I don't understand how here in Ohio, the deer harvest keeps going up every year. Most of the private land in Ohio is leased to outfitters who charge a large price to out of staters to hunt. I know those folks who are coming in to hunt aren't paying that fee to shoot does. Just doesn't add up. Any ideas?
I thnk that you significantly overestimate the amount of private ground that is controlled by outfitters and only hunted by out of state folks. Also, Ohio has its share of public ground which produces a lot of deer. Would assume that the Ohio harvests represent a mixed bag of traditional private ground hunting by locals, leased ground (by in-state and out-of-state folks), outfitters, and public ground hunting.
__________________
"Shoot him again....his soul is still dancing"
I don't understand how here in Ohio, the deer harvest keeps going up every year. Most of the private land in Ohio is leased to outfitters who charge a large price to out of staters to hunt. I know those folks who are coming in to hunt aren't paying that fee to shoot does. Just doesn't add up. Any ideas?
That's rediculous. If you actually believe that, I don't think anyone can help you understand. I'm guessing you're looking for a conspiracy theory. Good luck.
Well, I probably am exaggerating on " Most" of the land, but I know there are over 250 outfitters in Ohio leasing land and that adds up to thousands of acres that the regular joe can't hunt anymore. Public land hunting does not make up the difference in harvest numbers. I know personally of 2 outfitters that lease over 10,000 acres EACH! So, with thousands of acres leased that are now off limits to the regular joe, and figuring these folks are not paying to shoot does, how does the harvest number keep increasing? Please explain.
Well, I probably am exaggerating on " Most" of the land, but I know there are over 250 outfitters in Ohio leasing land and that adds up to thousands of acres that the regular joe can't hunt anymore. Public land hunting does not make up the difference in harvest numbers. I know personally of 2 outfitters that lease over 10,000 acres EACH! So, with thousands of acres leased that are now off limits to the regular joe, and figuring these folks are not paying to shoot does, how does the harvest number keep increasing? Please explain.
I absoultly hear what your saying. Yet, I also have to say that if you want land you have to buy it or pay the leasing fee. It might be more affordable than you think to buy. Its sad its come to this though.
I will say that I think Ohio needs to jack up their out of state tags. I used to live in Ohio now i live in Missouri. It is so cheap to hunt in Ohio. I think the Hunting license is priced right, but the tags need to double or triple. Doing so will free up "some" hunting land and bring some lease prices down. IMO.
Well, I'm not worried about buying or leasing land, I just can't see the harvest numbers continually climbing when the available hunting land keeps decreasing. As far as our license prices, I totally agree with you. I personally think the state should put a limit on the number of out of state tags that can be purchased. That would get rid of quite a few outfitters or at least free up some more land, as they wouldn't be able to get enough clients to pay for their leases.
Liberal limits in many areas and increasing deer numbers, that’s the answer. Not to mention, those non residents ARE buying and filling doe tags. More than a lot of (most) residents unfortunately. Your entire question is based on what you think to be true, when in fact it's not that way at all.
Magis, your answer may be what you believe, but it doesn't make sense. The deer bag limit has been the same for quite a few years now, and most outfitters clients are NOT shooting does, at least the outfitters in my area. There may be a higher deer population, I'm not sure, but there are less hunters available to harvest the animals, due to the amount of land that is leased, not to mention that all out of state hunters hunting on leased land are NOT successful in bagging a deer. So it adds up to this:
Bag limits same + Less hunters = higher deer harvest?
No, it doesn't add up.
__________________
Hunt, Like you mean it!
Last edited by excalibur43; 01-12-2010 at 11:10 AM.
I didn't say increased limits, but liberal limits. Yes, they've been liberal for a while, but few people have been using many antlerless tags. Last year they extended the deadline for the early season antlerless tags to include gun season. That right there should be an obvious reason for an increase.
Again, you think you know certain things as facts, but I doubt you do. How do you know that most outfitter clients aren't shooting does? You can't possibly know that. The fact is, those are the numbers.
To help with my taxes and provide some extra money for food plots I lease out the bow rights to my farm in knox county. The past several years out of state hunters have been more then happy to meet my lease requirement of shooting at least one doe per hunter. To be honest the only hunters have have balked at my requiring a doe to be shot have been local hunters... go figure
__________________
"We have to Kill animals or else they will Die, That makes us Environmentalists" Jimbo Kerns
How can it be?
