Bird Numbers Down/ Decrees The Limit ?

[Paulmyr]

Why couldn't they do that now??

Because as Gobblenut stated the wildlife is in control of the state. Easier and less costly to ban hunting on the federal level than it is in each state individually. Only one swipe of the pen compared to 50.

[Happy]

I would be all for anyone who utilizes public land for any reason to be required to buy a permit for the year. A couple dollars per permit, and that money goes directly to the upkeep and improvement of that land. I would prefere hunters pay more than the average bird watcher or hiker. But I don't think a few dollars for a permit would hurt anyone

[nativeks]

If you feel there should be a decrease in tags then you should personally adhere to the limit you think it should be in principle and not take advantage of what the actual limit is.

I have not bought a tag to hunt my own land since 2020. The numbers do not support it. I still donate alot of habitat work and donate alot to turkey conservation.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

[Ohiowoodchuck]

My opinion is if the states cared, then they would offer a bounty on nesting predators during trapping season. This would also help out the trappers since the fur market is not existent. I started a major habit improvement on my place several years and the last three years I have been removing all in season animals during trapping season. It is really working. When I bought the farm 10 years ago I never heard a Turkey in the spring. When I took my son last weekend, we counted seven Tom's gobbling on my place and the surrounding neighbors. I'm constantly getting pics of hens and Tom's and later in the summer I'll get pics of hens with her brood. I'm really impressed how it's turning out. I will keep up the pressure on the predators in the fall. I shave experienced the same outcome on my buddies farm that I hunt on. It was nothing to hear 15-20 different Tom's gobbling when he first purchased it 8 years ago. It started to dwindle down. I'm the only person allowed to hunt and most years I took one bird, some I'd take two. I started trapping it three years ago and I can see a big improvement in the turkeys this year. When you take 17 raccoon off of a 100 yard stretch of creek in a two week time, there is a problem. I would forget about the state coming in and doing anything because all they care about is your money and catering to the animal rights activists. Look at the vast majority of the chiefs of wildlife that the governors install. Most have never hunted a day in there life. 

[howl]

Solid point. What are the numbers of people who do this? I imagine some states publish it. They publish every durn thing else.

[eggshell]

I would forget about the state coming in and doing anything because all they care about is your money and catering to the animal rights activists. Look at the vast majority of the chiefs of wildlife that the governors install. Most have never hunted a day in there life.

With all respect Ohiowoodchuck, I think you have been misinformed. I worked 30+ years for ODOW and every chief I ever knew hunted and fished and understood very well where their paycheck came from. I never once heard any DOW employee defend animal rights organizations.

I am not arguing just trying to kindly bring facts to the discussion.

[Ohiowoodchuck]

I would forget about the state coming in and doing anything because all they care about is your money and catering to the animal rights activists. Look at the vast majority of the chiefs of wildlife that the governors install. Most have never hunted a day in there life.

With all respect Ohiowoodchuck, I think you have been misinformed. I worked 30+ years for ODOW and every chief I ever knew hunted and fished and understood very well where their paycheck came from. I never once heard any DOW employee defend animal rights organizations.

I am not arguing just trying to kindly bring facts to the discussion.

Maybe I'm wrong and if I am, I'll own it. The profile for the current chief in Ohio doesn't say anything about hunting in her profile. It says she camped and visited the state parks. Maybe she does hunt, but is she afraid to put that on her profile because of certain people? I was there in Athens when a lot of trappers and predator hunters wanted to open a bobcat season. We asked for anything limit of 1, we also said we would tag them in, take them to a station, buy a permit etc. they was getting ready to let us have it when the animal rights activist stood up and started crying and whining about the bobcat survey wasn't completed and we should wait till the survey is complete and then look at all the data before determining if we need a season. They decided with them over the ones who pay there bills. From then on I realized the fix was in on us sportsman. Also not arguing with you, just letting you know how I see it.

[Spurs]

Couple hot takes:

-The funding argument could be solve QUICKLY if states would manage timber better.  And I'm not talking TSI for money, but for habitat diversity. 

-I travel a lot for work, so I get to turkey hunt abroad.  Generally speaking, OOS hunters are by far the most respectful and ethical.  90% of my negative experience I've had from people turkey hunting has been residents.

-Want to see what mob rule and over restrictions can look like when it comes to over regulation?  Come duck hunt AR for a full season.  The OOS rule have created a vacuum that makes it nearly impossible to hunt state property for half the season.

-Anyone wishing to lower opportunities for other hunters is anti hunter...by definition.  I promise I'm not trying to call anyone out, but read your wish list in the voice of a liberal soy bean baby and you'll understand.  It's like music to their ears.

[Marc]

-The funding argument could be solve QUICKLY if states would manage timber better.  And I'm not talking TSI for money, but for habitat diversity. 

The prospect of the government spending money efficiently is about as likely as crossbreeding turkeys with elephants successfully...

My experience in watching government funding at work, is that accountability would be the first step towards improvement.

-I travel a lot for work, so I get to turkey hunt abroad.

Out of curiosity, what other countries are you hunting turkeys in?  Mexico comes to mind?  New Zeland?

-Anyone wishing to lower opportunities for other hunters is anti hunter...by definition. 

I disagree...   I have always been taught that hunters should be the biggest advocates for conservation, and the foremost stewards of the sport.  Hunters first and foremost should be the entity that prevents over-hunting.

While I do not necessarily agree with many of the proposed ideas, I also do not have a dog in this fight...  But I would certainly advocate for shorter season lengths, or decreased hunting if populations were hurting due to over hunting.

I believe that if habitat managment is to improve, that it will have to come from hunters, and hunting organizations.

[nativeks]

Couple hot takes:

-The funding argument could be solve QUICKLY if states would manage timber better.  And I'm not talking TSI for money, but for habitat diversity. 

-I travel a lot for work, so I get to turkey hunt abroad.  Generally speaking, OOS hunters are by far the most respectful and ethical.  90% of my negative experience I've had from people turkey hunting has been residents.

-Want to see what mob rule and over restrictions can look like when it comes to over regulation?  Come duck hunt AR for a full season.  The OOS rule have created a vacuum that makes it nearly impossible to hunt state property for half the season.

-Anyone wishing to lower opportunities for other hunters is anti hunter...by definition.  I promise I'm not trying to call anyone out, but read your wish list in the voice of a liberal soy bean baby and you'll understand.  It's like music to their ears.

What is your proposal? We are hunting a resource like it is 2005 when populations are down 60%-90%. In other species from ducks to deer, to elk when the population craters they reduce the harvest. But for whatever reason turkey hunters are the most selfish bunch of hunters. So what are the options? The status quo of selling unlimited tags is not sustainable. Even colorado has figured this out with the cash cow that is otc elk permits and many of them are going to a draw.

[Spurs]

Couple hot takes:

-The funding argument could be solve QUICKLY if states would manage timber better.  And I'm not talking TSI for money, but for habitat diversity. 

-I travel a lot for work, so I get to turkey hunt abroad.  Generally speaking, OOS hunters are by far the most respectful and ethical.  90% of my negative experience I've had from people turkey hunting has been residents.

-Want to see what mob rule and over restrictions can look like when it comes to over regulation?  Come duck hunt AR for a full season.  The OOS rule have created a vacuum that makes it nearly impossible to hunt state property for half the season.

-Anyone wishing to lower opportunities for other hunters is anti hunter...by definition.  I promise I'm not trying to call anyone out, but read your wish list in the voice of a liberal soy bean baby and you'll understand.  It's like music to their ears.

What is your proposal? We are hunting a resource like it is 2005 when populations are down 60%-90%. In other species from ducks to deer, to elk when the population craters they reduce the harvest. But for whatever reason turkey hunters are the most selfish bunch of hunters. So what are the options? The status quo of selling unlimited tags is not sustainable. Even colorado has figured this out with the cash cow that is otc elk permits and many of them are going to a draw.

I stated one of my proposals.

-Let the habitat managers do their thing on state property to create whole life habitat...unrestricted. 
-Create a state requirement for all state land and corporate land owners who own more than 1,000 acres to leave SMZs.(this would be huge in my area with timber companies owning the largest percentage of property)
-Allow state forestry commissions to have a const sharing or free fire breaks.  It's relatively cheap, but not viable for many land owners.

Some states are geared towards hunt satisfaction vs opportunity.  If we all were like that, we'd be out of places to hunt overnight.  Also, satisfaction to one person is different than the next.  Opportunity is the same for everyone.

[Old Gobbler]

States would be best served with a universal prohibition on shooting jakes in the spring .. nation wide ... especially Florida , where I live and over pressure and poor management could make the Osceola the next "carrier pigeon"

Ask any serious long time Florida turkey hunter the situation down here and they will tell you the sky is literally falling on us , if no corrective action is taken soon ...we are doomed

[WV Flopper]

 To address Florida, with the most respect.

WV is a diverse state, in geography. WV could be served well with two or three different start times for a turkey season.

But, as in the case with Florida, it can't be done. We would have guys running for the Eastern panhandle for week one to the Southern zone for week two then the mountain zone for week three. Three opening days! It's not feasible, it's asinine! It sure would work better to catch turkeys in prime time hunting, but, detrimental to the turkey and to hunter pressure "Florida"!

This has been a great read. I would parrot the idea of all users of NF lands paying a fee. Not just hunters. Hunters use the lands for 4-5 months, hikers use the lands year round . Groups, organized groups, year round. They can pay too.

I think there are several people that should do as I, read ever post in this thread. It is eye raising on the train of thought of some of our brethren.

Wishing everyone a great remainder to your season.

[Ohiowoodchuck]

My beef isn't with out of state hunters. We are all on this together and should stick together. I agree with decreasing the bag limit. Even agree with the above mentioned of not allowing the harvest of Jake's. I let 3 pass by this morning. The problem lies in the state. They have squandered the money that all outdoorsmen have paid to the state. When is the last time you heard of them buying a large chunk of land for public hunting etc. They had the prime opportunity to buy up a lot of the old mead paper ground and then implement proper habitat practices but they did nothing. The state gave mead a large tax reduction for keeping it public and they did, then they realized there was more money to be made by leasing and away it all went and the state didn't try to do anything to keep it public. I believe a bunch of anti hunters are leasing it because I never see anyone bunting them around here or parked at the gates.

[sasquatch1]

Couple hot takes:

-The funding argument could be solve QUICKLY if states would manage timber better.  And I'm not talking TSI for money, but for habitat diversity. 

-I travel a lot for work, so I get to turkey hunt abroad.  Generally speaking, OOS hunters are by far the most respectful and ethical.  90% of my negative experience I've had from people turkey hunting has been residents.

-Want to see what mob rule and over restrictions can look like when it comes to over regulation?  Come duck hunt AR for a full season.  The OOS rule have created a vacuum that makes it nearly impossible to hunt state property for half the season.

-Anyone wishing to lower opportunities for other hunters is anti hunter...by definition.  I promise I'm not trying to call anyone out, but read your wish list in the voice of a liberal soy bean baby and you'll understand.  It's like music to their ears.

What is your proposal? We are hunting a resource like it is 2005 when populations are down 60%-90%. In other species from ducks to deer, to elk when the population craters they reduce the harvest. But for whatever reason turkey hunters are the most selfish bunch of hunters. So what are the options? The status quo of selling unlimited tags is not sustainable. Even colorado has figured this out with the cash cow that is otc elk permits and many of them are going to a draw.

I stated one of my proposals.

-Let the habitat managers do their thing on state property to create whole life habitat...unrestricted. 
-Create a state requirement for all state land and corporate land owners who own more than 1,000 acres to leave SMZs.(this would be huge in my area with timber companies owning the largest percentage of property)
-Allow state forestry commissions to have a const sharing or free fire breaks.  It's relatively cheap, but not viable for many land owners.

Some states are geared towards hunt satisfaction vs opportunity.  If we all were like that, we'd be out of places to hunt overnight.  Also, satisfaction to one person is different than the next.  Opportunity is the same for everyone.

The SMZ thing would be nice if it was ever legit. We have a rule down south for the logging companies and SMZs, I think the rule is 25 yds on each side the creek and Ik they cheat that. Anyway, you don't end up with anything really useful, that tiny strip will grow so thick it's hardly any different. The size limit should be double but then you talking money and we know how that goes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro