Ohio wildlife chief submits resignation....

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by CaptMark, Sep 22, 2015.

  1. CaptMark

    CaptMark Retired Ohio Waterfowler Staff Member Moderator

    11,669
    51
    48
    September 20, 2015

    Associated Press


    COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — Ohio's wildlife chief is resigning after four years on the job, where he was involved in fights with lawmakers over deer-hunting changes and with the inspector general over alleged on-duty hunting by wildlife officers.

    The Columbus Dispatch reports Scott Zody submitted his resignation last week, writing that it was of his choosing and under his terms. It's effective Oct. 2.

    The 49-year-old had served as the director of the wildlife division at the Ohio Department of Natural Resources since November 2011.
    Zody says in an email to staff that his four years at the helm have been challenging, but they've "accomplished much."
    Zody didn't respond to an email seeking comment.
     
  2. Dan_O

    Dan_O Well-Known Member

    3,770
    95
    48
    Maybe they can get their $hit together now.
     

  3. mslater

    mslater Active Member

    3,784
    4
    38
    I've known Scott for a long time. He's made several trips to our farm for dove hunts and I'd say he's a top notch individual. I wish him the best.
     
  4. the_lone_wader

    the_lone_wader Active Member

    2,626
    15
    38
    I'll second that. If anything, Scott was the only thing holding whats left of the DOW together. They're pretty much the lowest priority when it comes to state departments. He did all he could do. I wish him the best.
     
  5. cmrosko

    cmrosko Member

    799
    0
    16
  6. I never met him. He may have been real nice, but I cant say Im a fan of many of the ideas put out in the last several years. He might have had less problems with politicians if every move made didn't anger a large segment of the hunting community enough to call politicians.
     
  7. duck rookie

    duck rookie Well-Known Member

    1,207
    75
    48
    Politicians are the problem, as it is with all government.

    d r
     
  8. the_lone_wader

    the_lone_wader Active Member

    2,626
    15
    38
    I don't think any move he could have made wouldn't have angered a large section of the hunting community. Not any smart decision anyway. The loudest whiners are usually the ones who don't really know what they're talking about, but get the most attention. That's why we have trump leading the polls right now...
     
  9. I might not know what Im talking about here. I don't have a 4 year degree. Im also going to make a few assumptions and generalizations.
    I would think that the majority of hunters are conservatives. I think conservatives are hesitant to embrace change.
    There was a lot of change in a short period of time. When people are told their opinions matter, and then tossed to the curb when they don't align with their sound science, it leaves a bad taste.
    If I was highly educated, and my job was to help make rules for everyone to follow (aka politics), and my base was generally conservative ignorant (not always stupid) folk, I would be slow to introduce change. Even If I knew in my heart of hearts that I was doing the right thing.



    Its been dead around here.
     
  10. duck rookie

    duck rookie Well-Known Member

    1,207
    75
    48
    The problem started when the herd was huge and everyone was killing/seeing deer, they became spoiled. Then a new guy came in and valued antler size over quantity. Now I do think the herd needed to be reduced but did it need to be reduced that much? Don't start saying we all could have stopped because there is an inherent trust of the people in charge knowing what they are doing and that our goals are the same. Clearly they were not. Besides, people are also inherently greedy and will kill what they can kill and find other people to give the deer to if they can't eat it. This works great and building support for hunting BTW.

    I hunted deer for the first time 20 years ago and jumped ONE deer in three days while hunting on Washington County. At it's peak we were pushing 20 deer a day on state lands but not anymore. Although we still kill a good number of deer and most people at least see them.

    If a middle of the road plan could be found then it will be best for everyone.

    d r
     
  11. the_lone_wader

    the_lone_wader Active Member

    2,626
    15
    38
    That's my point. I belive that a middle of the road plan has been found. Deer are still not hard to come by, but they aren't so over populated that they are a nuisance in most areas. Even with the numbers down to a stable amount like they are now, if you don't kill a deer, you're either being very selective or you're not trying hard enough.

    I honestly only sit in a stand maybe a dozen times a year anymore and never have problems putting a good doe or two in the freezer. Every other year or so, I'll end up with a mature buck and every year I pass on a lot of immature bucks and yearling does. If I put more effort into it, im sure I could be more consistent.

    You nailed it when you said that people became used to overpopulated deer herds, and now they're complaining because it's back to a stable amount and you can't kick them up like rabbits anymore.
     
  12. Toner07

    Toner07 Well-Known Member

    3,252
    294
    83
    It was nice that we finally had a chief that listened to his biologists. Hopefully the new one will follow suit.
     
  13. WorldBFreebase

    WorldBFreebase Resident Antagonist

    10,408
    14
    38
    if they would let us shoot the ****ers inside city limits, it would push them back into the country.
     
  14. Mariner220V

    Mariner220V Active Member

    2,095
    0
    36
    Its not one guy its that whole bunch of clowns inside 270 loop that are worrying about their PERS retirement and could care less on working together on managing the whats left resources.