Trapping and Habitat

[El Pavo Grande]

There are varying opinions on the effectiveness of predator control and trapping as it relates to turkey populations.  More biologists lean towards enhancing suitable habitat as being more effective than predator control and more important, or healthy, to the overall dynamics of all wildlife.  Some claim too much trapping or control of one predator species could be more detrimental than it would be positive.

I am no biologist, just a turkey hunter with a strong interest in healthy populations.  So with the above, I agree 100%.  Even for one uneducated with in depth and layered understanding of biology it makes sense.  It is simple....Turkeys have a higher percentage to thrive in suitable to exceptional turkey habitat.  A perfect balance of food source and nesting cover will alleviate the damages from adult predation and nest predation.  Basically common sense.  Turkeys can survive in suitable habitat, but can't in a paved parking lot. 

As I said, in my opinion the first paragraph is accurate.  However, that conclusion is based on that suitable habitat.  What if that is removed?  I've read the debates.  I've seen the anti-trapping comments that suggest it does no good and that habitat is the only answer, or that turkeys and predators have always co-existed.  I get it, but I think some on that side of the debate, including some highly educated biologists, can be guilty of tunnel vision and don't think outside the box.  Here is the reality that must be a part of the equation.  Many have zero to very little control over the habitat....hunting leases, timber company land, management areas, Corp land, or National Forest.  Some timber companies pillage the timber and landscape.  They are in the business of making money and wildlife management on most is not on the radar.  They leave no barriers along creeks, no cover, no mast producing trees.  National Forest land is often the same, it's focused on timber management rather than wildlife management.   Many state management areas are lacking suitable habitat for quail or turkeys.  As human disturbance / pressure goes, one common aspect I've seen is open access with countless roads dissecting what used to be areas off the beaten path.  That buffer is gone on a lot of property now. 

I trust a lot in what the educated or biologists say, but are those claiming trapping is ineffective taking into account the loss of habitat that continues to get worse in many areas.  Sure, private land owners can make a difference with habitat if it's a large enough area and dependent on what your neighbors are doing.  And I understand the dynamics and concerns with the effects of trapping too many nest predators and not enough big predators, or vice versa.  It can shift more predation pressure onto turkeys.  With all that said, are all the following being considered with the arguments that trapping isn't effective or trapping too many of one predator and not the other more harmful than helpful.....
*Loss of suitable habitat
*Supplemental feeding: corn, etc.  Does this help nest predators thrive / congregate prey?  Baiting is more popular than ever. 
*Timing of prescribed burns:  Most understand the value burns provide to turkeys.  But, at what expense to a struggling population?  Sure, in most cases hens can re-nest, but the percentages for success have to drop the less opportunities you have to nest.  Once again this is sometimes timber management over wildlife management, and is more prevalent than ever. 
*Fur market:  I would assume that research today is compared and contrasted with research from 15-20+ years ago, with this in the equation.  I believe it's a disservice if not.  It seems a key factor in all of this would be the major decline overall in trapping from then now.  So, any discussion on the subject of habitat and trapping should take that into account?
*Weather:  I believe this has been one of, if not the biggest, factor of decline in my area.  Wet, cold nesting and brooding seasons have not been kind over the majority of the last 15+ years.  This can't be controlled, but at what point does habitat and trapping not become even more important when yet another factor wreaks havoc on nesting turkeys? 

To conclude, my "uneducated in turkey biology" mind believes that with all the above, trapping is as important than ever.  I believe some (not all, some being the key word) biologists don't want to say trapping is effective, because that's not what they were educated to say and it's a little bit of politics.  A state turkey biologist isn't going to say trap coons and possums, because that steps on the toes of a lot of people....coon hunters, other biologists, etc.  I've heard a biologist say that.  While habitat provides the foundation, maybe trapping is more vital than ever.  While it's important to balance trapping of all predators, I think a person removing 10, 20, 30 nest predators out of a booming nest predator population is better than nothing, and for that shouldn't be told it's ineffective.  Just an uneducated opinion.  Maybe I'm wrong?

[GobbleNut]

Great, objective post, El Pavo Grande!  I entirely agree with the points you make.  No time right now, but may elaborate on my personal perspective later,...but you pretty much covered the bases!   

[dublelung]

  Your post above sums it up perfectly.  The majority of turkey hunters don't own large tracts of land and are limited in what they can do to benefit turkeys, as well as, other game animals. As you mentioned, timber companies are in the timber business, not wildlife management. As a hunter who has leased timber company land for years the only thing I can do to help wildlife on those leases is provide food plots and trap predators. Some biologist and arm chair qb's may think trapping or hunting predators doesn't do much to benefit turkeys, quail, deer, rabbits, etc. That couldn't be further from the truth. The fact is, any DEAD nest raider isn't going to raid a nest. I don't care if you're only able to trap 6 or 7 coons/possums a year, those animals aren't around to do any damage.  Yes, more will be born and more will move in to fill the void, you trap them again then next year, and the next, and the next. Eradicating the nest predators isn't the goal, managing their numbers is the goal.
 
  In another post a trapping skeptic mentioned, "oh you mean private land?" Yes, in that particular instance I'm referring to private land. However, all public land is bordered at some point by private land. What you do on the private ground carries over to, and also benefits the animals traveling to and from public land. Trapping predators isn't a miracle "fix all" and you won't see the results of it instantly but in the long run you and others joining you will benefit from it.
 
  I've personally trapped large and small acreage properties for individuals and for timber companies. Coyotes, coons, possums, bobcats, beavers, you name it. I've seen first hand the difference it makes over the years. I've got people lined up who ask me to trap their property year after year because they too have seen the benefits. Take a family of beavers for example. They've built a dam and the water is killing valuable timber. The timber company comes in with a trackhoe and tears out the damn, water goes down, and all is well. Until....the beavers rebuild the dam and the water is back up again. After many attempts to run the beavers off and make them relocate, a trapper is called and the family of beavers is removed from the property. With no beavers left to rebuild the dam the water stays off the timber and all is well again. Eliminate the problem and reap the rewards! It doesn't take a master's degree in wildlife biology to realize this, only common sense. 

[owlhoot]

Last paragraph says it all.  Nest predators are taking the turkey out. No control of them . Doesn't matter huge timbers or agriculture and pasture land , Crp lands , state forests. Turkey all over many states all going down.
State parks and county parks have Zero hunting pressure, populations are way down.
Chicken crap isn't being spread around rocks and heavily timbered areas. No crops for miles and miles.
Corn feeders on state and federal lands , never seen any. Turkey populations are way down.
What habitat changes are the same , The farm lands and the timber lands are not the same habitat, yet both areas have huge reductions in turkey populations. From northern Nebraska to southern Mississippi populations are down.
Trapping and hunting predators, especially nest raiders has seen a huge decline of participants. Populations are remaining unchecked.
Missouri Conservation reports 1997-98 over 200,000 raccoons trapped. In 2018-19 22,562 raccoons trapped. With 25 years of steady decline.
Is that the same in your areas? Probably so.
Oh common sense .

[Howie g]

Good post for sure . Disclaimer = not a Dr / biologists and haven't even stayed in a holiday inn express ever .
" some of you won't get that " .     IMO if you have permission to trap nest robbers on a property you care about , then if you have time , the benefits out way the negatives . With virtually nobody trapping commercially anymore and the few coon doggers only treeing the coons and not killing them . It's also recently become legal to feed deer where I'm located also has exploded the coon population!
Do yourself a favor if you find a clutch of eggs ,  put a camera on it , and then tell me your against trapping!
I honestly don't know how we have any poult survival rate with all the varmits after eggs and young poults .
   I can say with 100 % conference that it's made a difference in my lil peace of ground . 
This is not coming from a scientific study ,, coming from years of watching the turkey numbers and survival rate s going up and down .    If you disagree? That's fine ,  but don't complain about numbers in your area if your not at least "trying " to make a difference.

[saltysenior]

habitat is important, but why are turkey populations thriving in lots of suburban  and urban areas...

nest raiding is a big factor , but it has gone on for ages. but Coyotes are a newer factor...if a pointer can sniff out a single quail , how hard is it for a coyote to sniff a 2week old nest with moma sittin'n on it.

predators on adult birds have also been around for a while

I believe the following reasons each hold a part of a decline....
  Disease....large flocks suddenly vanish
  Birds of Prey....more Owls and Hawks every where and poults are an easy target
  Fire Ants in the S.E.....any where I have sat , ants have found within an hour the piece of jelly bread I placed on the ground.......try it
 

[g8rvet]

Dang it El Pavo.  LOL  I thought you were asking me to start one.  I am going to post in here what I typed in the other thread.  Can a thread be merged or can I delete my thread? 

[g8rvet]

Some children on the YouTube thread hijacked it with a bunch of stupidity.  But the subject of predator control came up in the success of improving turkey populations.  Would love to hear folks thoughts on it.

I thought they were talking about public land, but they were mostly talking about private.  I think these are two very different situations - ie total control vs multi-use areas.

On public ground, many biologists (but not all), backed by research, believe targeting just a few of the predators of turkey nests, even the most obvious ones, is an expensive, massively time consuming and largely ineffective method of improving nest success.  Their reasoning is that if you trap skunks, raccoons and coyotes in an area, there are still so many other predators that it is not effective ie crow, armadillo, owls, hawks, fire ants, etc - some of which are federally protected and others which are both invasive and uncontrollable (fire ants) on a large scale.  Most of those experts (which I am not, I just read their research and conclusions) think that the error in thinking occurs that when you remove a certain set of predators - let's say raccoons, that are the highest percent of nest and poult raiders in a given area, the other predators start to target the food source since it is more readily available and another predator becomes the primary in that system.  Similar well controlled and researched studies (that I have used based on one state committee I serve and one private group I am on the board) on predator/prey for turkey and other species come to the same conclusions.  Removing one predator in a large scale ecosystem often just changes the breeding and success of another predator in the same system.  It is interesting and actually does not make sense until you think of it on the larger scale.  Kill the raccoon or coyote or possum and you would think the hens would have more success - but nature abhors a vacuum and there are dozens of examples of another predator becoming the new primary culprit.  In remarkably short lengths of time as well.  Some in months, not years even.

Those biologists argue that the one most controllable factor that can be manipulated is habitat enhancement.  Thicker, proper nesting habitat makes the nest and young more protected against being found in the first place.  Proper land use management such as rotation and timing of burns, rotation of timber harvest (always nearby young trees in early stage for cover) and invasive plant species control are good for other reasons than just turkey habitat and are an easier sell on the Federal level for benefitting both the crop (trees) as well as the land use (hunting, recreation).  That same cover is good for lots of other species' reproduction (deer and quail to name two). Predators will target the most readily available food source and making the turkey nest (or quail, fawn, etc) less available increases the survival rate as the predator finds other food.

Private land is a very different situation.  For several reasons.  First, it is a much smaller ecosystem - and one that is controlled by an individual (or small group of people).  You can react to the new threats of predator/prey as you can monitor small areas more effectively.  You are also in charge of what you want for your main land use (turkey first, timber next, etc). As long as you are not removing protected species, in a more confined area you can be both more effective and more proactive.  The odds of a smaller tract having an owl problem, or hawks, or fire ants is lower and there are measures you can legally take as well.  You also control your burn and planting cycle which are equally important.   

I think this is an interesting and multi factored situation and my examples are for Southeastern areas of the country.  I don't know anything about other areas as I have not researched or been involved in those.

So, one thing we can do is hold the Feds to land use practices that favor turkey reproduction, as that is beneficial to other species as well-even some protected species like the dreaded RCW! Watching the adaptive land management plans of USDA and State agencies is a great place to start.  All public record and easily accessible and often there are public meetings where anyone can speak.

Would love to hear some thoughts from other folks, especially the issues and battles in other areas of the country.

[g8rvet]

Good point El Pavo.  I think your best point is what to do when habitat management is out of the equation, or at least moved way down the list.  Much harder answer and one that probably no one can accurately answer (there will never likely be any studies on it, no money there for research). I think I am guilty of thinking more about the massive public areas that I hunt instead of smaller areas as well. A big difference in trapping on 20,000 acres vs 600,000 acres. 

Owlhoot,
"Missouri Conservation reports 1997-98 over 200,000 raccoons trapped. In 2018-19 22,562 raccoons trapped. With 25 years of steady decline.".  Are you saying there was less trapping done or that fewer were actually caught?  If so, is half as much trapping being done with 90% less trapped or is actually 90% less trapping being done?  Is the 25 year decline in raccoons trapped or raccoons attempted to be trapped I guess is my question. Because that would likely be two very different cause and effects.

In my state, there is an oral vaccination program for raccoons for rabies control in certain areas (not to save the raccoons but to lessen the transmission to people and domestic animals).  Would make sense that there would be a longer survival of raccoons in that area and a greater reduction of nest success. As the area is semi urban/semi rural, not sure if anyone has looked at that, but I will ask. 

[Dtrkyman]

It all matters!  I know in central Illinois when the turkeys were at peak numbers it was not long after a recent Distemper outbreak in the area, you could not even find a coon track for several years!

Now years later the coons rebounded, skunks and bob cats are way up, Coyotes are always there, but Coyotes were there during the peak!

Also there are now some invasive habitat issues in the area, bush honeysuckle has gotten out of control in many areas, those properties have nothing in the woods besides it and mature trees, at turkey level there is nothing, little food and no nesting cover, I would love to hear a biologists opinion on that plant!  But I know of several properties that were once loaded with birds, now honeysuckle is prominent and birds are scarce.

Add to that some poor years for hatching and it is too much for them to over come.

I am no biologist but I have guided and managed properties in that area for 15-20 years and all the quality turkey properties I have been on in recent years have minimal honeysuckle! 

I can not see how trapping wouldn't help, season is usually late winter, so removing those nest robbers prior to the birds breeding sounds like a win!

[dublelung]

Dang it El Pavo.  LOL  I thought you were asking me to start one.  I am going to post in here what I typed in the other thread.  Can a thread be merged or can I delete my thread?

Yes feel free to delete yours as the other one who started this thread makes much more sense.

[GobbleNut]

Man, some really great, civil discussion going on here.  Here's hoping it stays that way...   

As others have stated, this is a really complex issue with any number of elements involved.  The solution often does not depend on one element or another being resolved,...it most likely depends on multiple elements being resolved. 

I will point out that one of the complications we face when talking about things like predator management is the fact that overall societal attitudes are changing.  Whether any of us agree that it is good or bad, it is a fact that we must recognize,...and find ways to "negotiate" around in an acceptable manner.

As hunters, we can preach predator management all we want, but if that other 97% if the population that does not hunt makes the decision that predator management is not acceptable to them, we will be forced to find alternatives that are.  Most of those folks base their positions on such matters strictly on emotion, not the realities of what happens in the natural world. 

The point being that, however we approach increasing wild turkey numbers, we always must be cognizant of how the rest of society views what we do.  In not doing so, we put our own futures as hunters in peril.   

[btomlin]

Disclaimer:  I trap because I enjoy it.  Predator management is a indirect benefit of my enjoyment.  Yes, I've been called heartless, a "barbarian", etc.  I'd like to say I haven't heard it from other hunters, but that would be inaccurate. 

I have seen a turkey population increase in the properties I trap and the landowners have as well.  I don't have any "studies", but I do know a cat is a cat and cats kill....many times just because they are a cat.  Raccoons, skunks, possums, etc all take eggs or young.  I figure if I remove one mouth it is one less mouth needing fed regardless if it is a bunny, quail, pheasant, turkey nest or one of their young. 

I heard a trapper by the name Robert Waddell(he is an instructor at the FTA Trappers College) state that a female coyote will take a fawn a day(if she can find one) while she is lactating for her pups. I'm guessing on the days she isn't getting a fawn that she isn't going hungry due to all of the "new life" that is occurring at that time of the year.

I agree that the better the habitat, the better the carrying capacity and it should be the #1 focus.  However, that carrying capacity would apply to all animals.  The more prey species available due to better habitat, the more predators due to increased supply of prey and habitat also.  Like I stated, if I can provide some "relief" to the prey species, I'm going to provide it.  Am I going to be able to 100% control it??  Absolutely not, but I feel it does help and the removal of some predators is something I can control unlike the weather or people running bulldozers through cover.

[dublelung]

Disclaimer:  I trap because I enjoy it.  Predator management is a indirect benefit of my enjoyment.  Yes, I've been called heartless, a "barbarian", etc.  I'd like to say I haven't heard it from other hunters, but that would be inaccurate. 

I have seen a turkey population increase in the properties I trap and the landowners have as well.  I don't have any "studies", but I do know a cat is a cat and cats kill....many times just because they are a cat.  Raccoons, skunks, possums, etc all take eggs or young.  I figure if I remove one mouth it is one less mouth needing fed regardless if it is a bunny, quail, pheasant, turkey nest or one of their young. 

I heard a trapper by the name Robert Waddell(he is an instructor at the FTA Trappers College) state that a female coyote will take a fawn a day(if she can find one) while she is lactating for her pups. I'm guessing on the days she isn't getting a fawn that she isn't going hungry due to all of the "new life" that is occurring at that time of the year.

I agree that the better the habitat, the better the carrying capacity and it should be the #1 focus.  However, that carrying capacity would apply to all animals.  The more prey species available due to better habitat, the more predators due to increased supply of prey and habitat also.  Like I stated, if I can provide some "relief" to the prey species, I'm going to provide it.  Am I going to be able to 100% control it??  Absolutely not, but I feel it does help and the removal of some predators is something I can control unlike the weather or people running bulldozers through cover.

You nailed it!  I can't tell you how many hunters attempt to tear me down for trapping.

[g8rvet]

It all matters!  I know in central Illinois when the turkeys were at peak numbers it was not long after a recent Distemper outbreak in the area, you could not even find a coon track for several years!

Now years later the coons rebounded, skunks and bob cats are way up, Coyotes are always there, but Coyotes were there during the peak!

Also there are now some invasive habitat issues in the area, bush honeysuckle has gotten out of control in many areas, those properties have nothing in the woods besides it and mature trees, at turkey level there is nothing, little food and no nesting cover, I would love to hear a biologists opinion on that plant!  But I know of several properties that were once loaded with birds, now honeysuckle is prominent and birds are scarce.

Add to that some poor years for hatching and it is too much for them to over come.

I am no biologist but I have guided and managed properties in that area for 15-20 years and all the quality turkey properties I have been on in recent years have minimal honeysuckle! 

I can not see how trapping wouldn't help, season is usually late winter, so removing those nest robbers prior to the birds breeding sounds like a win!

This is a really good example of multifactored changes in the ecosystem (is there another word that describes it all?).  Maybe it happened like this:
Distemper outbreak-turkey nesting success skyrockets-skunks and bobcats now have easy available food source with less competition so they increase in numbers-as there are more turkeys in the woods, more nesting occurs-raccoons make a comeback (as they breed back) and now there is more turkey nests for their comeback - then we have the population crash of turkey due to excess of two new targeting predators and one that has returned.  The whole system was thrown out of balance by the distemper.  Maybe it will right itself if left alone (not enough food, predators move away or see lower breeding success themselves leading to increase in the turkey numbers again).  This is another way to explain what happened (and may in fact not even be correct). Add in the invasive plant species and that was a recipe for a crash.  And had nothing to do with the distemper.  Maybe better habitat would have lessened the crash. 

btomlin, I do believe that in the area you are trapping you are providing relief for nesting success in the short term for sure.  The smaller the area, the longer term that relief will be (I think). 

Many years back there was an un-named island that was over run with raccoons.  The coon-human interactions were crazy - a state park and way too many folks only thought of raccoons from what they had seen on Disney and other silly shows.  I watched a family of Dutch letting their kids feed them by hand (wild coons!  in Florida where rabies is endemic).  In a non-publicized and very hush hush program, the raccoons were removed (relocation of rabies vectors is not legal).  Island too small to have any turkey, but you are hard pressed to see a coon there now some 25 years later. I'll bet shore bird nesting success has increased!  there is no doubt it works, but being able to do it at that level requires unique circumstances and like GobNut said, the general public would lose their mind here in Florida.  they voted for a flipping pig crate amendment.