Midwest OH, IN, IL, WI, MI, MN, IA, MO, KS, ND, SD, NE Remember the Regional Forums are for Hunting Topics only.

How can it be?

Old 01-13-2010, 02:29 PM
  #21  
Nontypical Buck
 
SuperRedHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: ILLINOIS
Posts: 1,207
Default

Originally Posted by excalibur43 View Post
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?

Ohio has LOTS of hunters. I don't even get your point, are you saying the DNR is lying about the harvest numbers?
SuperRedHawk is offline  
Old 01-14-2010, 09:39 AM
  #22  
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
 
excalibur43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Licking County, Ohio
Posts: 1,187
Default

I believe so.
excalibur43 is offline  
Old 01-14-2010, 10:04 AM
  #23  
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
 
excalibur43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Licking County, Ohio
Posts: 1,187
Default

Originally Posted by deerchump View Post
Excalibur - You are making a TON of assumptions and presenting them as facts. And you refuse to listen to the inaccuracies in your assessments.

First off, where do you get the numnber of 250 outfitters? It may be true, but do you know that for a FACT, as in it can be verified somewhere other than your post?

How do you assume that all of the land that outfitters are now leasing was being hunted every day? You could easily argue that the outfitters are hunting the leased ground MORE than it was previously hunted thus increasing the harvest rate. Do you really think these outfitters are surviving with only having hunters one or two weeks per year? More likely they have a constant flow of hunters on that land. Also, do you really think that the hunters who leased it before were allowing it to be hunted every day? I wouldn't join a lease knowing that the land would be hunted every day. I would just hunt public land if I wanted to be on land with that much hunting activity.

Do you think that the resident hunters, whose private land is now being leased, just stop hunting? No, they move to other land and hunt there. So in effect, the outfitters are INCREASING the number of hunters in the state, correlating to an increased harvest rate, especially since you admit the deer herd is increasing.

Decreasing the huntable land does NOT decrease the number of hunters. It just adds more hunters per capita of huntable land, which would also increase the harvest rate. As you yourself stated, those big bucks only come out if kicked up. Well, by putting more hunters on the land, there is a higher chance of kicking up those big bucks.

Your argument about deer running to the supposed nonhunting land is semi legitimate. The problem with it is that this land cannot support every deer in the state. Nor can it support an increased number of deer for an extended time period. Over time, the deer would overpopulate that land thus eliminating its resources, which forces the deer back to the huntable land.

Also, as you stated your opinion that most out of state hunters and/or outfitter hunters are not shooting does, this would directly explain why the deer population is rising. By not shooting does, each one of those does reproduces (potentially twins or triplets) which every year would exponentially increase the deer herd. More deer will lead to a higher deer harvest.

Outfitters do NOT reduce the amount of huntable land. I alluded to this above, but I wanted to point this out since it is the main basis of your argument. Outfitters are not leasing the land to NOT hunt it. They ARE hunting the land so there is NO reduction in the amount of huntable land.

Basically it comes down to this regardless of all your assumptions:
More deer + More hunters = Higher deer harvest
You apparently haven't read any of the prior posts.Most outfitters in Ohio do not make their living by outfitting as do outfitters in the western states. So yes, most only have clients in a few weeks out of the year.As far as leases by outfitters go, they are not to join, as you stated earlier, they are to pay to hunt.Also, you have stated a point that I have already made, the deer population is on the rise do to lack of harvest. Outfitters DO decrease the amount of huntable land to the regular joe hunter. This goes without saying. The deer are NOT going to eliminate their resources from leased land as the outfitter is constantly supplying the deer with food in order to keep them there ( food plots, feeders etc.).
You need to educate yourself on outfitters and land leases and how they work, as your opinions are illiterate to say the least.
excalibur43 is offline  
Old 01-14-2010, 10:16 AM
  #24  
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
 
excalibur43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Licking County, Ohio
Posts: 1,187
Default

Originally Posted by Lanse couche couche View Post
Do you really want to generalize about the behavior of deer after the lead starts flying based on 4.5 year old bucks? Also, do you really think that a typical 300 acre plot of land supports regular deer hunting by 15 people? I would argue that if an outfitter leases land for deer hunting and posts it, you probably end up with 15 or more hunters who lose access to hunting if you consider everything from squirrels to coons. But 15 deer hunters under normal conditions, I doubt it. Like i said, if you got lots of deer you are gonna get lots of deer killed. Maybe not many 4.5 year old bucks, but plenty of younger ones. So, again, i'm not seeing some really clear and heavy correlation between outfitters and harvest rates.
Not generalizing based on the activities of a mature buck, making a statement based on years of hunting deer and watching where they go after the first day of gun season, depending on the pressure of that particular tract of land. As far as hunting 300 acres, I can personally name several plots of land 85 acres and smaller that support at LEAST 15 hunters. Not all of them hunt at the same time, but all of them hunt regularly.So I know 300 acres could support alot more than 15 hunters, especially bow hunters. I personally know these guys, and, as with most guys I work with or hunt with,they have an agreement; they harvest a couple of does for the freezer and after that, it's 140" or better or they won't shoot at all.

Last edited by excalibur43; 01-14-2010 at 10:21 AM.
excalibur43 is offline  
Old 01-14-2010, 11:11 AM
  #25  
Typical Buck
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Cambridge Ohio USA
Posts: 744
Default

Originally Posted by excalibur43 View Post
You need to educate yourself on outfitters and land leases and how they work, as your opinions are illiterate to say the least.
That' a bold statement coming from YOU. To claim that the state is making up numbers is just plain stupid. And I'm trying to be as nice as I can. I can't imagine how anyone that can tie their own shoes can come to some of the conclusions you're coming to.
Good luck in life. You'll need it with your paranoia.
M.Magis is offline  
Old 01-14-2010, 11:23 AM
  #26  
Boone & Crockett
 
Lanse couche couche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Southwest Ohio
Posts: 10,277
Default

Excaliber,

You sort of keep fudging on things. You clearly tried to say that deer go nocturnal or go hide on unhunted ground after they get shot at at the beginning of gun season. When I called you on it, you then started talking about 4.5 or older bucks to make your case about deer in general. Now you back away from the 4.5 year old buck statement and are back to saying that it is based on your personal experience. Well, plenty of other people have plenty of experience at seeing and taking mid-to-late season bucks without being out at nite with a spotlight. Besides, you started out by commenting about high deer harvests in general, not just huge old bucks. Plenty of does are taken late season. So sorry but that dog don't hunt.

Good to hear that you know of a couple of folks that allow 15 or more hunters to regularly deer hunt on landholdings as small as 85 acres. Now if you can come up with examples of another 20,000 or so folks that cooperate with having a deer hunter density of one hunter per 6 acres on a regular basis on small property holdings, then your point might be valid. Until then, sorry but that dog ain't gonna hunt either.

You might have more luck just pushing the DNR misreporting conspiracy.....
Lanse couche couche is offline  
Old 01-17-2010, 10:12 AM
  #27  
Spike
 
redneckmike87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: central ohio
Posts: 80
Default

hey im kind of inline with excalibur here this year was the worst deer season i can remember for seeing deer period and that is right after the best year i can remember and i hunt in belmont ,licking,knox,fairfeild,hocking,vinton,athens,jack son, meigs,perry,and where ever else one of my friends take me and hunt most every day of the season and private and public land and the results this year for me and my friends kind of make us think the states released numbers are bunk and seriously how can every year be a record year sometime you got to put a hurtin on the population for a little while,
not an argument just my 2 cents
redneckmike87 is offline  
Old 01-17-2010, 11:45 PM
  #28  
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
 
excalibur43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Licking County, Ohio
Posts: 1,187
Default

Exactly Mike. Sure, some years are going to have greater harvests, but I don't believe you are going to consistantly have record harvests EVERY year. We ( about 20 of us) hunt a farm here in Licking county that is approx. 1200 acres of mixed wooded and ag. land. This year the farmer left about 500 acres of corn standing for some reason. Needless to say, there were only 27 deer taken off of that farm between us. We usually double that number. Lance, you would be suprised at the small acreage lots that hold several hunters.Not all at the same time of course. Not everyone has a 350 acre tract to hunt. There are alot more 15 to 50 acre tracts than there are 350 acre tracts. These small out of the way or sometimes urban tracts of land sometimes hold a a great shooter buck as well.
excalibur43 is offline  
Old 01-19-2010, 07:32 AM
  #29  
Boone & Crockett
 
Lanse couche couche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Southwest Ohio
Posts: 10,277
Default

I know all about hunting on small acreage since I have two small pieces of property. But I just don't know of that many instances when you are getting 15 people regularly hunting on 85 to 300 acres of land. Maybe if you are dealing with 300 acres of heavily wooded and hilly property. I just have doubts about it representing anything close to a norm in terms of hunters on private land. The same hold true for outfitters. No doubt there are limited cases of outfitters who contral vast acreage and might have some impact on the deer herd. But again, those are not necessarily the norm for generalizing about a state the size of ohio with a deer population of its size.
Lanse couche couche is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.