What are you guys opinions on using a fan in aide in killing a bird? I by no way mean reaping, I just mean like flashing one up on a field edge to try to get the attention of a hung up or hemmed up gobbler?
Where I hunt it's a no way, no how I would even think of it. But I hunt public land and open access private land. Seems like a great way to get shot. But if you are on very limited access private land and you want to then I say go for it. As long as it's not a safety hazard and it's legal then have at it. I sure ain't gonna judge!
Personally it violates my rules of fair chase. This is just my reasoning but I think that there are certain things that trigger a bird to respond a very high percentage of the time and makes it easier to kill them. Calling doesn't have as high of a success rate as compared to fanning. By my logic I have a call, a shotgun and a hen decoy occasionally. If that isn't enough to kill him then maybe some self improvement on my end is necessary. Some true old school guys won't use any decoy ever and my hat is off to them. This is just my personal viewpoint and if it's legal and you want to do it then that's your decision. I would suggest extreme caution though. Some people will shoot at just about anything.
Quote from: Happy on April 13, 2016, 08:52:22 PM
Personally it violates my rules of fair chase. This is just my reasoning but I think that there are certain things that trigger a bird to respond a very high percentage of the time and makes it easier to kill them. Calling doesn't have as high of a success rate as compared to fanning. By my logic I have a call, a shotgun and a hen decoy occasionally. If that isn't enough to kill him then maybe some self improvement on my end is necessary. Some true old school guys won't use any decoy ever and my hat is off to them. This is just my personal viewpoint and if it's legal and you want to do it then that's your decision. I would suggest extreme caution though. Some people will shoot at just about anything.
Since you stated you sometimes use a decoy, I don't see how a fan can violate your rules of fair chase. A fan is nothing more than a decoy. Kinda like saying "I don't approve of mouth calls but box calls are ok". I also think that aggressive cutts will get a response much better than soft clucks later in the day, still fair chase to me! Like I said, if it's legal and doesn't cause a dangerous situation, then who are we to judge?
I think using a fan is up to the person who ask the question. Again it's not for us to judge .. for safety reasons I don't think it's something I would do...
may get bashed for it, but that is not turkey hunting, if you have to use a fan to so called hunt, you need to fine another sport
You won't be bashed by me! Just something I've wondered about and wanted some other opinions. Had a gobbler this morning make me think about it. Henned up in a field with 4 hens and wanted nothing to do with my avian x jake n hen. Couldn't get the hens riled up and couldn't seem to coax him into a fight.... He looked awesome in that early morning sunshine though!
People have no problem knocking a guy for using a fan yet they want to have a pattern of 300+ at 40 yards then say they like them close. You will also have those that knock it sitting in a blind with a flock of dsds surrounding them.
I have never fanned. I have considered doing it to see what all the fuss was but never actually have.
If we would worry about how we hunt and not so much the guy next to us then you will get to experience real turkey hunting!
Sent from the Strut Zone
Quote from: Happy on April 13, 2016, 08:52:22 PM
Personally it violates my rules of fair chase. This is just my reasoning but I think that there are certain things that trigger a bird to respond a very high percentage of the time and makes it easier to kill them. Calling doesn't have as high of a success rate as compared to fanning. By my logic I have a call, a shotgun and a hen decoy occasionally. If that isn't enough to kill him then maybe some self improvement on my end is necessary. Some true old school guys won't use any decoy ever and my hat is off to them. This is just my personal viewpoint and if it's legal and you want to do it then that's your decision. I would suggest extreme caution though. Some people will shoot at just about anything.
Not gonna go back and forth and down nobody for the way they hunt but I agree with you happy. I hunt this way with the exception of decoys. I just don't like the Hassel of toting them around. I hunt woods 99 percent of the time and have adjusted to setting up for when the bird is in sight he is in range. I admit that I have close calls and do not see the bird alot of the time but my success ratio actually went up. I have used decoys several years ago , but the last 7 or 8 years I have not. I choose to hunt this way because I enjoy the challenge. It's me ,my calls , my gun and the bird one on one. If I don't kill him I'm not upset. When I lose I go home and I'm over it ready for the next hunt. However when he loses , it's higher stakes. Again hunt the way you want as long as it's legal. I don't agree with alot of the fanning and reaping that goes on but in the end if you do it and you are happy , that's your business. You hunt your way and I will hunt mine.
Quote from: Farmboy27 on April 13, 2016, 09:02:45 PM
Quote from: Happy on April 13, 2016, 08:52:22 PM
Personally it violates my rules of fair chase. This is just my reasoning but I think that there are certain things that trigger a bird to respond a very high percentage of the time and makes it easier to kill them. Calling doesn't have as high of a success rate as compared to fanning. By my logic I have a call, a shotgun and a hen decoy occasionally. If that isn't enough to kill him then maybe some self improvement on my end is necessary. Some true old school guys won't use any decoy ever and my hat is off to them. This is just my personal viewpoint and if it's legal and you want to do it then that's your decision. I would suggest extreme caution though. Some people will shoot at just about anything.
Since you stated you sometimes use a decoy, I don't see how a fan can violate your rules of fair chase. A fan is nothing more than a decoy. Kinda like saying "I don't approve of mouth calls but box calls are ok". I also think that aggressive cutts will get a response much better than soft clucks later in the day, still fair chase to me! Like I said, if it's legal and doesn't cause a dangerous situation, then who are we to judge?
Exactly what I was thinking!!! :icon_thumright: :icon_thumright: :icon_thumright:
Fan, strutting deke, jake deke, hen deke, what's the difference? They are all visual aids to help the hunt.
Those who have been here long enough know my opinion. If it's legal, and it makes you happy, go for it!! People have way too many opinions on what is ethical to factor in ethics. If you don't care to do it, don't do it!! But don't criticize other hunters for employing a legal method for harvesting. Kumbaya!!! ;) ;D
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v476/RutnNStrutn/Avatars%20Banners/fred_zpsldupflxi.jpg) (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/RutnNStrutn/media/Avatars%20Banners/fred_zpsldupflxi.jpg.html)
I guess I will explain myself a little further here since farmboy made a legitimate point. I believe that there are certain things that trigger a reaction more than others. A Tom is a very territorial bird in the breeding season and many toms can't help but come and let the intruder know who is boss. A hen decoy does not trigger that strong of a reaction. As a matter of fact I have had as many negative reactions as positive. I now typically only use them if i am caught in a position where the bird can see a long ways through the woods and I can't move to put the terrain to my favor. Or if I have a child with me and I want to have something out there to give them a point to train the gun on without to much movement and to hold the bird still for a few minutes.
Quote from: Happy on April 13, 2016, 09:33:04 PMI believe that there are certain things that trigger a reaction more than others. A Tom is a very territorial bird in the breeding season and many toms can't help but come and let the intruder know who is boss. A hen decoy does not trigger that strong of a reaction.
I routinely use strutting dekes in the early season. I put them away come mid season. I've had great success with using the legal technique of strutting deke use.
BUT, I've also had gobblers shy away from strutting dekes, and even jake dekes for that matter. It's not a magic bullet, and you risk blowing your hunt by using them.
My opinion is that everyone does not have the same opportunities when it comes to time, money, and access to land. I fault no one for employing
legal techniques.
Quote from: gobblegobblegobble on April 13, 2016, 09:36:04 PM
This is hard to follow.
Fan in your hand, holding it... unfair, unethical, too easy.
Fan on a stick 10 yards in front of you... fair chase, considered a decoy, no problem.
I'm in PA, so I can't fan here anyways. Just not following the logic.
:icon_thumright: :icon_thumright: :icon_thumright:
I only use a hen decoy. Have never used a strutter a or fan. It's where my personal line is and it may not be everyone's elses. That's fine also. Not judging anyone just expressing my personal viewpoint.
I totally respect that "personal line". That's how it should be. Methods beyond your personal line may be legal, but they ain't your style. More power to you!! Best of luck this spring!! :icon_thumright:
Best of luck to you also.
Quote from: RutnNStrutn on April 13, 2016, 09:45:02 PM
I totally respect that "personal line". That's how it should be. Methods beyond your personal line may be legal, but they ain't your style. More power to you!! Best of luck this spring!! :icon_thumright:
To some degree yes, but to some degree, we as a turkey hunting community need to be stewards of the sport.
I for one would like to see electronics (calls and decoys) banned from all bird hunting period. I would hate to see the day that electronic duck or turkey calls were allowed, and I am not a fan of electronic duck or turkey decoys. When the decision for electronic spinning wing decoys was being made in my state, I wrote, called, and emailed my point of view. Apparently I was in the minority though.
For many of us, the population and terrain we hunt dictates the ethics we feel are appropriate. Hunting a small population of birds in a large area, I am more likely to utilize means necessary to take a bird. Hunting a large population of birds, I would probably want to make things more challenging.
I grew up duck hunting and decoying ducks, so sticking out a turkey decoy seemed/seems pretty natural to me. But I have probably had them work against me more than I have had them work in my favor. If I think they would be a benefit, I will put out a pair though.
But I understand what
Happy is saying. If we found that magic decoy or call that worked vastly superior to other methods (currently in use), I for one would not like to see it allowed. If fanning creates that much of a reaction, it probably does not belong in fair-chase turkey hunting.... I have never seen it work or not, so I really have no opinion, but I will admit to wanting to try it once or twice just to see. Honestly for me, it probably will not do a whole lot of good, cause so often if I can see the bird, I can shoot him.
And from everything I have seen or heard about reaping, I remain uncertain as to whether or not that is really fair-chase... I won't cry if they make it illegal in my state.
Who cares what we think. If it's legal and you want to do it,then do it.
Great debate with endless shades of gray.
I probably wouldn't do it because I hunt on semi public and public land where it would not be that safe. You could make an argument that knowing how and when to use a fan could be an art similar to calling or using a wing. I could see a scenario where I might try it, if it was safe say on a large tract of private land in an open area and I had been hunting a monster for a while with out success....who knows. It would certainly not be my first option.
As stewards of the sport we should have these discussions and this forum seems to do it well.
Where these things go :TrainWreck1: in forums is when people start in with personal attacks or blanket statements about their personal way being the right way and any other opinion is dead wrong and people are lesser of a person for even thinking it. It is nice to see very little of that here.
Really enjoyed Marc's last post. Let's put aside the ethics and safety argument for a moment. Let's simply discuss conservation. The majority of hunting regulations were originally put in place to keep harvest from rising above sustainable levels. Bait, live decoys and plug restrictions were among these, and it had absolutely NOTHING to do with ethics. They were accepted and normal techniques prior to being outlawed. Obviously seasons and limits are the same.
Once those specific things were identified and outlawed and seasons were set, hunting moved forward with the idea of hunters take being compensatory rather than additive. There are cases such as snow geese and occasionally whitetails in specific areas when additive mortality is desired, but these are the exception.
Now, if a hunting technique comes along which tilts the scales to additive, what should happen? A change will be required. It could be lower limits and/or shorter seasons, or it could be outlawing that technique such as was done with bait, plugs and live decoys. Many don't realize it yet, but we're close to that point where I live. I realize it's different elsewhere, and this isn't an issue for you. For me, I'd rather see officials start with curtailing certain techniques before cutting the season and limits. See if that accomplishes the objective and move forward accordingly.
Not at all an ethical argument. Simply conservation 101 and currently an issue where I hunt.
It all boils down to if your state allows it and its a legal tactic, i don't know of any that ban it. Kinda hard to argue ethics if it's a legal means of helping in the killing of a turkey. Most of these discussions are really about what our own values are when it comes to hunting, I can't say I would do it but I'm not going to belittle someone who does, again if your state says it's legal then no one really has any reason to fuss about how you hunt. In VA we allow rifles to be used, I don't agree with it but it's legal so who am I to judge, if I encounter someone hunting turkeys with one I kindly change locations and look out for my own safety. I don't have time to rake someone over the coals for doing something I wouldn't do. It's in our nature to do whatever it takes to succeed at something and if flashing a real turkey fan to a gobbler who will not commit is what you need to do then good for you, I'll choose to relocate to another set up or let him live to fight another day. My :z-twocents:
This is the fan I use. It helps keep the skeeters away.
(http://i251.photobucket.com/albums/gg299/TrackeySauresRex/image.jpg1_zpsegtbmswm.jpg) (http://s251.photobucket.com/user/TrackeySauresRex/media/image.jpg1_zpsegtbmswm.jpg.html)
:goofball:
I personally would not use one where I hunt.
Quote from: trkehunr93 on April 14, 2016, 10:21:37 AM
It all boils down to if your state allows it and its a legal tactic, i don't know of any that ban it. Kinda hard to argue ethics if it's a legal means of helping in the killing of a turkey. Most of these discussions are really about what our own values are when it comes to hunting, I can't say I would do it but I'm not going to belittle someone who does, again if your state says it's legal then no one really has any reason to fuss about how you hunt. In VA we allow rifles to be used, I don't agree with it but it's legal so who am I to judge, if I encounter someone hunting turkeys with one I kindly change locations and look out for my own safety. I don't have time to rake someone over the coals for doing something I wouldn't do. It's in our nature to do whatever it takes to succeed at something and if flashing a real turkey fan to a gobbler who will not commit is what you need to do then good for you, I'll choose to relocate to another set up or let him live to fight another day. My :z-twocents:
Actually, what is legal and what is ethical can be two very different thing. For instance, while duck hunting, shooting a cripple while the boat is under power is generally the ethical thing to do, but it is illegal almost everywhere (legal in some sea duck zones). It's the ethical thing to do because many cripples are lost when they repeatedly dive while a hunter waits for his boat to stop. Now, there's a good reason for the law, but it doesn't change what is proper in regards to ethics. Is it ethical to bait in a state where it is legal? Why? How about shooting a turkey off the roost? It is legal in some states.
Regardless, I agree we shouldn't deride anyone who hunts within the law.
Quote from: RutnNStrutn on April 13, 2016, 09:31:48 PM
Quote from: Farmboy27 on April 13, 2016, 09:02:45 PM
Quote from: Happy on April 13, 2016, 08:52:22 PM
Personally it violates my rules of fair chase. This is just my reasoning but I think that there are certain things that trigger a bird to respond a very high percentage of the time and makes it easier to kill them. Calling doesn't have as high of a success rate as compared to fanning. By my logic I have a call, a shotgun and a hen decoy occasionally. If that isn't enough to kill him then maybe some self improvement on my end is necessary. Some true old school guys won't use any decoy ever and my hat is off to them. This is just my personal viewpoint and if it's legal and you want to do it then that's your decision. I would suggest extreme caution though. Some people will shoot at just about anything.
Since you stated you sometimes use a decoy, I don't see how a fan can violate your rules of fair chase. A fan is nothing more than a decoy. Kinda like saying "I don't approve of mouth calls but box calls are ok". I also think that aggressive cutts will get a response much better than soft clucks later in the day, still fair chase to me! Like I said, if it's legal and doesn't cause a dangerous situation, then who are we to judge?
Exactly what I was thinking!!! :icon_thumright: :icon_thumright: :icon_thumright:
Fan, strutting deke, jake deke, hen deke, what's the difference? They are all visual aids to help the hunt.
Those who have been here long enough know my opinion. If it's legal, and it makes you happy, go for it!! People have way too many opinions on what is ethical to factor in ethics. If you don't care to do it, don't do it!! But don't criticize other hunters for employing a legal method for harvesting. Kumbaya!!! ;) ;D
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v476/RutnNStrutn/Avatars%20Banners/fred_zpsldupflxi.jpg) (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/RutnNStrutn/media/Avatars%20Banners/fred_zpsldupflxi.jpg.html)
perfectly said!
I want to add for all you people who say it is dangerous. You better just stop turkey hunting because just sitting and calling has gotten more people shot than fanning or reaping. So by your views no one should use a call.
Give it time. They've only become somewhat widely practiced very recently. Doing anything which makes you appear more like a turkey enhances the potential of an accident. Hunters have been shot in the hand when they pulled out a red and white pack of cigarettes, and I know of at least two incidents of hunters being shot while using toilet paper (flash of white). I'm not arguing anything based on safety, but it would be foolish to not use caution when you pull out a fan.
Again, my argument is simply based on conservation and it does not apply in all regions. When a population is in decline (as it is in many areas), harvest will eventually be curtailed by regulations. In those instances, I'd rather officials at least consider outlawing a technique vs. cutting seasons and limits.
I understand that a fan can invoke a gobbler's response, but as others have said, so do calls. Personally, I have had decoys ruin more hunts than be an advantage. I still use them when the situation is appropriate, and I will not rule out using a fan on private property. It's interesting that this is gaining so much attention. I first saw someone doing this 20+ years ago. The gentleman I'm speaking of used it to close the distance between him and a gobbler with hens in the middle of a field.
Legal does not automatically equate with fair chase. When I find that I require anything other than a caller to entice a gobbler to my position, I shall quit.
Quote from: 870FaceLift on April 14, 2016, 11:57:32 AM
I understand that a fan can invoke a gobbler's response, but as others have said, so do calls. Personally, I have had decoys ruin more hunts than be an advantage. I still use them when the situation is appropriate, and I will not rule out using a fan on private property. It's interesting that this is gaining so much attention. I first saw someone doing this 20+ years ago. The gentleman I'm speaking of used it to close the distance between him and a gobbler with hens in the middle of a field.
Correct; it is far from new, but it has caught on in very recent years just as have decoys with full fans attached.
I still dont understand how a fan is any different than using a decoy .
The reaction and rate of success is different. That applies to both fans and gobbler decoys with fans. In thirty years of turkey hunting I've never seen anything which would routinely cause the type of reaction gobblers have to fans and strutters. It's certainly not 100%, but it's the closest legal means I've seen to it. Hen decoys are far from that.
Understand, I'm not saying folks who choose to use them are bad people or doing anything wrong. Just saying they are indeed different when compared to "traditional" means. If they weren't so very effective, why would anyone lug a big strutter around? Even a fan is a bit of a pain to carry. People carry put up with the inconvenience because they're generally more effective than any call in their vest.
I've used a strutter 2 times so far. Both times, it's shut down the bird I was working. Might have been the bird, might've been me. Either way, it didn't instill confidence in the use of the decoy again. Been thinking about just selling him and going a different route all together.
What the person has to ask himself in using a fan is this worthy of fair chase of these turkeys . Let's not forget we all have opinions on what's right or wrong again i feel that's up to that person to make that decision. What we have to do as hunters is watch our behavior that affects public opinions of us as hunters, with issues of what's fair and what's irresponsible behavior in using fans. We need to respect and show fairness in our opinions on what ways we feel that are effective in getting a reaction for gobblers. These ways of hunting are just between himself and what he feel is a traditional way of taking a gobbler.
Fair chase is using calls and woodsmanship to hunt and kill turkeys. Using any type of visual aid gives the hunter an unfair advantage. Not fair to the turkey, disrespectful to the turkey and cheating as far I am concerned. Legal and ethical are 2 totally different things.
Everyone can hunt how they choose to within the law; fair chase is not a big priority for the state game departments, selling licenses and tags is.
Quote from: wvmntnhick on April 14, 2016, 01:25:30 PM
I've used a strutter 2 times so far. Both times, it's shut down the bird I was working. Might have been the bird, might've been me. Either way, it didn't instill confidence in the use of the decoy again. Been thinking about just selling him and going a different route all together.
Probably the specific bird. I guess the best thing about anything mimicking a strutter is you know really quick if it's going to work. They either run in like their life depended on it or they vacate the premises.
Quote from: Marc on April 13, 2016, 10:10:57 PM
Quote from: RutnNStrutn on April 13, 2016, 09:45:02 PM
I totally respect that "personal line". That's how it should be. Methods beyond your personal line may be legal, but they ain't your style. More power to you!! Best of luck this spring!! :icon_thumright:
I for one would like to see electronics (calls and decoys) banned from all bird hunting period.
For many of us, the population and terrain we hunt dictates the ethics we feel are appropriate. Hunting a small population of birds in a large area, I am more likely to utilize means necessary to take a bird. Hunting a large population of birds, I would probably want to make things more challenging.
But I understand what Happy is saying. If we found that magic decoy or call that worked vastly superior to other methods (currently in use), I for one would not like to see it allowed.
I can definitely agree with all of that. :icon_thumright:
Quote from: nosaj on April 14, 2016, 08:01:13 AM
Where these things go :TrainWreck1: in forums is when people start in with personal attacks or blanket statements about their personal way being the right way and any other opinion is dead wrong and people are lesser of a person for even thinking it. It is nice to see very little of that here.
Totally agree!! :icon_thumright: I cannot stand it when some holier than thou starts ragging on someone for using a legal hunting method that they just happen not to like.
Quote from: trkehunr93 on April 14, 2016, 10:21:37 AM
It all boils down to if your state allows it and its a legal tactic. Most of these discussions are really about what our own values are when it comes to hunting.
:icon_thumright: :thanks:
Quote from: TrackeySauresRex on April 14, 2016, 10:26:08 AM
This is the fan I use. It helps keep the skeeters away.
(http://i251.photobucket.com/albums/gg299/TrackeySauresRex/image.jpg1_zpsegtbmswm.jpg) (http://s251.photobucket.com/user/TrackeySauresRex/media/image.jpg1_zpsegtbmswm.jpg.html)
:goofball:
Trackey, you crack me up bro!!! :TooFunny:
Quote from: Ihuntoldschool on April 14, 2016, 02:15:41 PM
Fair chase is using calls and woodsmanship to hunt and kill turkeys. Using any type of visual aid gives the hunter an unfair advantage. Not fair to the turkey, disrespectful to the turkey and cheating as far I am concerned. Legal and ethical are 2 totally different things.
Everyone can hunt how they choose to within the law; fair chase is not a big priority for the state game departments, selling licenses and tags is.
Waterfowl hunting relies heavily on visual aids. Does that standard also apply there? I don't really have an opinion on "fanning". I'm not going to do it but I have shot birds while using decoys. I don't bait nor hunt over feeders. I do hunt deer over food plots. When we talk about "fair chase", I'm more inclined to say that applies to high fences and paying 10K to kill a 200" buck. My opinion only.
On private land, I hunt naked. On public, I wear a loin cloth. I take nothing to the woods with me. I make a bow and arrow when I arrive in the woods, if materials are available. If not, I use an atlatl that I make myself. I will smear locally occurring mud on my face and chest as camo and bug protection. I use only my mouth as a call. For some odd reason, whenever I hunt an area, Sasquatch sightings rise in the area. Odd coincidence I guess.
Seriously though, good discussion. Especially like that ethics should be more restrictive than law-but shooting a crippled duck while still moving is a great example. Illegal, but ethical.
I had 4 jakes in a field on private land a couple years back. Gobbling and raising a ruckus. I really really had to leave and could only get up to walk out as my back was to another piece of property. I barked at them. Nothing. So I eased out of my ground blind (made of natural vegetation, not a pop up, not that there is anything wrong with that) and crawled out towards them on all fours, thinking it would spook them a little, but not like crazy (I really had to leave, I am skeered of my wife - half the money and all the "you know"). They saw me instantly. 2 of them go in to full strut and start walking toward the dog walking fat guy. They actually got to shooting range until I stood up on my haunches a bit. They walked off, one clucking/putting, but not that "Oh, Shoot, that is the bugger man" alarm. I saw them on the same field 6 days later, acting all tough again. Dumb jakes.
Quote from: renegade19 on April 14, 2016, 04:42:16 PM
Quote from: Ihuntoldschool on April 14, 2016, 02:15:41 PM
Fair chase is using calls and woodsmanship to hunt and kill turkeys. Using any type of visual aid gives the hunter an unfair advantage. Not fair to the turkey, disrespectful to the turkey and cheating as far I am concerned. Legal and ethical are 2 totally different things.
Everyone can hunt how they choose to within the law; fair chase is not a big priority for the state game departments, selling licenses and tags is.
Waterfowl hunting relies heavily on visual aids. Does that standard also apply there? I don't really have an opinion on "fanning". I'm not going to do it but I have shot birds while using decoys. I don't bait nor hunt over feeders. I do hunt deer over food plots. When we talk about "fair chase", I'm more inclined to say that applies to high fences and paying 10K to kill a 200" buck. My opinion only.
:icon_thumright:
Ihuntoldschool is one of the holier than thous I am talking about. Don't want to use anything but calls and your version of woodsmanship? More power to ya!! But don't rag on other people for not choosing to hunt how you hunt, and don't condemn what the state has deemed legal.
My problem with holier than thou types is they never consider the other guy they are condemning. Some guys have plenty of money, plenty of private land that's loaded with turkeys, and plenty of time to go hunting. Then there are guys that work 6 days a week, and go hunting on their only day off on crowded public land for pressured birds. I say give those guys every
legal opportunity they wish to use.
Personally, I'm in between those two types of guys. I'm a fire dep't Lieutenant :firefighter:, so I'm not rich, but I make enough to afford a private lease out of state. Here in Florida, I'm forced to hunt public land because I cannot afford private. Most of the time I hunt with decoys, but I've also killed plenty of birds without decoys.
I support any hunter that employs any legal method to harvest a gobbler.
Quote from: g8rvet on April 14, 2016, 04:56:32 PM
For some odd reason, whenever I hunt an area, Sasquatch sightings rise in the area. Odd coincidence I guess.
:TooFunny: :TooFunny: :TooFunny:
I don't buy the conservation argument that they may be to effective. Sure the seasons and bag limits were written long before fanning became popular. They were also long before turkey specific shotguns, chokes, and shells even existed. With the right combo of choke and shells, many of today's guns are capable of nearly twice the range of the guns commonly used 30 years ago. Should after market chokes and htl shells be outlawed? Is it ethical to use a gun capable of killing a bird at 60 yards when the hard part is often getting him to come the last 30 yards? How about modern camo and blinds. Hunting is constantly evolving sport. If you don't believe me than just compare the camo you wear now to what you wore 20 years ago. The tried and true methods work but someone will always try to find more effective ways. Some succede and some fail but if they would outlaw every "new" method or means of turkey hunting then we would all be out there in our work clothes with no vest, an old call, the same gun we hunt squirrels with.
Quote from: RutnNStrutn on April 13, 2016, 09:45:02 PM
I totally respect that "personal line". That's how it should be. Methods beyond your personal line may be legal, but they ain't your style. More power to you!! Best of luck this spring!! :icon_thumright:
Amen brother!
Been out 7 days now. My gunners put down a big gobbler right off the roost 5 of those 7 days. Sometimes a hen or two only, sometimes hen and jake, most times hens and strutter. Most of the birds were in range before they even saw the dekes. I also had 3 birds in range spook off the jake/gobbler dekes with no shot provided. I also let my guys try "reaping" several field birds. Every one of them spooked and ran off.
Strutters are no magic bullet. I think all 5 of these birds would be dead with no strutter and no dekes at all. Trying to reap has only prevented us from killing those birds. Still, I was "reaping" way before any of this crap became "public knowledge" and it works well on the right birds. Then again, simulating three birds flying down with a wing and only making one cluck brought a bird right to us. That wing ain't magic either though.
And Bill Cooksey, just curious where you are that the bird population is doing so bad? Our population has made a real comeback the last few years after some good hatches. I don't know why the game department for your state would think cutting a season length, or cutting a hunting method, from a season that only targets adult males after they've bred would have any appreciable effect on bird populations. Taking away fall hunting and hen mortality is about the only thing that would bring the population up. Saving one gobbler from reaping only increases the population by one. Not really an effective management plan on a statewide basis, since even if all the gobblers were shot one year it would still be small potatoes for the population. Recruitment is everything with bird management.
Quote from: Ihuntoldschool on April 14, 2016, 02:15:41 PM
Fair chase is using calls and woodsmanship to hunt and kill turkeys. Using any type of visual aid gives the hunter an unfair advantage. Not fair to the turkey, disrespectful to the turkey and cheating as far I am concerned. Legal and ethical are 2 totally different things.
Everyone can hunt how they choose to within the law; fair chase is not a big priority for the state game departments, selling licenses and tags is.
Disrespectful to the turkey?!?! Lol! I would think that the turkey would find getting his head filled with shot would probably be much more disrespectful. If you truly don't want to disrespect a gobbler then call him in, apologize for deceiving him, tell him to have a nice day, and let him go about his business.
I'm going out to Nebraska 2 weeks from today for a 3 day hunt.
I have 3 tags, so does my partner.
I'm going to do what I have to do to fill my tags. All of it will be legal.
Gonna start in the AM with a hen and jake deke and use available cover for a hide, or set up a double bull if the weather is poor. I set my dekes at 7 yards. It's John Elway's number and we live in Colorado, so it's a natural. Plus if they lock up at 30 yards from the deke it's still a good shot.
After the first hour we will run and gun.
If we see a bird that is in the middle of a huge field and calling isn't doing it, we will probably break out a fan and give it a try.
Gotta keep moving so we have a bit of time to get over to Lake Mac - the walleye fishing is on and cracking right now at the dam.
My intention is to have fun and work some turks.
My wife thinks using calls is unfair. She thinks it is like my buddies calling me up and inviting me to one of those bars where half-nekkid girls dance around on stages with poles to 'Pour Some Sugar On Me' and then having someone shoot me in the melon when I get to the front door.
Question for the holier than thou folks: It's about a 4 hour drive to where we are going. Is it ok to drive out there or do I need to go 'old school' and take the prairie schooner? If we have to take the covered wagon to be legit, how do you recommend we hook up the Sirius Radio so we can listen to The Highway on the way out?
Hope everyone has a great season. Remember, don't take yourself too seriously - no one else does.
I'll do it as long as it's not on public land. It's another tool in the tool chest. I don't think you have to bowhunting with a longbow and cedar arrows nor fish with a bamboo flyrod. I'm not an elitest, I'm a turkey hunter who is going to use every legal thing I can to get my birds. Now I had rather call them but some birdes for what ever reason won't so then I'll pull out all the stops.
Quote from: spaightlabs on April 14, 2016, 05:39:50 PM
I'm going out to Nebraska 2 weeks from today for a 3 day hunt.
I have 3 tags, so does my partner.
I'm going to do what I have to do to fill my tags. All of it will be legal.
Gonna start in the AM with a hen and jake deke and use available cover for a hide, or set up a double bull if the weather is poor. I set my dekes at 7 yards. It's John Elway's number and we live in Colorado, so it's a natural. Plus if they lock up at 30 yards from the deke it's still a good shot.
After the first hour we will run and gun.
If we see a bird that is in the middle of a huge field and calling isn't doing it, we will probably break out a fan and give it a try.
Gotta keep moving so we have a bit of time to get over to Lake Mac - the walleye fishing is on and cracking right now at the dam.
My intention is to have fun and work some turks.
My wife thinks using calls is unfair. She thinks it is like my buddies calling me up and inviting me to one of those bars where half-nekkid girls dance around on stages with poles to 'Pour Some Sugar On Me' and then having someone shoot me in the melon when I get to the front door.
Question for the holier than thou folks: It's about a 4 hour drive to where we are going. Is it ok to drive out there or do I need to go 'old school' and take the prairie schooner? If we have to take the covered wagon to be legit, how do you recommend we hook up the Sirius Radio so we can listen to The Highway on the way out?
Hope everyone has a great season. Remember, don't take yourself too seriously - no one else does.
Spaight,
Here's an insider tip. If you're using only a fan, turn the back toward the turkey. It seems to help if they don't expect to see the head. Good luck on your trip.
Thanks Bill!
I've used the old fan in times of need before. ;D
Going up with the winning team's guide from your World Goose Hunting Championship to hunt with another buddy who was also our guide on the 2nd place team. Good old days.
Personally I wouldn't use a fan since I think they're suckers for it for the most part. That said, I have used a wing to generate a little interest. I flash the wing along with calling. It does help a little...
Like others have said, a tail is a visual, like a decoy...I know it doesn't make sense from a purely logical perspective but it seems somehow unfair to use one to me...
I guess everybody uses what he thinks is fair/ethical...It's a personal judgement as long as it's legal...For me, no fan...
EDIT: (Original comment saved for another thread)
Back to OP question: I don't see much difference between that and decoys... BUT, personally, my "line" is drawn with movement with decoys, be it motor, string, or hand. Can't really explain why I think that way, I just do.
How did fanning get deemed so successful that it is "disrespectful" to the sport and unethical? Most of those who oppose the method are adamant about never having used it and never will, so where are their statistics coming from? YouTube? Sure if you google it most every video you find is going to show a successful fanning attempt, because who wants to post a video of themselves crawling out into the field and a bird running away? If you've never tried it how can you conclude that it works over 90% of the time? By that logic anyone that watches a TV show could easily conclude that the sport itself is disrespectful to the bird, because all they have to do is pile 3 or 4 guys behind a tree with a couple cameras, make a few calls, watch the bird charge in, then shoot it in the head. They have 3 or 4 of those scenarios to display on every weekly show, so turkey hunting must be like shooting fish in a barrel...
I've not tried it, but I did witness it to an extent once. I met a buddy at lunch one day, and he was telling me that they tried to crawl behind a deke on two gobblers and got busted at 60 yards. I didn't really believe him, because I wasn't familiar with the technique and figured it was another one of his tall tales. We hunted together that afternoon, and late in a very unsuccessful day I challenged him to sneak on a couple hens we saw to call his bluff. Well he did, and he actually got into range (obviously didn't shoot due to legality), so that proved to me that it can work. However, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the vast majority of hunters couldn't have cowered behind that deke and duck-walked 200 yards like he did. I know you won't see me doing it! That in itself is far more challenging than sitting on a cushion up against a tree. Furthermore his success rate that day was 0% on gobblers and 50% on turkeys in general. I know several hunters that boast a success rate well above 50% with "old school" tactics, so how is fanning so unfair? (Not a good sample size I know, just further proving my point of relying on hasty generalizations and logical fallacies as "proof".) Not to mention had he killed a bird on that stalk it would have been after walking 3-5 miles on 3 farms over several hours, then executing a physically challenging stalk. Sounds like taking candy from a baby....
I usually pass over these hot topics, but lately there have been several new guys asking innocent questions looking for advice, only to be condemned an unethical, non-steward of the turkey hunting world. It's crazy. There's nothing out there that's going to work 100% of the time. I guess you guys believe in the banjo minnow, too. You'd probably also label my Pawpaw an unethical fisherman because he used worms and "minners" to bring home a mess of fish. The antis and activists love to see division within the hunting world. It just gives them a stronger foothold to further their agenda. Calling legal hunters unethical and disrespectful fuels the same fire that calling a semi-automatic rifle an "assault rifle" does.
My hope is that we can all enjoy this awesome privilege that God has blessed us with. We don't have to agree on what methods we choose to use, but we also don't need to shed negative light on legal hunting methods and give the activists ammunition against us. Hold onto your opinions, that is your right, just choose how you express them carefully. Turkey season is upon us across most of the country right now, I wish you all the best of luck.
Quote from: g8rvet on April 14, 2016, 04:56:32 PM
Seriously though, good discussion. Especially like that ethics should be more restrictive than law-but shooting a crippled duck while still moving is a great example. Illegal, but ethical.
I was making the point that law and ethics don't always equate. Something can be legal yet unethical, at least from one's personal viewpoint. I believe anyone reading this thread can think of examples. The reverse of that is also true. Regardless, ethics are a personal thing, and I'm in no position to judge others who hunt in a legal manner. I've killed birds using a fan, so I certainly can't claim some moral superiority. The fact that I felt I'd done something wrong after the second bird I killed via the method points to it probably being the wrong choice for ME; others could feel differently, and I'm fine with that.
Quote from: Blackduck on April 14, 2016, 05:16:25 PM
And Bill Cooksey, just curious where you are that the bird population is doing so bad? Our population has made a real comeback the last few years after some good hatches. I don't know why the game department for your state would think cutting a season length, or cutting a hunting method, from a season that only targets adult males after they've bred would have any appreciable effect on bird populations. Taking away fall hunting and hen mortality is about the only thing that would bring the population up. Saving one gobbler from reaping only increases the population by one. Not really an effective management plan on a statewide basis, since even if all the gobblers were shot one year it would still be small potatoes for the population. Recruitment is everything with bird management.
I'm in West Tennessee, and let me begin by saying I generally agree with much of what you said. That's why I emphasize the caveat "region." Because of topography, we are very much in a boom/bust hatch region, but that's not as true of Middle and East TN. Their population is far more stable. That said, most of the states bordering me have also experienced a decline over the last several years. Obviously much of that has to do with nest success, but unlike the several decades of turkey population growth, the boom years today don't demonstrate a sustainable recovery.
The nature of my region dictates turkey season could see birds at every stage of breeding on the opener (from still in winter flocks to a hen on a nest), so the majority have not completed the cycle before we are hunting them. It was this way when the population was growing, and it's remained this way during the decline. Now, I'm not claiming our flocks have been decimated, but there's a decline. There is talk among wildlife professionals that the kill will have to be curtailed in the near future if the trend doesn't change. Hunting pressure has increased, and they are of the opinion too many birds are being taken to achieve their goals.
There are several ways to decrease pressure, but most impact your opportunity to hunt. I'd simply prefer to keep opportunity (days) while stopping a very effective technique which has only recently widely caught on; then we can see if it has a positive effect before going the route of our neighbor to the west. Next in my desired actions would be a reduction in the limit in this part of the state, but that's for another thread. I'd simply rather see small incremental measures while the flock is in a position to post a strong rebound in hopes of preventing more drastic measures down the road.
Quote from: Bill Cooksey on April 15, 2016, 09:34:35 AM
Quote from: g8rvet on April 14, 2016, 04:56:32 PM
Seriously though, good discussion. Especially like that ethics should be more restrictive than law-but shooting a crippled duck while still moving is a great example. Illegal, but ethical.
I was making the point that law and ethics don't always equate. Something can be legal yet unethical, at least from one's personal viewpoint. I believe anyone reading this thread can think of examples. The reverse of that is also true. Regardless, ethics are a personal thing, and I'm in no position to judge others who hunt in a legal manner. I've killed birds using a fan, so I certainly can't claim some moral superiority. The fact that I felt I'd done something wrong after the second bird I killed via the method points to it probably being the wrong choice for ME; others could feel differently, and I'm fine with that.
Did you feel it was wrong because it wasn't as challenging or was that it just didn't feel like you were Turkey hunting in the traditional sense? I am not judging just curious?
Quote from: Farmboy27 on April 14, 2016, 05:07:06 PM
I don't buy the conservation argument that they may be to effective. Sure the seasons and bag limits were written long before fanning became popular. They were also long before turkey specific shotguns, chokes, and shells even existed. With the right combo of choke and shells, many of today's guns are capable of nearly twice the range of the guns commonly used 30 years ago. Should after market chokes and htl shells be outlawed? Is it ethical to use a gun capable of killing a bird at 60 yards when the hard part is often getting him to come the last 30 yards? How about modern camo and blinds. Hunting is constantly evolving sport. If you don't believe me than just compare the camo you wear now to what you wore 20 years ago. The tried and true methods work but someone will always try to find more effective ways. Some succede and some fail but if they would outlaw every "new" method or means of turkey hunting then we would all be out there in our work clothes with no vest, an old call, the same gun we hunt squirrels with.
As one who has been after them for thirty years, 60 yard guns and loads were available then, and there were "turkey specific" guns and loads. Heck, Hevi shot has been around for almost twenty years, and lead is still deadly. Camo is certainly no more effective now than twenty, or even thirty, years ago. Bottomland came out in '86 and is still as good as anything we have, and Treebark was out before that, and I could have killed every bird I've ever shot while wearing WWII camo.
I do think it is incumbent upon hunters (we advocated for the laws to begin with) to evaluate new methods and consider when they might tip the scales to "additive mortality." I believe that is happening where I hunt, but I'm certain it's not in issue in most regions. That said, if a sportsman believes he's witnessing additive mortality, the right thing to do is talk about it, at a minimum.
Where I am, our bag limit was increased at virtually the same time gobbler decoys and fanning began to catch on. Personally, I think it was a perfect storm in this area. Regardless, there's not a "do nothing" option when declining populations are involved.
Nothing to do with ethics. If your population is stable or growing, keep riding that horse as long as possible.
Quote from: renegade19 on April 14, 2016, 04:42:16 PM
Quote from: Ihuntoldschool on April 14, 2016, 02:15:41 PM
Fair chase is using calls and woodsmanship to hunt and kill turkeys. Using any type of visual aid gives the hunter an unfair advantage. Not fair to the turkey, disrespectful to the turkey and cheating as far I am concerned. Legal and ethical are 2 totally different things.
Everyone can hunt how they choose to within the law; fair chase is not a big priority for the state game departments, selling licenses and tags is.
Waterfowl hunting relies heavily on visual aids. Does that standard also apply there? I don't really have an opinion on "fanning". I'm not going to do it but I have shot birds while using decoys. I don't bait nor hunt over feeders. I do hunt deer over food plots. When we talk about "fair chase", I'm more inclined to say that applies to high fences and paying 10K to kill a 200" buck. My opinion only.
That was my definition of fair chase, too. I would have a problem with fanning if someone used that method to kill a 1.75'' spurred smoke phase gobbler in a pen. Then again, the fanning wouldn't be my issue with that situation.
Quote from: Mabren2 on April 15, 2016, 08:16:15 AM
How did fanning get deemed so successful that it is "disrespectful" to the sport and unethical? Most of those who oppose the method are adamant about never having used it and never will, so where are their statistics coming from? YouTube? Sure if you google it most every video you find is going to show a successful fanning attempt, because who wants to post a video of themselves crawling out into the field and a bird running away? If you've never tried it how can you conclude that it works over 90% of the time? By that logic anyone that watches a TV show could easily conclude that the sport itself is disrespectful to the bird, because all they have to do is pile 3 or 4 guys behind a tree with a couple cameras, make a few calls, watch the bird charge in, then shoot it in the head. They have 3 or 4 of those scenarios to display on every weekly show, so turkey hunting must be like shooting fish in a barrel...
I've not tried it, but I did witness it to an extent once. I met a buddy at lunch one day, and he was telling me that they tried to crawl behind a deke on two gobblers and got busted at 60 yards. I didn't really believe him, because I wasn't familiar with the technique and figured it was another one of his tall tales. We hunted together that afternoon, and late in a very unsuccessful day I challenged him to sneak on a couple hens we saw to call his bluff. Well he did, and he actually got into range (obviously didn't shoot due to legality), so that proved to me that it can work. However, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the vast majority of hunters couldn't have cowered behind that deke and duck-walked 200 yards like he did. I know you won't see me doing it! That in itself is far more challenging than sitting on a cushion up against a tree. Furthermore his success rate that day was 0% on gobblers and 50% on turkeys in general. I know several hunters that boast a success rate well above 50% with "old school" tactics, so how is fanning so unfair? (Not a good sample size I know, just further proving my point of relying on hasty generalizations and logical fallacies as "proof".) Not to mention had he killed a bird on that stalk it would have been after walking 3-5 miles on 3 farms over several hours, then executing a physically challenging stalk. Sounds like taking candy from a baby....
I usually pass over these hot topics, but lately there have been several new guys asking innocent questions looking for advice, only to be condemned an unethical, non-steward of the turkey hunting world. It's crazy. There's nothing out there that's going to work 100% of the time. I guess you guys believe in the banjo minnow, too. You'd probably also label my Pawpaw an unethical fisherman because he used worms and "minners" to bring home a mess of fish. The antis and activists love to see division within the hunting world. It just gives them a stronger foothold to further their agenda. Calling legal hunters unethical and disrespectful fuels the same fire that calling a semi-automatic rifle an "assault rifle" does.
My hope is that we can all enjoy this awesome privilege that God has blessed us with. We don't have to agree on what methods we choose to use, but we also don't need to shed negative light on legal hunting methods and give the activists ammunition against us. Hold onto your opinions, that is your right, just choose how you express them carefully. Turkey season is upon us across most of the country right now, I wish you all the best of luck.
100% agree. Sure all the videos are going to show successful hunts. Heck, all turkey hunting videos show mostly successful hunts. Does everyone so against fanning believe that the guys on the calling videos are successful all the time?
Quote from: Bill Cooksey on April 15, 2016, 09:34:35 AM
Quote from: g8rvet on April 14, 2016, 04:56:32 PM
Seriously though, good discussion. Especially like that ethics should be more restrictive than law-but shooting a crippled duck while still moving is a great example. Illegal, but ethical.
I was making the point that law and ethics don't always equate. Something can be legal yet unethical, at least from one's personal viewpoint. I believe anyone reading this thread can think of examples. The reverse of that is also true. Regardless, ethics are a personal thing, and I'm in no position to judge others who hunt in a legal manner. I've killed birds using a fan, so I certainly can't claim some moral superiority. The fact that I felt I'd done something wrong after the second bird I killed via the method points to it probably being the wrong choice for ME; others could feel differently, and I'm fine with that.
I understood and was commenting on a perfect example (chasing a cripple) where you discussed doing something illegal, but highly ethical. I have done it many times.
Another great example comes from duck hunting. If you shoot 5 birds (say Ringnecks) and have them in hand. You then shoot your final duck and it falls. You make a concerted, immediate and vigorous attempt to find the bird. If you are unable to find the bird, after meeting those criteria, it is perfectly legal to shoot another bird. You never reduced the bird to possession, but made a definite attempt to do so. In most cases in my life, I count that bird if I know I killed it. That is my ethics. I have gone ahead and shot another bird on occasion. On the flip side, if by some odd stroke I shot another bird and later the first bird popped up dead and I found it, I would carry it out and face the consequences. Also illegal, but ethical in my opinion.
Another example. Catching Redfish. I have culled one from my livewell (illegal) when I later caught and gut or gill hooked one that I knew was going to die as long as the first was lively and healthy. Illegal? yes Unethical? I don't think so.
Applying the use of a fan is the same thing to me. If it is legal, then it is up to the individual to decide if it is ethical TO THEM. I know what my opinion is on hunting methods and I do not feel that I have some set of moral superiority to all other turkey hunters that my ethics should apply to all others or they are beneath me if they chose a different set of ethics. Let's face it, if meat is the only goal, why not just go buy one at Publix? Would be cheaper and less effort.
I have a friend who's dad hunted them with a rifle on his lease from a box stand. No baiting. Is that unethical? Does it make a difference that he had Parkinson's so bad that he had a hard time walking and needed to steady a rifle on a bench to make a clean shot? Does the turkey give two craps if it dies via rifle or shotgun?
g8rvet,
Great post, and I agree.
All,
I hope I haven't come off as if judging others as that wasn't my intent. My thoughts on fanning, gobbler decoys and the effectiveness of each is based on personal experience. I'm not advocating a nationwide ban, but I've tried to express why I think a regional ban could be a positive thing in very specific cases. Otherwise, the ethics of their use is up to the individual. Personally, I felt as though I cheated the turkey when I used them, but that's just me, and I was well along as a turkey hunter before I gave either a try. In all honesty, there was a time I would have been happy, and proud, to do anything legal to kill a bird. I won't look down on others for doing the same.
Tried it a few times to try to kill my son his first gobbler, but haven't used it myself.
Now, I will go to (and have gone) to several extremes to kill a gobbler. I have snuck, called, stalked, climbed, etc....and will do it all again....YES!!!
Now, as far as reaping, I have a line in the sand there....not that I care if anyone else does or not. Just that it kinda looks too easy I guess.
To end, we gotta draw it back a little with the BAN THIS and BAN THAT mentality. We need to remember that with every law, ban, or restriction put on the books, that one more outdoorsman could be pushed to the wayside. We need to be promoting the sport, not restricting it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: g8rvet on April 15, 2016, 01:08:01 PM
Quote from: Bill Cooksey on April 15, 2016, 09:34:35 AM
Quote from: g8rvet on April 14, 2016, 04:56:32 PM
Seriously though, good discussion. Especially like that ethics should be more restrictive than law-but shooting a crippled duck while still moving is a great example. Illegal, but ethical.
I was making the point that law and ethics don't always equate. Something can be legal yet unethical, at least from one's personal viewpoint. I believe anyone reading this thread can think of examples. The reverse of that is also true. Regardless, ethics are a personal thing, and I'm in no position to judge others who hunt in a legal manner. I've killed birds using a fan, so I certainly can't claim some moral superiority. The fact that I felt I'd done something wrong after the second bird I killed via the method points to it probably being the wrong choice for ME; others could feel differently, and I'm fine with that.
I understood and was commenting on a perfect example (chasing a cripple) where you discussed doing something illegal, but highly ethical. I have done it many times.
Another great example comes from duck hunting. If you shoot 5 birds (say Ringnecks) and have them in hand. You then shoot your final duck and it falls. You make a concerted, immediate and vigorous attempt to find the bird. If you are unable to find the bird, after meeting those criteria, it is perfectly legal to shoot another bird. You never reduced the bird to possession, but made a definite attempt to do so. In most cases in my life, I count that bird if I know I killed it. That is my ethics. I have gone ahead and shot another bird on occasion. On the flip side, if by some odd stroke I shot another bird and later the first bird popped up dead and I found it, I would carry it out and face the consequences. Also illegal, but ethical in my opinion.
Another example. Catching Redfish. I have culled one from my livewell (illegal) when I later caught and gut or gill hooked one that I knew was going to die as long as the first was lively and healthy. Illegal? yes Unethical? I don't think so.
Applying the use of a fan is the same thing to me. If it is legal, then it is up to the individual to decide if it is ethical TO THEM. I know what my opinion is on hunting methods and I do not feel that I have some set of moral superiority to all other turkey hunters that my ethics should apply to all others or they are beneath me if they chose a different set of ethics. Let's face it, if meat is the only goal, why not just go buy one at Publix? Would be cheaper and less effort.
I have a friend who's dad hunted them with a rifle on his lease from a box stand. No baiting. Is that unethical? Does it make a difference that he had Parkinson's so bad that he had a hard time walking and needed to steady a rifle on a bench to make a clean shot? Does the turkey give two craps if it dies via rifle or shotgun?
To quote from The Big Lebowski - "I like your style, Dude."
Tom Kelly is good with it:
(http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/af161/davisd9/Capture%203_zpsoviwwllj.jpg)
The One thing that is for certain is that it's a totally personal choice how you want to hunt when you're within the confines of the law. Everybody will have their own opinion whether they think something is ethical and another will have the inverse opinion. Turkey hunters span the spectrum. Some people might prefer to pursue a turkey by flashing a fan, belly crawling and stalking it, possibly with a buck knife in their teeth to get a hands on kill while using natural voice calling like native americans did.... and some might prefer to sit in a lounge chair drinking coffee and reading OG posts on their smartphones from a popup tent watching taxidermy quality decoys, shooting 1000 pellets from a scoped gun that will kill to 75 yards. I personally see no difference in ethics when i compare the two....I know where I stand, in some shade of the gray, as does most everyone else. So in response to the OP I'd say that whatever you feel is what you want to do, go for it just don't break laws. You might try it and hate it, or you might love it, who knows.