Ohio Sportsman - Your Ohio Hunting and Fishing Resource banner
61 - 79 of 79 Posts
So you are saying that if the landowners surrounding you could do anything they wanted to eliminate deer from their property, that you would still have good hunting on yours?
I think I answered this question above, but if not, let me know and I'll wax on.

Deer may love your property and it may have everything they need, but I bet they sneak over to your neighbors' farms and eat crops all the time.
In reality, our parcel doesn't have year-round habitat for deer. Their needs vary depending on the season and we provide about a three season habitat.

Ours is not a winter yard.

For feeding areas, we have a variety of seasonal upland and wooded grazing and browsing matter. But, they indeed do cross the property lines for the really, really good and expensive stuff.

Their resting and family-raising needs vary and our carrying capacity is but for a few.

Breeding grounds? Now that's where our Highway 101 comes into its own.

Once they leave your land, they are fair game. No bag limits, hunt with rifles at night, anything, right?
Right! I'm confident that the deer will be just fine under Mother Nature's oversight than will be our modern ag-community's endeavors to counter-punch all She throws at them.

Does any of that make sense?
 
Where do you get this crap? This is why the state went from region / districts to county bag limits to better target areas to reduce the ACTUAL BAG LIMIT....Sure, not everyone tags out or, even fills a tag, but that doesn't mean the DNR is basing the actually bag limits on what they didn't want...If they did, they would lower the bag limit even more or raise it.....There is no logic to that what so ever.....

You control the herd by actual limits, not what you think MIGHT HAPPEN. Example: the state just authorized all hunters to kill more than what the state is intended for good managment, if that is the case then there are way more problems in the ODNR than I thought....smh
. I encourage you to educate yourself.
 
I'm confident that the deer will be just fine under Mother Nature's oversight than will be our modern ag-community's endeavors to counter-punch all She throws at them.

Does any of that make sense?
Maybe for you, it does, but I might be confusing myself.

I don't want to come across as anti ag-community. I used to was one, and my family is replete with the lot. I have to live among these good folks and we interact in many ways, sometimes even in hunting (Though I've yet to be invited to help fill their damage permits. Hm, very interesting, as Arte Johnson would say.)
 
I think I answered this question above, but if not, let me know and I'll wax on.

In reality, our parcel doesn't have year-round habitat for deer. Their needs vary depending on the season and we provide about a three season habitat.

Ours is not a winter yard.

For feeding areas, we have a variety of seasonal upland and wooded grazing and browsing matter. But, they indeed do cross the property lines for the really, really good and expensive stuff.

Their resting and family-raising needs vary and our carrying capacity is but for a few.

Breeding grounds? Now that's where our Highway 101 comes into its own.

Right! I'm confident that the deer will be just fine under Mother Nature's oversight than will be our modern ag-community's endeavors to counter-punch all She throws at them.

Does any of that make sense?
Oh I absolutely believe deer would be just fine. I just believe that some folks that hunt small acreage would be way more negatively impacted than they are now.
 
I don't hunt my own little property right now (6.4 acres) because I hunt another property in the same county. We are separated by 20 miles, but still can't harvest deer here because of the law. (Other property needs deer taken off) this would change if your idea took place. I wonder how many others are in this position? How many people would kill multiple bucks each year?

This land owner said go ahead and kill a buck, this other land owner said the same, and then I paid this other guy so I could kill another one...

This thread makes for good convo though! Lol
 
Discussion starter · #69 ·
It is both the limit and the opportunity to meet that limit that matter. Just because there is say a four deer limit in an area does not mean I have killed four deer by the end of the season. Give me more days with a gun and you increase my chances of filling all four tags.
For some, but not all. Many work, or who know why they may not be able to go....But that don't change the fact that probabilities and maybes don't manage a deer herd...Bag limits do
 
For some, but not all. Many work, or who know why they may not be able to go....But that don't change the fact that probabilities and maybes don't manage a deer herd...Bag limits do
Yes, with a very similar approach to the response rates anticipated from most surveys; the bag limit setters are aware of the success rate per hunter on average. If this average was anywhere close to the max bag limit then the max bag limit would be much lower than it is today. Fact is that the overwhelming majority of successful hunters (1/3rd of all deer hunters usually) kill 2 or less. Very few reach their max bag limit.
 
1buck 1 doe for the season but bucks only for gun season
We would have a mess of Deer where I hunt... I know a lot of places with high #'s., I like that they are breaking up the zones due to habitat and population densities.

Nonresident hunting licenses need to go up that would be one change.

Licensing Outfitters and leasing would be another not only would it protect the person leasing the property but it would protect the people that are leasing the property to the leases.

People that Deer hunt property that have low numbers need to micro manage their properties. Whether that is not killing any toes for a year or two or habitat management to bring Deere onto the property. Just because those people over harvested dear does it mean the state needs to allocate statewide one so and 1 buck limits throughout the state. Example just because somebody wants to smoke drink eat and get fat does it mean I should pay for their health care costs that's my analogy.
 
We would have a mess of Deer where I hunt... I know a lot of places with high #'s., I like that they are breaking up the zones due to habitat and population densities.

Nonresident hunting licenses need to go up that would be one change.

Licensing Outfitters and leasing would be another not only would it protect the person leasing the property but it would protect the people that are leasing the property to the leases.

People that Deer hunt property that have low numbers need to micro manage their properties. Whether that is not killing any toes for a year or two or habitat management to bring Deere onto the property. Just because those people over harvested dear does it mean the state needs to allocate statewide one so and 1 buck limits throughout the state. Example just because somebody wants to smoke drink eat and get fat does it mean I should pay for their health care costs that's my analogy.
I agree except in the case of public lands. No one person or group of people can manage these areas. The state has to step up and do so. I liken it to smoking. We all know it is unhealthy even second hand smoke. Easy to not allow it in our homes if we choose but what about the workplace or other public areas? Regulations had to be put in place to protect our health. The same needs to be done to protect the public land herds. You can't count on people to self regulate in areas they do not control.
 
I am saying everything stays the same. But... There a cause and effect.... If you don't have very many Deer on your property then the reason is you harvested to many... Now fix the problem buy not shooting any or just a few...
 
I am saying everything stays the same. But... There a cause and effect.... If you don't have very many Deer on your property then the reason is you harvested to many... Now fix the problem buy not shooting any or just a few...
What if (don't you just love when the what ifs start rolling out. :) ) But actually this is a serious what if. What if you hunt your own little piece of paradise that you bought that is all of 20 acres right in the middle of a rural county. All you want is to have the chance to shoot one deer a year but your neighbors have so over-harvested their own land that you rarely see a deer any more. People who hunt small properties are somewhat at the mercy of what goes on around them. I would think this is probably a fairly common occurrence.
 
I would think so and agree.... Imo that's where the state starts to go to work on educating. Add a section to the hunters reg. In the deer section. Perhaps with a little bit on management and pushing for hunters to pay attention to try he #'s.. I don't know all the answers but education is the key... Some will never utilize it but if its out there more will have the knowledge which is good and more may use it.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
 
I am saying everything stays the same. But... There a cause and effect.... If you don't have very many Deer on your property then the reason is you harvested to many... Now fix the problem buy not shooting any or just a few...
What about the guy that doesn't shoot every deer he sees and tries to let the heard grow but the neighbors shoot everything how do you do the right thing .If the state doesn't put it on paper some or a lot of hunters can't see the forest through the trees
 
I would make the property thick if it a field standing corn that would help...

But Your right I have felt with the same thing at an old property... Most people that could give a crap less are the same that don't follow the rules anyways.

If I have a great Deer population due to paying attention to my Deer #'s on my 3 property's, why shouldn't I be able to harvest 3+ deer a year. Not everyone has low Deer #'s. I know I'm not the only one.


Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
 
Good topic.

Archery opens the first Sat. of Oct. and ends the last Sat of Jan. (enough of this Sept. and Feb. craziness!)
Dump the 2nd gun season
Late muzzy 3 day season starting 1st Sat. of Jan. (I'd love to ban all inline muzzleloaders but I know that will never happen!)
1 Buck and 1 Doe max in SE Ohio
A complete restructure of the controlled hunts application process (this could be a separate Thread in itself!)
;)
Oh so we are banning which weapons can be used now? Seig Heil!!!!
 
I propose that orange be required for bowhunters. At the very least an orange hat. The hunter density during bow season has increased tremendously. Orange requirements include while in a stand.
I would like to see archery season close during all deer gun seasons.
One buck and one doe outside of urban areas.
More regulation of controlled hunts, not just DNR controlled hunts. My hunting area is suffering tremendously due to an almost unregulated unsponsored bow hunt.
I actually would like to see more leases available in my area because great properties are completely off limits.
I would like to see more rights for a hunter tracking a wounded animal (not just deer).
If the DOW would allow retrieval of an animal that is visibly dead across property lines (like other states have) that would open up many smaller properties to deer hunting, bow especially. Many of these properties in high deer population areas.
 
61 - 79 of 79 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top