I just checked out the 2024Spring Hunt Guide in the Turkey Call Mag. There are a good 10 States with just a 1 Gobbler Bag Limit. Most States have a 2 Gobbler Limit. A few States have a 3 Gobbler Limit.At least 1 State has 4. And Montana has a 5 Spring Gobbler Limit. While New Jersey- There is a opportunity to buy alot more then 5 Turkey Permits.
I feel bad for residents in States like Ohio. Just 1 Gobbler. Probably most hunters would want a much shorter Spring Turkey Season if they could take 2 Gobblers.
2 Gobblers is Probably just right for a bunch of States. So how do you feel about your States Spring Turkey Bag Limit? Too Few,Too Many, or Just about right?
Georgia recently went from 3 to 2 gobblers and also moved the opening day up a week later in the year. We start this Saturday, March 30th. I am good with the changes if it will help the turkey population out. Two per year is a plenty if you ask me.
Too many with a caveat:
Mississippi-currently has a 3 bird limit. My personal opinion is NR should be one and one only. Resident should have a one ( maybe 2) bird limit at license purchase with an opportunity at an additional tag with a predator bounty.
Quit wasting money on tele-check. Look at the NWTF harvest report for MS. Little over 11k reported but MS "thinks" like 30k actual. Wow. Even they know it's ridiculous. Use $ for something else. Like supporting a predator bounty... get all us NWTF members off our duff and #1 trapping- gotta get that tag! and #2 helping man and support that predator bounty.... Just one poor man's opinion. lol, might have got a little more than u asked....
Depends on the reason for asking about the limit, from a hunter standpoint I wish we could kill 5. From a "good for the turkey" standpoint I believe a 1 bird season would help. But then again, we've had so many new hunters from out of state showing up lately, even with a one bird limit I doubt the total harvest would decrease. I believe it's something like 2% actually fill their second tag here.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Not sure how to answer this.
Pennsylvania is a big place. State limit is 2 spring birds. There are places that should be cut to 1 bird. There are places it could be upped to 3 birds.
I guess if it's gonna be one set limit for the entire state, then 2 is just right. Not sure why the Game Commission hasn't broken the limit down by WMU ?? I thought that's what they were for........
South Carolina dropped the limit from 5 to 3 a few years ago. Also pushed the start date back a week. We're looking at possibly more changes next season. Personally I'm ok with whatever is in the best interest of the resource. I hunt private as well as public land. Our WMA's all have different bag limits based off size of area and population. On the private land I hunt I have a self imposed limit of 1 bird per season for the past three years. I still get to hunt plenty with my grown kids and son-in-law. I enjoy pulling the trigger on an old long beard as much as the next guy, but the biggest thrill for me is calling and working a gobbler. I support any changes so long as they are made with logic and common sense.
Seems simple to me. If recorded harvest counts show a declining trend year after year, then bag limits should be something to look at for sure. Unfortunately most Wildlife Agencies count on license and permit fees to fund their operations. This might (will) serve to make them apprehensive about changing laws that could affect their livelihood. It's an unfortunate "conflict of interest" that many DNR's are struggling with. Funding has become a major problem with everything in life. We all know as sportsman that when states look to cut budgets, hunting and fishing dollars could be easy targets for sure. No target funding is safe anymore......
Quote from: Tom007 on March 27, 2024, 06:53:14 AM
Seems simple to me. If recorded harvest counts show a declining trend year after year, then bag limits should be something to look at for sure. Unfortunately most Wildlife Agencies count on license and permit fees to fund their operations. This might (will) serve to make them apprehensive about changing laws that could affect their livelihood. It's an unfortunate "conflict of interest" that many DNR's are struggling with. Funding has become a major problem with everything in life. We all know as sportsman that when states look to cut budgets, hunting and fishing dollars could be easy targets for sure. No target funding is safe anymore......
X2 Unfortunately with some states it appears its all about money. Very Unfortunate!
I am ok with the reduced limits if they are done using biological data and in a way to be effective. However, they are usually applied as appeasement to the crowd hollering, "do something about our turkeys". Reducing the bag limit is the easiest and fastest way to demonstrate to the whining masses they are doing something. In reality most small reductions in bag limits do very little to stabilize flocks. As someone else said, most hunters never fill all their tags. Here in Ohio approx. 40% or less filled the second tag. We buy our tags individually and a lot don't even buy the second. Using the states own harvest numbers works out that the reduced limit to 1 gobbler averages saving one gobbler for around every 25,000 acres. That's not going to do much for the flock as a whole. It's just a smoke screen and not biologically sound in most places.
The main problems are declining habitat and perhaps more significantly people, too many people persuing a limited resource. For the most part a hunter behind every tree. Cutting the limits and the seasons are about the only things a game department can do. I so miss the old days of the 1980s and 1990s.
I have watched the slow decline of the turkey population here in South Carolina since the mid 1970's and in my opinion, if we don't make changes in a lot of areas, not just season limits and start dates we will see the continued decline of turkey similar to what happened to quail. It's really a state by state issue because what works in one state may or may not work in another, it should be left up to the game department and their biologist and researchers in each state to make the recommended changes and we as hunters should follow the science. If that means we spend less time in the woods during turkey season and are able to kill fewer birds, so be it. If that's what it takes on our part for our children, grandchildren and future generations to enjoy turkey hunting even close to the way many of us have, then in my mind, that's a small sacrifice on our part and one we should gladly make.
Grew up in New Jersey when there was no season. Now go back because the population of birds is better than Maryland where I live. I think Jersey does a decent job of limiting the amount of people hunting per week per zone. Have 7 tags, will be lucky to hunt 10 days spread over entire season. I wish Maryland would go to a permit system to help rebuild the population. I would never take 7 birds but look for that perfect hunt when he plays the game the way I want it.
Quote from: Prospector on March 27, 2024, 05:17:10 AM
Too many with a caveat:
Mississippi-currently has a 3 bird limit. My personal opinion is NR should be one and one only. Resident should have a one ( maybe 2) bird limit at license purchase with an opportunity at an additional tag with a predator bounty.
Quit wasting money on tele-check. Look at the NWTF harvest report for MS. Little over 11k reported but MS "thinks" like 30k actual. Wow. Even they know it's ridiculous. Use $ for something else. Like supporting a predator bounty... get all us NWTF members off our duff and #1 trapping- gotta get that tag! and #2 helping man and support that predator bounty.... Just one poor man's opinion. lol, might have got a little more than u asked....
I am from ms. My feelings are the same as yours.
3 birds is too many with all the out of staters put on us :you_rock:
I have always believed that all states should have a 1 bird limit for non residents. With a delayed start, even if it's 2 days.
Quote from: Gobbler428 on March 27, 2024, 08:18:00 AM
I have watched the slow decline of the turkey population here in South Carolina since the mid 1970's and in my opinion, if we don't make changes in a lot of areas, not just season limits and start dates we will see the continued decline of turkey similar to what happened to quail. It's really a state by state issue because what works in one state may or may not work in another, it should be left up to the game department and their biologist and researchers in each state to make the recommended changes and we as hunters should follow the science. If that means we spend less time in the woods during turkey season and are able to kill fewer birds, so be it. If that's what it takes on our part for our children, grandchildren and future generations to enjoy turkey hunting even close to the way many of us have, then in my mind, that's a small sacrifice on our part and one we should gladly make.
X2
I would rather have a turkey to hunt and chase, than no turkey left at all... I can remember the early years of just being glad to hear a gobbler or two during the spring season. So it's all part of a cycle and hopefully numbers will increase again. I have seen more turkeys in the last several months than in the previous two years in my area. Good luck everyone this spring.
I think it needs to be broken down more specifically, one thing Illinois does well is county by county tags and the smaller state lands are tag specific for that one place.
They also have 5 separated seasons.
I don't like seeing opportunities taken away however the focus should be on population effects, which may be minimal?
I wouldn't mind seeing a premium to get a second tag, and or not allowing a second tag until you fill the first.
I like one bird per day restrictions and even one bird the first week like Missouri.
Keeping non res off federal land is a joke!
Tom's are supposedly expendable after peak breeding but there would be less on the landscape to hear and work from year to year.
Hopefully the Covid effect starts to slow down!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There's a reason for the one tom limit in some states that may be legitimate, or it could be a knee jerk reaction because as i was told by ODWC "We had to do something." I could write pages about doing something but I'll just sum it up and say if we all as turkey hunters put just 2-3 hours a week into what ever we feel passionate about (habitat improvements, predator control, controlled burns, ...) then our combined efforts would change a lot of the situation.
It depends on the states population and how much pressure is being put on the population. As long as harvest is not more than 30% of the adult gobbler population in the state. You want to have enough in the population to withstand a really bad hatch year. I like to see things managed for quality of hunts more than managed for opportunity to hunt.
Pa.2 Gobblers allowed with 2nd Special tag. Pa has it,s ups and downs with its Turkey Population every year. I know we used to trap the turkeys and trade them to either one of the Dakota states the one with a lot of pheasants because we have a horrible pheasant population and they traded birds. On the other hand Pa.GC is always struggling for money and their 2nd tag is a money maker for them. If I remember it,s the most expensive extra tag out of all the extra tags you can purchase. :firefighter:
2 is a Gracious plenty for any State IMO. This is a resource that has more downs than ups and we as Resource Managers should be thinking this way, if we want to be able to hunt these Amazing Animals in the FUTURE! TOO MANY predators and BAD things can happen when eggs are laid on the ground. God wasn't kind to Turkey hatchlings so we need to do our part to HELP them any way we can. My 2 cents.
If every state had a stamp, delayed non res, and limit 1 non resident... a lot of problems would go away.
I feel a lot of bad feelings for non res hunters, are they really putting that much of a dent in the turkey numbers? I see as many non res vehicles around here as I do resident during turkey season. My state has a 2 bird limit with one bird being taken in specific units. I live in one of the special units so I don't have to travel much. I would rather see a one bird limit with a second permit after you tag the first. The second tag would be contingent on the unit and a $50 fee. But that's just my :z-twocents:. Z
I'm in the NEVER more than two camp. States that whine and complain while still allowing three bird limits for their residents are a joke IMO.
Quote from: zelmo1 on March 27, 2024, 10:55:13 AM
I feel a lot of bad feelings for non res hunters, are they really putting that much of a dent in the turkey numbers? I see as many non res vehicles around here as I do resident during turkey season. My state has a 2 bird limit with one bird being taken in specific units. I live in one of the special units so I don't have to travel much. I would rather see a one bird limit with a second permit after you tag the first. The second tag would be contingent on the unit and a $50 fee. But that's just my :z-twocents:. Z
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20240327/e94bf825456696158d2e169e116d0e74.jpg)
This is 9 in the morning on April 20th last season at a WMA I've hunted since a kid. It has 4 parking areas on this one 4,000 acre tract and this is just one of them. April 20th was the Thursday after opening weekend mind you. 6 days in to the season on a week day. You'll see 10 to 1 non resident plates on any WMA or national forest land that I've been to within 100 miles of my house the years of 21,22,23. And each year it gets worse and worse. It's to the point of either going out of state yourself to get to hunt or just not hunting. That particular WMA from 2009 until 2021 had less than 30 total turkey taken during the spring season on 8,500 acres combined between all tracts, and it was very heavily pressured then. Even the covid year of 2020 there were 28 turkeys taken. 2023 there were 59, 2022 there were 60, 2021 there were 37, 2020 there were 28.
The only thing that changed was an influx of OOS hunters. How long can this WMA handle this constant increase of harvest and pressure?. This is just one of many in the state that is seeing this trend. I personally feel that our state needs to get on board with the states within a 8 hour drive of us and all open the same day. Drop the limit to 1 turkey and charge a 100$ turkey stamp. I had many conversations with the OOS guys last year and every one of them told me they were "chasing 49" or because "our season doesn't open for 3 weeks and this was the closest place to go to hunt". 6 out of 10 were from Ohio, Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania. Very few were from the south of us or out west.
And before this gets misconstrued, I'm all for fairness. I'll gladly pay for a 100$ stamp, a license increase across the board, and kill one less turkey if it means I'll have them to hunt in 20 years and in the mean time can actually hunt the lands around here instead of spending 6 hours, from 3 hours before daylight until I give up, the handful of days I have to hunt driving to every WMA and National Forest land around because they all have a OOS hunter camped at them 2 or 3 deep.
I say all of that but I also want to say, I don't mind, respectful OOS hunters that have common sense and morals. I ran in to a few older gentlemen last year from up north as I was leaving that pulled in behind me and we talked for a half hour and I wished them well. But 90% of these cats are running around, "my turkeys" "gotta fill my tags" rush in on you working birds, rev their trucks behind yours when you beat them to park, honk their horns, etc.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: zelmo1 on March 27, 2024, 10:55:13 AM
I feel a lot of bad feelings for non res hunters, are they really putting that much of a dent in the turkey numbers? I see as many non res vehicles around here as I do resident during turkey season. My state has a 2 bird limit with one bird being taken in specific units. I live in one of the special units so I don't have to travel much. I would rather see a one bird limit with a second permit after you tag the first. The second tag would be contingent on the unit and a $50 fee. But that's just my :z-twocents:. Z
Ok I travel and I'm working towards the US Slam. For the most part I have no issues with taking a single bird in each given state especially on public land.
Joey46- New Jersey has no set Max Limit on Gobblers Killed. If you know the Lottery Phase- the Over the Counter Phase- have plenty of Time + Money and Extra Quick Typing Fingers- 8- 10+ Turkey Permits are possible.
I realize a small but growing group takes advantage of this System Loophole.
I wish we could put a limit on the timber harvest particularly in the Southeast. That's the threat to turkeys and reason for the decline.
We went from 2 to 1 and it was long overdue. When you have outfitters saying there aren't surplus gobblers anymore you know something is amiss. I haven't bought a turkey tag since 2020. On a calm morning you may not even hear a turkey gobble. Quite the change fron 10 years. Get alot of poachers from Arkansas and points south and east though.
We can start with no jakes unless it's for a youth first. MS been 3 birds forever and I've never had to up my effort to kill my limit, so I don't want to hear how the birds disappeared. Some years are better and some worse. We are talking about a highly fluctuated resource here. They are not deer. It doesn't take but 2 solid years of hatches to make a drastic difference in population.
The only reason most of this even gets brought up now is from a huge increase of social media driven newbies all wanting instant gratification.
These post pop up almost everyday, just 5 years ago they hardly ever showed up.
No jakes and no filming on public lands. Let's just Start there
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Quote from: quavers59 on March 27, 2024, 11:47:16 AM
Joey46- New Jersey has no set Max Limit on Gobblers Killed. If you know the Lottery Phase- the Over the Counter Phase- have plenty of Time + Money and Extra Quick Typing Fingers- 8- 10+ Turkey Permits are possible.
I realize a small but growing group takes advantage of this System Loophole.
I can tell you first hand that Jersey is seeing the effects of these bag limits. The Northern part of the state has seen a very concerning drop in populations. The last 3 years in a row have shown an average drop of over 20% annual harvest over-all. The Southern part of the state is now getting pounded, it's a matter of time that the entire state will suffer very low bird numbers. It's a shame that they rely heavily on this permit revenue, thus steps to reduce same will lead to budget shortfalls. Time will tell, but I can see this becoming a real problem in the future. On-line checking that was instituted the past few years I believe has impacted this also. They make it too easy for a dishonest hunter to harvest several birds on the same permit. I believe you could add another 10% to the annual harvest numbers due to birds that were not checked in. All this will definitely affect the resource, we can only hope it survives.....
The thing about lowering bag limits...specially to one, is a lot of people won't give a and just wont report their harvest.
I'd like to think that wasn't the case. But I have seen my share of illegal on public, can't imagine what goes down on private.
I would support states going to a one tag limit for NR, and it would be great if first week was resident only. I'm sure not every state is a 'destination' state, but residents should always have priority in their home states. What if only a set number of NR tags were allocated by lottery like top destination deer states? Might throttle back the pressure a bit. Most states are probably pretty good with a two bird limit for residents.
I dont think the limit matters much. Very few hunters have the ability to kill more than 1 a year or even every 2 years. Dropping the limit only affects a select few
I am for letting the states decide. I do think it could be fined tuned a bit according to the regional populations, but that's just me. Branching out on that thought, I would rather they restrict legal methods of harvest before reducing bag limits. I am selfish and perfectly fine with admitting it. I would rather be hunting them handicapped with a recurve bow and no limit than be allowed 1 by many of the legal methods today.
Good-looking and Platinum level member of the Elitist club
Quote from: Happy on March 27, 2024, 04:00:16 PM
I am for letting the states decide. I do think it could be fined tuned a bit according to the regional populations, but that's just me. Branching out on that thought, I would rather they restrict legal methods of harvest before reducing bag limits. I am selfish and perfectly fine with admitting it. I would rather be hunting them handicapped with a recurve bow and no limit than be allowed 1 by many of the legal methods today.
Good-looking and Platinum level member of the Elitist club
This
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
If we were producing poults at an annual rate that exceeded 3.0 poults per hen, I think this would be a different conversation.
But we've arrived at a point in the US where folks are happy just to see 2.0 pph and things are barely sustaining. And we've also arrived at a point where innovation has permeated every aspect of turkey hunting and the birds are taking it on the chin. Let's be real damn honest. It's easier than every to kill turkeys and the seemingly endless number of harvest records being set in states with stable or declining populations reflect it.
I'm a pretty well traveled guy and one of the most common things out of state farmers/landowners/hunters say to me when turkeys take over the discussion is "Son, you should have seen it 8/10/15/20 years ago." I really liked turkey hunting a lot more 8/10/15/20 years ago too!
There are a myriad of factors influencing wild turkey populations but we have killed our way into a scenario where most states are dependent on robust hatches each year. Turkey mortality from hunters, nest predators and avian predators never relents. If anything it has only intensified and that should be extremely concerning to everyone.
While I hunt public extensively, I'm also fortunate to help manage a decent bit of private dirt. I can say without any hesitation that killing less than 20% of the gobblers off a property and trapping will go a long way towards ensuring robust flocks.
I've said for many years I don't understand why an NR hunter should be allowed to harvest more than 1 gobbler in any state. Go enjoy a quality experience with good opportunity at success, be happy with your 1 gobbler and drive your home.
I also don't believe we should be able to kill any more than 2 gobblers as residents of the majority of states around the country.
The best hunting in the country can be found where bad limits are 1. And i'll happily take a quality experience where I see an abundance of turkeys and hear an abundance of turkeys over seeing few, hearing few but also killing a few.
I guess this was a long way of saying i support resident bag limits of 2 in most places (1 where populations are really struggling) and a nationwide 1 bird bag limit for NR's in any state they travel to.
I have hunted quite a few states. I actually like the way some states are doing it. Iowa for example has limited non resident tags, different seasons, different zone and each zone has its allotment of tags. Minnesota is also limited to one tag and has different seasons but does not have a license quota. Illinois is based county by county with a limited number of tags and different seasons. Honestly, I like the different season approach when I'm traveling. But that's just me.
I know each state is different. Each state is dealing with their own problems. I have no issue with going out of state for one bird (tag). Three of the states I'm going to this year, including Iowa, has a one bird limit. I'm not greedy so I'm good with that.
I am definitely for states limiting out of state tags. Give the first shot to residents if tags are limited, as well, like Illinois. That's fair. I'm also for limiting the number of people on WMA's. I've hunted several that I've had to draw tags for and they are well managed.
Virginia, my state, has always had a three bird limit since I started hunting them in 1992. I think it's time for them to look at that. Certain parts of the state the population is in decline while other parts of the state population is steady or increasing.
Again, it is definitely up to the states to decide but I truly hope they have the turkey in the forefront of their mind over money. But...what's the chances?
I am a hunter.
I am not an educated, trained biologist.
My view of a state population has no merit. I will let the professionals do their jobs.
When Oklahoma dropped the statewide limit from 3 birds to 1, I started hunting another state every year to try and fill 1 or 2 more tags.
Prior to that I was happy to hunt in Oklahoma and fill a couple of tags each Spring.
Dropping the limit to 1 bird might actually INCREASE the number of non-resident hunters in some areas.
California has a 3 bird season limit, 1 bearded turkey per day. I am fine with that.
Turkeys are not a native species in California, and some consider them "invasive." Outside of harvest season/limits, nothing is done, or allowed to be done to improve turkey numbers...
Plenty of urban areas with turkey issues, and there has been talk of relocation, but relocation of turkeys in California is NOT allowed at this time.
From my understanding, much of the state fees from licensing and stamps goes to the general state fund, and not back into game or fish management.
My impression is (and I could be wrong) that if there were two turkeys left in California, the limit would remain 3.
All the points to be made are in this thread, we have some intelligent people here with experience and common sense. It seems to me that the states should be raising or lowering the bag limits statewide and regional areas to sustain what numbers we do have. But we all have the same issues that negatively affect turkeys and there are remedies for each. 1) Access to good hunting areas, be a steward of the land and assist land owners to promote good faith. 2) Egg stealers/nest raiders. We can all take a few of these out of the equation and assist trappers to help ourselves. 3)Mandatory physical registration will put a dent in the poaching/slobs. 4)Get involved with your local NWTF or F&G to volunteer time or resources. I have no issues with giving residents a head start or an opportunity for a second bird, but punishing non res hunters doesnt have to be extreme. My season is one of the last openers so a lot of states are either done or wrapping up. Our location dictates the later opener, this brings in the dedicated turkey hunter with an extra opportunity/ incentive to hunt my state. I am liking the 2/1 res/non res limits in general. But I think the individual states need to get cracking on the other issues. I for one dont like the online registration, it can be tempting to some people to roll the dice. Since I had my first license I had to physically tag and register every big game animal I ever took in my own state. Untagged animals here are big fines, as they should be. This online registration is not a good idea in my opinion, it is convenient. But it gives the " less than ethical hunter" more of a chance to be just that. Good luck to everyone and God Bless Y'all. Z
Quote from: Ihuntoldschool on March 27, 2024, 12:11:20 PM
I wish we could put a limit on the timber harvest particularly in the Southeast. That's the threat to turkeys and reason for the decline.
Absolutely. Habitat loss is the #1 reason behind any decline here in the South. Changes in timber management practices go right there. No more prescribed burns bc the big "skidders" don't need clear understory like a man on a saw. Good for deer, good for rabbits- not so good with turkeys. Those growed up clear cuts or sterile understory of older pine plantations ( for huge expanses) just don't support as high a population.
Also I've said this before. The sport has increased in popularity bc with all the "tech" it's easier to be successful thus nullifying the time spent and expierance factor. Reduce the dependence on the tech and the hunter numbers will probably decrease without true loss of opportunity. JMHO.
Quote from: Prospector on March 28, 2024, 05:21:34 AM
Quote from: Ihuntoldschool on March 27, 2024, 12:11:20 PM
I wish we could put a limit on the timber harvest particularly in the Southeast. That's the threat to turkeys and reason for the decline.
Absolutely. Habitat loss is the #1 reason behind any decline here in the South. Changes in timber management practices go right there. No more prescribed burns bc the big "skidders" don't need clear understory like a man on a saw. Good for deer, good for rabbits- not so good with turkeys. Those growed up clear cuts or sterile understory of older pine plantations ( for huge expanses) just don't support as high a population.
Also I've said this before. The sport has increased in popularity bc with all the "tech" it's easier to be successful thus nullifying the time spent and expierance factor. Reduce the dependence on the tech and the hunter numbers will probably decrease without true loss of opportunity. JMHO.
You raise a good point about the tech, etc.....Makes me wonder which of the techs is most responsible for upticks in success. 65 yard turkey guns/ loads/ TSS? Lifelike decoys? Blinds? I agree with the premise but I'm honestly not sure how a state wildlife agency would go about putting further restrictions on. It seems like once something is approved it's next to impossible to take it away due to the pushback. If you had hundreds of dollars wrapped up in your DS decoys and all of a sudden they were banned in your state, you would be irate. Same with long range turkey rigs, etc ....I'm not sure how they could realistically ban TSS or tight chokes, etc.....and since TSS is non toxic vs lead I don't see that ever passing. "Maybe" decoys and blinds......We might be better served by pushing for significant fee hikes for turkey tags. That would filter out some of the casual guys and also add valuable revenue that could be devoted to habitat work, etc. And rather than pushing for mandatory restrictions on gear and tactics, there may be room to influence such things from a social standpoint. If you look at things like the resurgence of the old Bottomland camo....it's because eventually most guys like to be considered "old school". It's like a badge of honor. Eventually Bottomland became "cooler" than the modern patterns because the old guy wearing the original were respected ad the seasoned veterans they were. There does seem to be a bit of a shift taking place to old school tactics. More and more guys hanging up the dekes and trying to call them close in the timber vs field ambushing from a blind. Then we have the rise of the 410's and other sub gauges. These could be moves in the right direction. I've already made a lot of these moves myself. We can use our influence to encourage other hunters especially younger hunters to strip down their tech and up the challenge in their sport. Get out of the blind. Get back in the timber. Lose the decoys, etc. Let them see for themselves that the enjoyment is in the challenge of the pursuit, not the score card. I have noticed that I see less and less guys posting their bird stats (spurs and beards) versus a few years ago when it seemed every harvest photo had to have a stat sheet attached. That's a great thing, imo. And I think that's a testament to what positive social
pressure can do.
We are bouncing ideas for sure: One thing though, hiking fees may eliminate the "casual" hunter but it may also eliminate devoted hunters who just don't have that cash flow. Yes, I understand the money thing as far as hi dolla tech. It's not gonna happen bc too much money comes in from companies making the "tech". But it could be done. My opinion is for what it takes to prevent telling a NR he can't hunt NF, or price a hunter out of other states. The Midwest enjoys big white tails bc of geography, bc of genetics, bc of agriculture, and admitting, bc of limited NR access....but also bc they have LONG archery seasons and short firearm seasons. ANYBODY can archery hunt if they re willing to accept the limitations. Conversely with Turkey, you can hunt if you're willing to do so without the tech- Not everyone will
Bag limit changes are not the end all solution, as we all know. Instead of hanging up the gear many hunters just go on to other states or they start recruiting people to call for and take hunting. I know a guy that fills his one tag and then proceeds to take anywhere from 5-10 additional people through the season. Since we have had a one bird limit he is actually responsible for more birds then when he was hunting his own two.
When it comes to money, I imagine in most states turkey tags generate a very small % of the game commission's funds. they will never dictate the attention deer and fishing does, it's simply a supplement to most agencies.
Quote from: Ihuntoldschool on March 27, 2024, 12:11:20 PM
I wish we could put a limit on the timber harvest particularly in the Southeast. That's the threat to turkeys and reason for the decline.
X2
Quote from: Gobbler428 on March 28, 2024, 07:39:24 AM
Quote from: Ihuntoldschool on March 27, 2024, 12:11:20 PM
I wish we could put a limit on the timber harvest particularly in the Southeast. That's the threat to turkeys and reason for the decline.
X2
It's not the harvesting of timber that's the problem. It's the changes in timber management over the years that gets them to the point where they can be harvested that's the issue.
Apperently I must be wired differently than some. When I see logging activity in a big forest setting it gets a pin. No bigger attractor in the big woods in spring than an opening big or small, natural or man made.
These openings provide the security of open space during periods of rain and better yet prime nesting and brood rearing habitat if managed correctly.
If you want more turkeys let the timber companies cut. What needs to be put in place is a management plan conducive to wildlife through the all the stages of a growing forest after said cutting. A thinning regime needs to be put in place to allow light to get the forest floor after the initial 2 to 3 year benefit seen from the logging.
Recent studies are indicating the number one factor effecting turkey populations is the pathetic availability of quality nesting and brood rearing habit throughout the country. It is also becoming apperent to many that any disturbance especially fire and logging that allows light to the forest floor is extremely beneficial to wild turkeys.
Closed canopy hardwoods with open understories are not the the answer. Great for fall winter habitat and of course hunting. Not so great at providing the requirements needed to bring a turkey from egg to adult. There will be turkeys around but the population will not come close to its potential unless " proper" management practices are put into place that and includes disturbances like fire and logging.
Quote from: Dtrkyman on March 27, 2024, 08:45:59 AM
I think it needs to be broken down more specifically, one thing Illinois does well is county by county tags and the smaller state lands are tag specific for that one place.
They also have 5 separated seasons.
I don't like seeing opportunities taken away however the focus should be on population effects, which may be minimal?
I wouldn't mind seeing a premium to get a second tag, and or not allowing a second tag until you fill the first.
I like one bird per day restrictions and even one bird the first week like Missouri.
Keeping non res off federal land is a joke!
Tom's are supposedly expendable after peak breeding but there would be less on the landscape to hear and work from year to year.
Hopefully the Covid effect starts to slow down!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I have a love hate with the IL regs. I've spent my whole life crossing the river from IN to IL for deer and turkeys (we own land and all my extended family is from IL). The cut up seasons are annoying as hell but I also appreciate them because it enables the state to provide more tags. If they had a month long open season they would never be able to issue the same amount of permits. And I agree wholeheartedly that the county quota system is great tho I do wonder what data they're running that off of because their broke govt ain't sending biologists into my neck of the woods.
Then on the other side a 5 day season really can suck if you hit bad weather or something comes up at home...
In just about everything we hunt here in the U.S., habitat management would make more of a difference than harvest management.
Things like CRP programs, managed burns, tree planting, etc...
And rather than harvest limits per hunter, I would think that harvest quotas per area would be better. After so many birds are killed on any given wildlife area, shut it down....
Turkey populations will rise and fall drastically independent of hunting depending on the yearly habitat conditions. Would not take them long to come back strong, and it certainly does not take long for them to plummet.
I am looking for it - But once upon a time I found the harvest data per hunter for NJ. A place where you could kill a gobbler every day of the season if you had the money for tags.
Something like 4 people killed 5+ turkeys. But the vast majority of the turkey harvest was people killing 1. I bet you could extrapolate that across the country.
I guess the point being, is a 5% harvest reduction (bringing it down to 1 bird) going to actually make a difference.
Bigger issue is always going to be habitat and predator control.
That parking lot pic is outrageous!!Yhat would piss me off!!
Quote from: mdmitchell on March 28, 2024, 11:38:29 AM
1 bird in IN here. 1 bird in KY on public - 2 if private. IL is 2 I'd you're willing to pay for multi tags which I do not so I stick with 1 bird.
Personally I love the 1 bird limit. It helps the birds and keeps the woods from staying busy all season. Guys fill a tag and they're done.
It's crazy to hear the bag limits in the southern states as compared to what we typically have in the Midwest.
You're still allowed 2 turkey in KY on public. You just can't kill them both off of the same place
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: High plains drifter on March 28, 2024, 12:56:08 PM
That parking lot pic is outrageous!!Yhat would piss me off!!
That's every parking lot, WMA or National Forest around here. Last year, opening morning I took my dad on his neighbors place and around 9 or so he decided he was done hunting. I went to that particular WMA and it had more trucks than that, at every pull off, I went to 6 different counties, 15 different parking areas on several WMA tracts, and a ton of NF land. I drove from around 9:30 am until 6 pm, found one spot that didn't have a vehicle, went in and was working a gobbler, he's maybe 70 yards away, coming. He slicks up, takes off running, 45 seconds to a minute later, here come two guys, no facemask, no hat, no gloves, short sleeve shirts, carrying their guns like they were on the cross, and walked 30 yards right by me. Had no clue I or the turkey was ever there. I went back to the truck and drove home. 400 mile round trip, got out once, walked for 25 minutes, was set up for maybe 15 minutes and then back on the road. Unfortunately, that's the common theme around here the past 2 seasons.
It's almost to the point of ethics and morals being damned, I'm going hunting right in amongst em because that's the only way you're going to be able to hunt at all. Gonna have to bust right on through there and chase the same bird along side of them. They do it to us.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
In Illinois we can get 3 birds. Counties are allotted so many tags per season, so I can't blame non-residents on a declining population the state already decided that's how many birds can be taken out. Now there are other things that are frustrating such as parking in non-parking areas on public ground. This is supposed to be illegal according to the site rules, but out of state plates are always parked on the side of the road for an easier walk. Sure come hunt our state, I may want to hunt yours one of these days. The regs are easy to find online, take 5 minutes and read them before your hunt.
Quote from: ScottTaulbee on March 28, 2024, 01:07:23 PM
Quote from: mdmitchell on March 28, 2024, 11:38:29 AM
1 bird in IN here. 1 bird in KY on public - 2 if private. IL is 2 I'd you're willing to pay for multi tags which I do not so I stick with 1 bird.
Personally I love the 1 bird limit. It helps the birds and keeps the woods from staying busy all season. Guys fill a tag and they're done.
It's crazy to hear the bag limits in the southern states as compared to what we typically have in the Midwest.
You're still allowed 2 turkey in KY on public. You just can't kill them both off of the same place
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ahhh ok thanks for the clarification
I think 2 is perfect number. Honestly I would be content with one. But 2 is a good middle ground
I live in a multiple tag state, but I'd be okay with 1 gobbler IF I knew it would help the population recover. I get more than one tag, but I'm not looking to fill them all. It's more about getting to be out there than stacking game for me.
Sent from my SM-G990U2 using Tapatalk
All States should raise the price of a non resident Turkey Hunting Permit. I would have no problem paying double the cost of a New Jersey Turkey Permit which is $21 Bucks. Jersey should charge $42 Bucks for those tags that non residents need to buy.
And my home State of New York should definitely raise the price of a non resident Turkey Permit. Currently- for $20 Bucks you get 2 Spring Turkey Permits and 1 Fall Turkey Permit. 3 Tags for just $20 Bucks.No wonder New York has so many non resident Turkey Hunters visiting every Spring. And a NY non Resident hunting License only costs a low of $100 Bucks.
A few here has said that limiting non resident Turkey hunters to 1 Gobbler is the way to go . I agree.
It is one in my part of Texas. Eastern birds here. I think the four bird statewide limit is high and should go to three.
I'm fine with 2 birds for residents. I'd like to see 1 for non residents and higher tag prices. The WMAs in this state have become a joke. I've seen a parking lot as bad or worse than above at a wma half that size.
Ky just raised the OOS fees. Don't know if for this year or next.
Simply stated, this discussion all comes down to wildlife biology 101. If you have a declining resource, you make adjustments wherever needed to protect the remaining resource at a level where that resource has the ability to recover should that decline be reversed. For wildlife managers, the single factor that is most easily controlled is human-caused mortality in the form of hunting.
There are a variety of ways to reduce that hunting mortality, many of which have been mentioned in this discussion. Until that problem of a declining resource, wherever it might be occurring, is addressed, wildlife managers (if they are knowledgeable, responsible, and free of negative outside influences) are going to continue to incorporate more and more restrictive regulations in an attempt to minimize the impact on the remaining resource.
Each of us can "choose our poison" as to how to best go about minimizing that impact, but rest assured, without a reversal of those factors that are the "real" culprits...reproduction/population recruitment failure...we are doomed to seeing more and more restrictions put in place over time. Those will almost assuredly be in the form of more restrictive bag limits, hunting methods, shorter seasons, and/or reduced hunter participation...or some combination of those.
Hunting is the quickest and easiest thing to change. In my opinion, hunting may be a contributor to declines, but it is not the central cause. Sadly the bigger issues are long term strategies and optimal fixes are outside the scope of state agencies. They simply can't impact enough private land management to make a huge difference. Over all I see an improvement in farming practices around my area, and a slight change in timber management, but most landowners only see forest land as cash reserve and monetary value. Loggers exploit this and throw big numbers at the landowners to get access. Once in they absolutely destroy the woods. The only way to mitigate that is engage foresters or do your homework and hire low impact loggers. Landowners need to have a contract and require a bond unless they wholehearted know they can trust the logger. Human encroachment doesn't help either. We see more and more larger tracts of land busted up into smaller plots and sold off. Those get developed into home or vacation plots with cabins or homes. I just saw a 170 acres of prime turkey habitat reduced to developer plots. Money is indeed the root of all evil, including the turkey woods. It's already been said in previous discussions, but I'll say it again, changing bag limits is not going to bring back birds, it may help stabilize the flock a little, but I doubt it. If hunting is a cause then cease killing opportunities by reducing seasons or just stop all hunting, but no agency is going to commit professional suicide and do that. I am for doing all we can to stabilize flocks, but in all honesty, barring a huge social/economic paradigm shift, I think we are past the point of restoring the flocks we saw 25-30 years ago. The best we can hope for is sustaining what we have.
Quote from: Vintage on March 30, 2024, 08:06:46 PM
Ky just raised the OOS fees. Don't know if for this year or next.
Where did you get this info. I just checked and they said License are unchanged this year.
Quote from: Paulmyr on March 28, 2024, 11:13:13 AM
Quote from: Gobbler428 on March 28, 2024, 07:39:24 AM
Quote from: Ihuntoldschool on March 27, 2024, 12:11:20 PM
I wish we could put a limit on the timber harvest particularly in the Southeast. That's the threat to turkeys and reason for the decline.
X2
It's not the harvesting of timber that's the problem. It's the changes in timber management over the years that gets them to the point where they can be harvested that's the issue.
Apperently I must be wired differently than some. When I see logging activity in a big forest setting it gets a pin. No bigger attractor in the big woods in spring than an opening big or small, natural or man made.
These openings provide the security of open space during periods of rain and better yet prime nesting and brood rearing habitat if managed correctly.
If you want more turkeys let the timber companies cut. What needs to be put in place is a management plan conducive to wildlife through the all the stages of a growing forest after said cutting. A thinning regime needs to be put in place to allow light to get the forest floor after the initial 2 to 3 year benefit seen from the logging.
Recent studies are indicating the number one factor effecting turkey populations is the pathetic availability of quality nesting and brood rearing habit throughout the country. It is also becoming apperent to many that any disturbance especially fire and logging that allows light to the forest floor is extremely beneficial to wild turkeys.
Closed canopy hardwoods with open understories are not the the answer. Great for fall winter habitat and of course hunting. Not so great at providing the requirements needed to bring a turkey from egg to adult. There will be turkeys around but the population will not come close to its potential unless " proper" management practices are put into place that and includes disturbances like fire and logging.
Paulmyr I would like to expand on your take here. I agree with you that it is more the way it's managed rather than that it is. Clear cuts ARE a game draw and ARE a pin on my map as well. The problem is that here in east central MS most of the land is timber company owned. That means VAST cuts at one time. It is very common to see cuts as far as you can see with absolutely no trees left. That's gonna limit how much and how long a turkey can utilize it. In a season or two it turns into an impenetrable briar patch- for hundreds of yards. And the companies don't respect the hardwoods and SMZ. They cut right up to the banks of even large creeks etc.They certainly do not replant hardwoods either. Also, the spraying practice by helicopter or plane not only destroys native plants but has been proven to stunt or eliminate acorn production on any oak left big enough to not be killed outright. If you pay to lease timber company land you have no rights here/ they will bid it out to be cut during turkey/deer season regardless of Why you leased it.
Quote from: Prospector on March 31, 2024, 08:27:05 AM
Quote from: Paulmyr on March 28, 2024, 11:13:13 AM
Quote from: Gobbler428 on March 28, 2024, 07:39:24 AM
Quote from: Ihuntoldschool on March 27, 2024, 12:11:20 PM
I wish we could put a limit on the timber harvest particularly in the Southeast. That's the threat to turkeys and reason for the decline.
X2
It's not the harvesting of timber that's the problem. It's the changes in timber management over the years that gets them to the point where they can be harvested that's the issue.
Apperently I must be wired differently than some. When I see logging activity in a big forest setting it gets a pin. No bigger attractor in the big woods in spring than an opening big or small, natural or man made.
These openings provide the security of open space during periods of rain and better yet prime nesting and brood rearing habitat if managed correctly.
If you want more turkeys let the timber companies cut. What needs to be put in place is a management plan conducive to wildlife through the all the stages of a growing forest after said cutting. A thinning regime needs to be put in place to allow light to get the forest floor after the initial 2 to 3 year benefit seen from the logging.
Recent studies are indicating the number one factor effecting turkey populations is the pathetic availability of quality nesting and brood rearing habit throughout the country. It is also becoming apperent to many that any disturbance especially fire and logging that allows light to the forest floor is extremely beneficial to wild turkeys.
Closed canopy hardwoods with open understories are not the the answer. Great for fall winter habitat and of course hunting. Not so great at providing the requirements needed to bring a turkey from egg to adult. There will be turkeys around but the population will not come close to its potential unless " proper" management practices are put into place that and includes disturbances like fire and logging.
Paulmyr I would like to expand on your take here. I agree with you that it is more the way it's managed rather than that it is. Clear cuts ARE a game draw and ARE a pin on my map as well. The problem is that here in east central MS most of the land is timber company owned. That means VAST cuts at one time. It is very common to see cuts as far as you can see with absolutely no trees left. That's gonna limit how much and how long a turkey can utilize it. In a season or two it turns into an impenetrable briar patch- for hundreds of yards. And the companies don't respect the hardwoods and SMZ. They cut right up to the banks of even large creeks etc.They certainly do not replant hardwoods either. Also, the spraying practice by helicopter or plane not only destroys native plants but has been proven to stunt or eliminate acorn production on any oak left big enough to not be killed outright. If you pay to lease timber company land you have no rights here/ they will bid it out to be cut during turkey/deer season regardless of Why you leased it.
Amen brother I hunt 10,000 acres of mostly timber company land in South Carolina and
it seems like they are cutting and spraying somewhere on us constantly and the only hardwoods left are mostly in the bottoms near the creeks where they leave a few that don't get sprayed. Last year they starting cutting on one of our tracks on opening day of turkey season and its normal for them to spray while hens are nesting,
Quote from: Vintage on March 30, 2024, 08:06:46 PM
Ky just raised the OOS fees. Don't know if for this year or next.
Not sure what they used to be but I paid $242.05 total for my KY oos license. That was online so there was some sort of convenience fee tacked on.
The moral of timber companies is that they are in the timber, not wildlife bizness no matter how many touchy feely pamphlets they put out demonstrating different.
I am not normally for lots of regs but in this case I wish that there were more to help our natural resources as a whole rather than just exploitation of one of them. Money buys influence though and that is very apparent in my home state.
Quote from: deathfoot on March 31, 2024, 08:46:04 AM
Quote from: Vintage on March 30, 2024, 08:06:46 PM
Ky just raised the OOS fees. Don't know if for this year or next.
Not sure what they used to be but I paid $242.05 total for my KY oos license. That was online so there was some sort of convenience fee tacked on.
That's probably what he's talking about. They added that "convenience fee" this year. We've never had that before
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Indiana raised their prices for oos last season or the season before. For deer, it is now over 500$ for the bundle license. It did not change the amount of oos pressure I saw deer hunting on state property. I feel like the guys that take the time to hunt out of state are going to do it regardless of price. If anything, I feel like increased prices may increase the pressure from your more serious guys. The perceived notion that the price is going to keep people from also going is an incentive to go. Let's face it, what is 100 or 2 dollars now. It's a drop in a bucket in the grand scheme of things. I'm happy with Indiana 1 bird limit. Public land is a zoo anymore it feels like.
I have a friend in West Tennessee who spends a fortune on turkey habitat each year. Owns 680 acres where you don't hunt your bird, you select him. Two years ago we counted over 80 jakes in a field.I typically hunt with him, doing an afternoon and following morning hunt...always kill two, three or four year old birds.
He only hunts first two weeks of the season taking friends each day. He harvest his birds by the 3rd day of the season. Last year there were 23 birds taken on 15 hunting days. If he shot 4 birds per man per season, he would not make a dent in his population. There are areas of the state where you are lucky to kill one bird a year. I see no reason to not allow a higher harvest total when the state knows there is probably less than one bird average taken per hunter a year. What difference would it make if the limit was three per year and very few will even get two?
Virginia: 3 per season with no more than 2 in the Fall. That's about right. From what I have seen, Virginia manages it flocks well. Over the last years, I've seen more turkeys than ever before. And I am seeing them in places I've never seen them before.
Quote from: Prospector on March 27, 2024, 05:17:10 AM
Too many with a caveat:
Mississippi-currently has a 3 bird limit. My personal opinion is NR should be one and one only. Resident should have a one ( maybe 2) bird limit at license purchase with an opportunity at an additional tag with a predator bounty.
Quit wasting money on tele-check. Look at the NWTF harvest report for MS. Little over 11k reported but MS "thinks" like 30k actual. Wow. Even they know it's ridiculous. Use $ for something else. Like supporting a predator bounty... get all us NWTF members off our duff and #1 trapping- gotta get that tag! and #2 helping man and support that predator bounty.... Just one poor man's opinion. lol, might have got a little more than u asked....
Yep predators are out of control. I kill every coon, possum and coyote I see, but need help.