I'll start off by saying that I know some don't care for using fans to put a sneak on a gobbler and that's fine. I myself like to set up and work a gobbler and call him to the gun first but if that doesn't pan out then if i can find a tom in a field then from time to time I've used a tail fan to try to crawl in position for a shot. For those of you who do fan turkeys or have in the past my question is I've noticed toms who when you move toward them with the fan they don't seem spooked, they just seem to get uneasy. You might gain 20 yards on them but they ease off about 20 yards from you at about the same time. Is that something that the gobblers don't like about the fan or is it the same idea as why some turkeys don't react well to a full strut decoy? If it's the latter has anybody tried fanning with a jake fan and noticed birds acting any more favorably?
Can't help ya bud but given the resent threads on this topic I don't see this thread turning out well! Good luck.
I don't think you will get many positive feed backs about fanning. You may need to ask this on another forum. First off the safety factory is one thing .. so you may wants to reading others respond in this forum on fanning. Good Luck also.
I can see where it can be dangerous, but I have yet to hear of someone getting shot while fanning. Their have been reports of hunters getting shot while not using this method, this year.
Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk
Ok. Point taken. I tried to take my post down by hitting the remove button but it gave me an error. If the mods would please remove the topic for me I'd appreciate it. I really enjoy OG. There are lots of very experienced hunters with lots of knowledge and great stories too. Not trying to stir the pot.
You ever see the cartoon where the guy has his mother in law wear a sweatshirt with horns on the hood come deer season?
:TrainWreck1:
Yes I have used a jake fan. Sometimes it makes all the difference in the world. There are still those gobblers that do exactly what you mentioned no matter what you do. Everyone seems to think that fanning is the easiest, evilest way to kill a turkey. It's not easy. The situation has to be right. You have to work at it (no matter what these tv idiots show).
Sometimes they just won't commit to the fan! I think it has a lot to do with where they are in the breeding cycle...
But when the timing is right and everything comes together, they will just about run over you!
Yes OP it is for the same reasons some birds dont like decoys much.
Quote from: Greg Massey on May 03, 2016, 08:40:29 PM
I don't think you will get many positive feed backs about fanning. You may need to ask this on another forum. First off the safety factory is one thing .. so you may wants to reading others respond in this forum on fanning. Good Luck also.
As i have said many times for all you people who bring up saftey. You better just stop turkey hunting. I bet you walk and use calls huh. Guess what, people get shot every year doing both of those and yet you are fine with doing them yet no reports of a fanning shooting and everyone wants to cry about saftey! You try to fit the saftey issue to use it against fanning/reaping and yet ignore the facts about turkey hunting accidents.
Quote from: snapper1982 on May 03, 2016, 10:40:52 PM
Yes OP it is for the same reasons some birds dont like decoys much.
Quote from: Greg Massey on May 03, 2016, 08:40:29 PM
I don't think you will get many positive feed backs about fanning. You may need to ask this on another forum. First off the safety factory is one thing .. so you may wants to reading others respond in this forum on fanning. Good Luck also.
As i have said many times for all you people who bring up saftey. You better just stop turkey hunting. I bet you walk and use calls huh. Guess what, people get shot every year doing both of those and yet you are fine with doing them yet no reports of a fanning shooting and everyone wants to cry about saftey! You try to fit the saftey issue to use it against fanning/reaping and yet ignore the facts about turkey hunting accidents.
First off safety is not spell saftey and why would you want to start a argument about fanning. If you don't think it's a safety issue then have at it ..good luck
Quote from: Greg Massey on May 03, 2016, 10:48:28 PM
Quote from: snapper1982 on May 03, 2016, 10:40:52 PM
Yes OP it is for the same reasons some birds dont like decoys much.
Quote from: Greg Massey on May 03, 2016, 08:40:29 PM
I don't think you will get many positive feed backs about fanning. You may need to ask this on another forum. First off the safety factory is one thing .. so you may wants to reading others respond in this forum on fanning. Good Luck also.
As i have said many times for all you people who bring up saftey. You better just stop turkey hunting. I bet you walk and use calls huh. Guess what, people get shot every year doing both of those and yet you are fine with doing them yet no reports of a fanning shooting and everyone wants to cry about saftey! You try to fit the saftey issue to use it against fanning/reaping and yet ignore the facts about turkey hunting accidents.
First off safety is not spell saftey and why would you want to start a argument about fanning. If you don't think it's a safety issue then have at it ..good luck
I aint got a dog in this fight! :popcorn:
I would assume that the issue of shying away is a simple dominance issue. We started out years ago using strutter decoys with full fans but quickly saw a 50/50 response. Half the birds would run to it and the other half would run away. Now we all use jake fans. With the jake tails you get more of coming in or not but rarely birds being scared away.
As far as people not liking fanning, using blinds, using the best market shells, hunting after noon, only hunting on private land etc.....SIMPLE then don't do it. Telling others how THEY need to hunt shows lack of character. Legal is legal and when you throw ethical into a discussion you may want to climb down off your high horse before doing so. Unless you are using a bow and arrow you made yourself along with a wingbone call....Shut Up. :goofball:
A large percentage of our laws in regard to manner of harvest have their roots in hunter ethics. Baiting, roost shooting, rifles and a host of others are legal in some places and illegal in others. Are they more ethical in those places where they are legal yet somehow unethical where illegal? Certainly virtually all of the limitations on method of take could be eliminated, and limits and seasons adjusted to compensate for the additional mortality. Why not do so? The only downside is shorter seasons and lower limits. Everyone could choose for themselves how they wish to kill their birds.
My only issue with new (or only recently in common use) methods is when/if their use tips the scales on total harvest into additive. The same issue as with legalizing the methods mentioned earlier.
Now, as to safety, plenty of hunters have been shot when someone takes a poke at their decoy. Others have been shot simply by moving at the wrong time, openly carrying a dead bird and even just coming over a rise with the sun at their back. Anyone not realizing the increased risk of an accidental shooting when a hunter holds a full fan in front of their face possesses the analytical skills of a possum. As the practice becomes more widespread it's only a matter of time. That however, at least in my opinion, is no reason to ban the practice.
Off the fan subject but arent limits set within deemed safe percentages of the population? Limits are set to encompass limits being potentially reached by everyone even though that would never occur. Every method beyond throwing rocks is "Additive". This has the sound of the mojo debate. Never have worried about how people hunted way back when and "ethics" ALWAYS goes hand in hand with the so called "grass roots" BS. Times change but some stuck in their ways just dont want to accept that and would much rather look down upon others who dare not share their views. How hard is it for people to just keep quiet and stop trying to change everyone and everything to fit their personal mold ?
Quote from: duxrus on May 04, 2016, 01:17:43 PM
Off the fan subject but arent limits set within deemed safe percentages of the population? Limits are set to encompass limits being potentially reached by everyone even though that would never occur.
Not in the majority of cases. They are set to limit the take of the small percentage of those who regularly reach a limit, and, in the case of some species, limit the daily take when conditions come together where you could kill far more. This is done to keep the take by hunters compensatory rather than additive. If suddenly those who are normally less successful become more successful, the scale can slip to additive. At that point there are concerns about the sustainability of the resource.
For instance, if duck hunters actually killed a limit of ducks every day, ducks would be extinct in North America in less than thirty days. If turkey hunters in TN all killed a limit of male turkeys this season, there would be zero male turkeys left in the state. Same can be said of deer. Take a look at population estimates in a given state. Then, add the number of hunters and multiply by the number of animals which could be legally taken. The math doesn't work out.
Method of take is one of the few factors humans control in the scenario, but it is a very significant factor.
i'll fan one any chance I get. i have killed a couple behind a fan. i got on one in a road bed Friday evening with another gobbler and some hens. he came a little ways and stopped and strutted and then turned and walked off. he wouldn't commit. he knows the game apparently. its not a 100% deal with a fan as some think.
as for safety, i don't see it any different than sitting behind a decoy spread and calling. i would likely not do this on public land or where others may be hunting
Quote from: duxrus on May 04, 2016, 01:17:43 PM
How hard is it for people to just keep quiet and stop trying to change everyone and everything to fit their personal mold ?
It is hard, really hard. It is like keeping quiet and not punishing your kids when you find out they have been cheating on a test.
Quote from: silvestris on May 04, 2016, 03:13:19 PM
Quote from: duxrus on May 04, 2016, 01:17:43 PM
How hard is it for people to just keep quiet and stop trying to change everyone and everything to fit their personal mold ?
...cheating on a test.
:TooFunny:
Quote from: Bill Cooksey on May 04, 2016, 01:38:40 PM
Quote from: duxrus on May 04, 2016, 01:17:43 PM
Off the fan subject but arent limits set within deemed safe percentages of the population? Limits are set to encompass limits being potentially reached by everyone even though that would never occur.
Not in the majority of cases. They are set to limit the take of the small percentage of those who regularly reach a limit, and, in the case of some species, limit the daily take when conditions come together where you could kill far more. This is done to keep the take by hunters compensatory rather than additive. If suddenly those who are normally less successful become more successful, the scale can slip to additive. At that point there are concerns about the sustainability of the resource.
For instance, if duck hunters actually killed a limit of ducks every day, ducks would be extinct in North America in less than thirty days. If turkey hunters in TN all killed a limit of male turkeys this season, there would be zero male turkeys left in the state. Same can be said of deer. Take a look at population estimates in a given state. Then, add the number of hunters and multiply by the number of animals which could be legally taken. The math doesn't work out.
Method of take is one of the few factors humans control in the scenario, but it is a very significant factor.
[/quote Amen and i'm glad you know how to spell Safety...
Would be more like making your kids go to a certain college and major in what daddy did or daddy will be pouty lipped. This is exactly what is wrong with this country. People just have to get into other peoples business and try to force their ideals on them.
If you dont like using a fan or think it is dangerous then dont use one. I personally think riding a motorcycle is danderous. Guess what, I dont ride. The way some of you act I need to go around to everyone who has one and tell them they are wrong because of MY feelings.
Fan em all :z-guntootsmiley:
Quote from: Greg Massey on May 03, 2016, 08:40:29 PM
I don't think you will get many positive feed backs about fanning. You may need to ask this on another forum. First off the safety factory is one thing .. so you may wants to reading others respond in this forum on fanning. Good Luck also.
The spelling police might want to work on proper grammar :smiley-char092:
Quote from: duxrus on May 04, 2016, 04:47:38 PM
Quote from: Greg Massey on May 03, 2016, 08:40:29 PM
I don't think you will get many positive feed backs about fanning. You may need to ask this on another forum. First off the safety factory is one thing .. so you may wants to reading others respond in this forum on fanning. Good Luck also.
The spelling police might want to work on proper grammar :smiley-char092:
I love a man that's educated.
Sorry but I couldnt resist.
We all need to get back To chasing birds and using tags :fud:
Quote from: duxrus on May 04, 2016, 05:17:10 PM
Sorry but I couldnt resist.
We all need to get back To chasing birds and using tags :fud:
I still like you..i like all turkey hunters.
Quote from: snapper1982 on May 03, 2016, 10:40:52 PM
Yes OP it is for the same reasons some birds dont like decoys much.
Quote from: Greg Massey on May 03, 2016, 08:40:29 PM
I don't think you will get many positive feed backs about fanning. You may need to ask this on another forum. First off the safety factory is one thing .. so you may wants to reading others respond in this forum on fanning. Good Luck also.
As i have said many times for all you people who bring up saftey. You better just stop turkey hunting. I bet you walk and use calls huh. Guess what, people get shot every year doing both of those and yet you are fine with doing them yet no reports of a fanning shooting and everyone wants to cry about saftey! You try to fit the saftey issue to use it against fanning/reaping and yet ignore the facts about turkey hunting accidents.
Bud I personally think it's unsafe but it's your life do what you wish but you're saying no accidents occurred as of fanning?
You may possibly be correct I've personally heard of none, but remember its a recent phenomenon. Many states outlaw it, some guys just won't do it so the percentages if just one guy got hurt would prob be higher incident rate among fanners than the percentage of accidents among non fanners.
Do what you wish though. Good luck
If a bird doesn't spook but eases off when you move, my guess is he's a subordinate tom that has taken a couple beatings by a boss tom
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thank you everybody for your replies. To everybody who gave me feedback on my question I appreciate it and to those of you who were against the idea of fanning, I respect your opinion and stance on the matter. I did not mean for this to turn in to an argument of any type and hope nobody got to worked up with one another. Thanks again.
Nothing wrong with your question at all. Sportsmen should be able to discuss differing points of view.
Quote from: Bill Cooksey on May 04, 2016, 09:17:59 PM
Nothing wrong with your question at all. Sportsmen should be able to discuss differing points of view.
x2
Turkey hunting is very unsafe you all should stay home so i can ... :z-guntootsmiley:
Quote from: Bowguy on May 04, 2016, 06:17:42 PM
Bud I personally think it's unsafe but it's your life do what you wish but you're saying no accidents occurred as of fanning?
You may possibly be correct I've personally heard of none, but remember its a recent phenomenon. Many states outlaw it, some guys just won't do it so the percentages if just one guy got hurt would prob be higher incident rate among fanners than the percentage of accidents among non fanners.
Do what you wish though. Good luck
??? What state's have outlawed "fanning"?
Quote from: GobbleNut on May 06, 2016, 11:51:15 AM
Quote from: Bowguy on May 04, 2016, 06:17:42 PM
Bud I personally think it's unsafe but it's your life do what you wish but you're saying no accidents occurred as of fanning?
You may possibly be correct I've personally heard of none, but remember its a recent phenomenon. Many states outlaw it, some guys just won't do it so the percentages if just one guy got hurt would prob be higher incident rate among fanners than the percentage of accidents among non fanners.
Do what you wish though. Good luck
??? What state's have outlawed "fanning"?
Any state that doesn't allow you to stalk birds. I live in NJ n the law states clearly bird cannot be stalked.
I'm a pretty big guy so I prefer a peacock fan.
Quote from: Bowguy on May 06, 2016, 12:06:49 PM
Quote from: GobbleNut on May 06, 2016, 11:51:15 AM
Quote from: Bowguy on May 04, 2016, 06:17:42 PM
Bud I personally think it's unsafe but it's your life do what you wish but you're saying no accidents occurred as of fanning?
You may possibly be correct I've personally heard of none, but remember its a recent phenomenon. Many states outlaw it, some guys just won't do it so the percentages if just one guy got hurt would prob be higher incident rate among fanners than the percentage of accidents among non fanners.
Do what you wish though. Good luck
??? What state's have outlawed "fanning"?
Any state that doesn't allow you to stalk birds. I live in NJ n the law states clearly bird cannot be stalked.
Not that I am trying to either defend or condemn fanning, but the use of a fan and stalking are not synonymous. A hunter is perfectly capable of using a fan in his hunting strategy without ever trying to approach a turkey with it. It would be interesting to see how those states define fanning in their regulations.
If a hunter could not "stalk" a turkey with a fan, does that mean the hunter that uses a decoy and carries it out to set it in a field could be charged with stalking because he is carrying a decoy while moving? An extreme example, I know, but defining "fanning" and "stalking" in the same light is a very slippery slope.
Now "reaping", on the other hand,...the active use of a decoy or fan to approach a turkey,....might be something that could be prosecuted if a conservation officer actually witnessed somebody doing it. How often, however, is that going to happen?
:happy0064:
I think people need to learn the difference between ethics and opinions.
Simple Definition of ethics
: rules of behavior based on ideas about what is morally good and bad
Simple Definition of opinion
: a belief, judgment, or way of thinking about something
: what someone thinks about a particular thing
Quote from: gobblegobblegobble on May 06, 2016, 05:20:43 PM
(http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/58326636/caruso.jpg)
:TooFunny: :TooFunny:
Quote from: GobbleNut on May 06, 2016, 03:49:23 PM
Quote from: Bowguy on May 06, 2016, 12:06:49 PM
Quote from: GobbleNut on May 06, 2016, 11:51:15 AM
Quote from: Bowguy on May 04, 2016, 06:17:42 PM
Bud I personally think it's unsafe but it's your life do what you wish but you're saying no accidents occurred as of fanning?
You may possibly be correct I've personally heard of none, but remember its a recent phenomenon. Many states outlaw it, some guys just won't do it so the percentages if just one guy got hurt would prob be higher incident rate among fanners than the percentage of accidents among non fanners.
Do what you wish though. Good luck
??? What state's have outlawed "fanning"?
Any state that doesn't allow you to stalk birds. I live in NJ n the law states clearly bird cannot be stalked.
Not that I am trying to either defend or condemn fanning, but the use of a fan and stalking are not synonymous. A hunter is perfectly capable of using a fan in his hunting strategy without ever trying to approach a turkey with it. It would be interesting to see how those states define fanning in their regulations.
If a hunter could not "stalk" a turkey with a fan, does that mean the hunter that uses a decoy and carries it out to set it in a field could be charged with stalking because he is carrying a decoy while moving? An extreme example, I know, but defining "fanning" and "stalking" in the same light is a very slippery slope.
Now "reaping", on the other hand,...the active use of a decoy or fan to approach a turkey,....might be something that could be prosecuted if a conservation officer actually witnessed somebody doing it. How often, however, is that going to happen?
I'll only use NJ since that's where I'm from. Yes if you stayed in one spot you prob wouldn't be illegal. The COs may or may not have a case though since in NJ you're supposed to call em, there's even a law that you must have a call on you n I think it's worded from a stationary position or something. You bring up some good points though.
Waking up to set dekes though isn't one I agree is stalking. You're not attempting to get up on the bird but use your dekes to draw em in. Like I said stationary you may be right
Quote from: Bowguy on May 06, 2016, 06:57:29 PM
I'll only use NJ since that's where I'm from. Yes if you stayed in one spot you prob wouldn't be illegal. The COs may or may not have a case though since in NJ you're supposed to call em, there's even a law that you must have a call on you n I think it's worded from a stationary position or something. You bring up some good points though.
Waking up to set dekes though isn't one I agree is stalking. You're not attempting to get up on the bird but use your dekes to draw em in. Like I said stationary you may be right
For the purpose of discussion, I agree with Bowguy. Walking out and setting decoys vs. crawling (stalking) towards a bird are two different venues. Sitting in one spot and waving a fan would not be "stalking". More like flagging a goose...
I'm not a fan of fanning. Then again, I wouldn't set up so close in the dark so I could shoot 'em when he hits the ground either. But that's
just me...
I wasn't gonna post on this topic again but what the heck. Everyone out there who considers fanning unethical because it's so highly effective is basing their opinion off videos and story's. A successful story or video sells much better than an unsuccessful one. I just saw a turkey video for sale the other day that said on the cover "22 successful hunts caught on film". How well do you think a video would sell if it said "22 unsuccessful hunts caught on film"? And if I didn't know any better I'd watch any turkey hunting video or show out there and say "wow, calling to a turkey is a sure way to kill him. These guys do it every time!!" Another thing to remember to all the ethical police out there is that we are hunting these birds during their most vulnerable time. Archibald Rutledge said in his writings that to kill a gobbler in breeding season is nothing. He considered it unethical to use the turkeys sexual weakness to call him in. Also, think what the internet has done to compound all this. It's the reason we are all discussing this. If fanning became popular in the pre-internet days, most people would have never cared. Think about if the internet was around when compound bows first started being used. Or portable climbing stands. After all, Saxton Pope and Art Young both thought it to be unethical to ambush an animal from a tree. People's ideas change with time and with them so do ethics. They always have. The differance is that today these changes are broadcast instantly, and those who oppose them can post there objections on the web instead of just doing their own thing and letting others do theirs.
Quote from: Farmboy27 on May 06, 2016, 07:21:28 PM
I wasn't gonna post on this topic again but what the heck. Everyone out there who considers fanning unethical because it's so highly effective is basing their opinion off videos and story's. A successful story or video sells much better than an unsuccessful one. I just saw a turkey video for sale the other day that said on the cover "22 successful hunts caught on film". How well do you think a video would sell if it said "22 unsuccessful hunts caught on film"? And if I didn't know any better I'd watch any turkey hunting video or show out there and say "wow, calling to a turkey is a sure way to kill him. These guys do it every time!!" Another thing to remember to all the ethical police out there is that we are hunting these birds during their most vulnerable time. Archibald Rutledge said in his writings that to kill a gobbler in breeding season is nothing. He considered it unethical to use the turkeys sexual weakness to call him in. Also, think what the internet has done to compound all this. It's the reason we are all discussing this. If fanning became popular in the pre-internet days, most people would have never cared. Think about if the internet was around when compound bows first started being used. Or portable climbing stands. After all, Saxton Pope and Art Young both thought it to be unethical to ambush an animal from a tree. People's ideas change with time and with them so do ethics. They always have. The differance is that today these changes are broadcast instantly, and those who oppose them can post there objections on the web instead of just doing their own thing and letting others do theirs.
If I could find the "Like" button... I'd click it. :icon_thumright:
Quote from: gobblegobblegobble on May 06, 2016, 05:20:43 PM
(http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/58326636/caruso.jpg)
:TooFunny: :TooFunny: :TooFunny: :TooFunny:
Quote from: Farmboy27 on May 06, 2016, 07:21:28 PM
I wasn't gonna post on this topic again but what the heck. Everyone out there who considers fanning unethical because it's so highly effective is basing their opinion off videos and story's. A successful story or video sells much better than an unsuccessful one. I just saw a turkey video for sale the other day that said on the cover "22 successful hunts caught on film". How well do you think a video would sell if it said "22 unsuccessful hunts caught on film"? And if I didn't know any better I'd watch any turkey hunting video or show out there and say "wow, calling to a turkey is a sure way to kill him. These guys do it every time!!" Another thing to remember to all the ethical police out there is that we are hunting these birds during their most vulnerable time. Archibald Rutledge said in his writings that to kill a gobbler in breeding season is nothing. He considered it unethical to use the turkeys sexual weakness to call him in. Also, think what the internet has done to compound all this. It's the reason we are all discussing this. If fanning became popular in the pre-internet days, most people would have never cared. Think about if the internet was around when compound bows first started being used. Or portable climbing stands. After all, Saxton Pope and Art Young both thought it to be unethical to ambush an animal from a tree. People's ideas change with time and with them so do ethics. They always have. The differance is that today these changes are broadcast instantly, and those who oppose them can post there objections on the web instead of just doing their own thing and letting others do theirs.
I agree and disagree if it hadn't been for the invention of the automobile, we would still be walking or riding a horse. I still like driving my chevy silverado hunting and on those nice hot days having air conditioning..So yes things do change and i don't think a lot of people want to give up either way of hunting old school or new school,,,
Quote from: Farmboy27 on May 06, 2016, 07:21:28 PM
I wasn't gonna post on this topic again but what the heck. Everyone out there who considers fanning unethical because it's so highly effective is basing their opinion off videos and story's. A successful story or video sells much better than an unsuccessful one. I just saw a turkey video for sale the other day that said on the cover "22 successful hunts caught on film". How well do you think a video would sell if it said "22 unsuccessful hunts caught on film"? And if I didn't know any better I'd watch any turkey hunting video or show out there and say "wow, calling to a turkey is a sure way to kill him. These guys do it every time!!" Another thing to remember to all the ethical police out there is that we are hunting these birds during their most vulnerable time. Archibald Rutledge said in his writings that to kill a gobbler in breeding season is nothing. He considered it unethical to use the turkeys sexual weakness to call him in. Also, think what the internet has done to compound all this. It's the reason we are all discussing this. If fanning became popular in the pre-internet days, most people would have never cared. Think about if the internet was around when compound bows first started being used. Or portable climbing stands. After all, Saxton Pope and Art Young both thought it to be unethical to ambush an animal from a tree. People's ideas change with time and with them so do ethics. They always have. The differance is that today these changes are broadcast instantly, and those who oppose them can post there objections on the web instead of just doing their own thing and letting others do theirs.
WOW. You da man. Excellent post.
AMEN
Quote from: Farmboy27 on May 06, 2016, 07:21:28 PM
I wasn't gonna post on this topic again but what the heck. Everyone out there who considers fanning unethical because it's so highly effective is basing their opinion off videos and story's. A successful story or video sells much better than an unsuccessful one. I just saw a turkey video for sale the other day that said on the cover "22 successful hunts caught on film". How well do you think a video would sell if it said "22 unsuccessful hunts caught on film"? And if I didn't know any better I'd watch any turkey hunting video or show out there and say "wow, calling to a turkey is a sure way to kill him. These guys do it every time!!" Another thing to remember to all the ethical police out there is that we are hunting these birds during their most vulnerable time. Archibald Rutledge said in his writings that to kill a gobbler in breeding season is nothing. He considered it unethical to use the turkeys sexual weakness to call him in. Also, think what the internet has done to compound all this. It's the reason we are all discussing this. If fanning became popular in the pre-internet days, most people would have never cared. Think about if the internet was around when compound bows first started being used. Or portable climbing stands. After all, Saxton Pope and Art Young both thought it to be unethical to ambush an animal from a tree. People's ideas change with time and with them so do ethics. They always have. The differance is that today these changes are broadcast instantly, and those who oppose them can post there objections on the web instead of just doing their own thing and letting others do theirs.
There you go, making sense and sounding intelligent again! ;D Well said!
I say Farmboy for President!!!
Quote from: Farmboy27 on May 06, 2016, 07:21:28 PM
I wasn't gonna post on this topic again but what the heck. Everyone out there who considers fanning unethical because it's so highly effective is basing their opinion off videos and story's. A successful story or video sells much better than an unsuccessful one. I just saw a turkey video for sale the other day that said on the cover "22 successful hunts caught on film". How well do you think a video would sell if it said "22 unsuccessful hunts caught on film"? And if I didn't know any better I'd watch any turkey hunting video or show out there and say "wow, calling to a turkey is a sure way to kill him. These guys do it every time!!" Another thing to remember to all the ethical police out there is that we are hunting these birds during their most vulnerable time. Archibald Rutledge said in his writings that to kill a gobbler in breeding season is nothing. He considered it unethical to use the turkeys sexual weakness to call him in. Also, think what the internet has done to compound all this. It's the reason we are all discussing this. If fanning became popular in the pre-internet days, most people would have never cared. Think about if the internet was around when compound bows first started being used. Or portable climbing stands. After all, Saxton Pope and Art Young both thought it to be unethical to ambush an animal from a tree. People's ideas change with time and with them so do ethics. They always have. The differance is that today these changes are broadcast instantly, and those who oppose them can post there objections on the web instead of just doing their own thing and letting others do theirs.
There are outfitters in Nebraska killing over 150 turkeys per season, an astounding percentage of which are killed with fanning.
There are guys in the mid-west who use this tactic almost exclusively and kill over 80% of the time.
It's an insanely effective tactic and I don't care how progressive a guy is, there comes a point where ya gotta say enough is enough. Technology ruins culture. It ruins tradition. No one is naive enough to dispute that all of us embrace it to a certain extent but for me, the quality of a kill is significantly influenced by how it is achieved. Maybe a guy who has only killed 20, 30 or 50 birds in his lifetime can't see the forest for the trees but the truth is, we're pushing the ethical threshold.
At what point does a human being recognize the significant advantage they already have over our quarry and suspend the pursuit of additional advantages?
At what point do you guys finally realize that turkey hunting is the fastest growing genre of hunting and we can't be promoting tactics that increase harvest numbers while we have organizations like the d.a.m.n NWTF recruiting to increase hunter numbers. The resource can't withstand the length of current seasons as they are, the bag limits we now have and the number of people killing birds.
20 years from now. Guys that have been hunting turkeys for a while are going to look back on the early- mid 2000s as the glory days of turkey hunting. The spring weather was good, the habitat supported high poult recruitment, the hunter numbers were low and very few people were discussing bullshit tactics like this.
Quote from: Farmboy27 on May 06, 2016, 07:21:28 PM
I wasn't gonna post on this topic again but what the heck. Everyone out there who considers fanning unethical because it's so highly effective is basing their opinion off videos and story's. A successful story or video sells much better than an unsuccessful one. I just saw a turkey video for sale the other day that said on the cover "22 successful hunts caught on film". How well do you think a video would sell if it said "22 unsuccessful hunts caught on film"? And if I didn't know any better I'd watch any turkey hunting video or show out there and say "wow, calling to a turkey is a sure way to kill him. These guys do it every time!!" Another thing to remember to all the ethical police out there is that we are hunting these birds during their most vulnerable time. Archibald Rutledge said in his writings that to kill a gobbler in breeding season is nothing. He considered it unethical to use the turkeys sexual weakness to call him in. Also, think what the internet has done to compound all this. It's the reason we are all discussing this. If fanning became popular in the pre-internet days, most people would have never cared. Think about if the internet was around when compound bows first started being used. Or portable climbing stands. After all, Saxton Pope and Art Young both thought it to be unethical to ambush an animal from a tree. People's ideas change with time and with them so do ethics. They always have. The differance is that today these changes are broadcast instantly, and those who oppose them can post there objections on the web instead of just doing their own thing and letting others do theirs.
Nope. My opinion is based on personal experience. I've seen a couple of hundred turkeys die in front of me. First time I fanned one was exciting. Second time, it just didn't feel right. Third time, I didn't pull the trigger. I pulled out the fan a few more times on bad birds just to see. It's simply too damn easy. I'm not advocating a nationwide ban, but I won't congratulate someone for killing a bird that way. Shootimg a bird of the limb is more challenging.
Quote from: VaTuRkStOmPeR on May 06, 2016, 10:29:57 PM
Quote from: Farmboy27 on May 06, 2016, 07:21:28 PM
I wasn't gonna post on this topic again but what the heck. Everyone out there who considers fanning unethical because it's so highly effective is basing their opinion off videos and story's. A successful story or video sells much better than an unsuccessful one. I just saw a turkey video for sale the other day that said on the cover "22 successful hunts caught on film". How well do you think a video would sell if it said "22 unsuccessful hunts caught on film"? And if I didn't know any better I'd watch any turkey hunting video or show out there and say "wow, calling to a turkey is a sure way to kill him. These guys do it every time!!" Another thing to remember to all the ethical police out there is that we are hunting these birds during their most vulnerable time. Archibald Rutledge said in his writings that to kill a gobbler in breeding season is nothing. He considered it unethical to use the turkeys sexual weakness to call him in. Also, think what the internet has done to compound all this. It's the reason we are all discussing this. If fanning became popular in the pre-internet days, most people would have never cared. Think about if the internet was around when compound bows first started being used. Or portable climbing stands. After all, Saxton Pope and Art Young both thought it to be unethical to ambush an animal from a tree. People's ideas change with time and with them so do ethics. They always have. The differance is that today these changes are broadcast instantly, and those who oppose them can post there objections on the web instead of just doing their own thing and letting others do theirs.
Great post.
There are outfitters in Nebraska killing over 150 turkeys per season, an astounding percentage of which are killed with fanning.
There are guys in the mid-west who use this tactic almost exclusively and kill over 80% of the time.
It's an insanely effective tactic and I don't care how progressive a guy is, there comes a point where ya gotta say enough is enough. Technology ruins culture. It ruins tradition. No one is naive enough to dispute that all of us embrace it to a certain extent but for me, the quality of a kill is significantly influenced by how it is achieved. Maybe a guy who has only killed 20, 30 or 50 birds in his lifetime can't see the forest for the trees but the truth is, we're pushing the ethical threshold.
At what point does a human being recognize the significant advantage they already have over our quarry and suspend the pursuit of additional advantages?
At what point do you guys finally realize that turkey hunting is the fastest growing genre of hunting and we can't be promoting tactics that increase harvest numbers while we have organizations like the d.a.m.n NWTF recruiting to increase hunter numbers. The resource can't withstand the length of current seasons as they are, the bag limits we now have and the number of people killing birds.
20 years from now. Guys that have been hunting turkeys for a while are going to look back on the early- mid 2000s as the glory days of turkey hunting. The spring weather was good, the habitat supported high poult recruitment, the hunter numbers were low and very few people were discussing bullshit tactics like this.
Quote from: Farmboy27 on May 06, 2016, 07:21:28 PM
I wasn't gonna post on this topic again but what the heck. Everyone out there who considers fanning unethical because it's so highly effective is basing their opinion off videos and story's. A successful story or video sells much better than an unsuccessful one. I just saw a turkey video for sale the other day that said on the cover "22 successful hunts caught on film". How well do you think a video would sell if it said "22 unsuccessful hunts caught on film"? And if I didn't know any better I'd watch any turkey hunting video or show out there and say "wow, calling to a turkey is a sure way to kill him. These guys do it every time!!" Another thing to remember to all the ethical police out there is that we are hunting these birds during their most vulnerable time. Archibald Rutledge said in his writings that to kill a gobbler in breeding season is nothing. He considered it unethical to use the turkeys sexual weakness to call him in. Also, think what the internet has done to compound all this. It's the reason we are all discussing this. If fanning became popular in the pre-internet days, most people would have never cared. Think about if the internet was around when compound bows first started being used. Or portable climbing stands. After all, Saxton Pope and Art Young both thought it to be unethical to ambush an animal from a tree. People's ideas change with time and with them so do ethics. They always have. The differance is that today these changes are broadcast instantly, and those who oppose them can post there objections on the web instead of just doing their own thing and letting others do theirs.
To take this a bit further, if turkey hunting had started in its initial stages with hunters using fans, and with the idea of "real hunting" consisting of getting close enough to a gobbler to show him the fan and have him approach you because of it,....and then some hunters started using turkey calls to get a gobbler to come,....we would all be having the exact opposite discussion right now. We would all be complaining about how turkey calling had ruined the sport and was unethical. ...Go figure.... ;D :toothy12:
That makes as much sense as a hemorrhoid transplant.
My take on fanning is its not for me. I'd rather use my calling skills to bring the bird in. Might as well shoot them off the roost or chase them down in a corn field with your truck. In this day and age, it seems like everybody wants instant success without putting in the required effort or skill. I fully expect in 10 yrs, hunting over corn piles with a rifle will be legal in Mississippi. The legislature just recently legalized feeders for deer and I despise it. If a man can't kill a deer in Mississippi without sitting over a feeder, he's not much of a hunter.
Quote from: GobbleNut on May 06, 2016, 11:49:17 PM
To take this a bit further, if turkey hunting had started in its initial stages with hunters using fans, and with the idea of "real hunting" consisting of getting close enough to a gobbler to show him the fan and have him approach you because of it,....and then some hunters started using turkey calls to get a gobbler to come,....we would all be having the exact opposite discussion right now. We would all be complaining about how turkey calling had ruined the sport and was unethical. ...Go figure.... ;D :toothy12:
I doubt that very seriously. There have been essentially three eras of turkey hunting. In the first, turkeys were plentiful and sports hunters hunted them with callers and primarily with rifles. The first era was virtually ended by the destruction of habitat and the hiatus lasted for about thirty years or so until the invention of the cannon net which was the beginning of the second era which consisted of sports hunters hunting with callers and shotguns. The third era began in the 80s as videos and decoys of all kinds began to be used primarily by deer hunters who were attracted to turkey hunting by the videos. How much farther the decoy technology will progress is anyone's guess (we already have radio-controlled strutting gobblers on wheels capable of turning their fans from side-to-side), but I fear that the technology and the increasing numbers being "introduced" to the sport will lead to a fourth era, an era in which the young hunters of today will be telling their grandchildren of a time when a magnificent bird roamed the forests of this continent.
Quote from: Cottonmouth on May 07, 2016, 12:17:28 AM
My take on fanning is its not for me. I'd rather use my calling skills to bring the bird in. Might as well shoot them off the roost or chase them down in a corn field with your truck. In this day and age, it seems like everybody wants instant success without putting in the required effort or skill. I fully expect in 10 yrs, hunting over corn piles with a rifle will be legal in Mississippi. The legislature just recently legalized feeders for deer and I despise it. If a man can't kill a deer in Mississippi without sitting over a feeder, he's not much of a hunter.
On the money!
We all have different opinions on what methods of hunting are fair or ethical?
To me it more about the challenge and have no interest in fanning. Nor do I have any interest in using any decoys or shot gunning within a blind. As I feel all these methods in my eyes are all an unfair advantage. Decoys and fanning both work as visual aids to dupe turkeys, where a blind is a crutch to conceal yourself and movement, but this is my opinion as to the style of hunting I enjoy for the challenge.
But on the other hand, some may say my hunting sitting against a tree in camo with a shot gun and using calls is unfair? It all comes down to what type of hunting one is looking for, but doesn't neccessarily mean all should, just because you don't.
Quote from: GobbleNut on May 06, 2016, 11:49:17 PM
Quote from: Farmboy27 on May 06, 2016, 07:21:28 PM
I wasn't gonna post on this topic again but what the heck. Everyone out there who considers fanning unethical because it's so highly effective is basing their opinion off videos and story's. A successful story or video sells much better than an unsuccessful one. I just saw a turkey video for sale the other day that said on the cover "22 successful hunts caught on film". How well do you think a video would sell if it said "22 unsuccessful hunts caught on film"? And if I didn't know any better I'd watch any turkey hunting video or show out there and say "wow, calling to a turkey is a sure way to kill him. These guys do it every time!!" Another thing to remember to all the ethical police out there is that we are hunting these birds during their most vulnerable time. Archibald Rutledge said in his writings that to kill a gobbler in breeding season is nothing. He considered it unethical to use the turkeys sexual weakness to call him in. Also, think what the internet has done to compound all this. It's the reason we are all discussing this. If fanning became popular in the pre-internet days, most people would have never cared. Think about if the internet was around when compound bows first started being used. Or portable climbing stands. After all, Saxton Pope and Art Young both thought it to be unethical to ambush an animal from a tree. People's ideas change with time and with them so do ethics. They always have. The differance is that today these changes are broadcast instantly, and those who oppose them can post there objections on the web instead of just doing their own thing and letting others do theirs.
To take this a bit further, if turkey hunting had started in its initial stages with hunters using fans, and with the idea of "real hunting" consisting of getting close enough to a gobbler to show him the fan and have him approach you because of it,....and then some hunters started using turkey calls to get a gobbler to come,....we would all be having the exact opposite discussion right now. We would all be complaining about how turkey calling had ruined the sport and was unethical. ...Go figure.... ;D :toothy12:
I find this hypothesis illogical,
Go find 10 gobblers in various situations (solo, henned up, etc)and call to them. Tell me how many you kill.
Go find 10 gobblers put a fan in front of you and crawl at them. Tell me how many you kill.
No one has ever called in birds with the consistency that you can crawl/reap em.
Hence my hemorrhoid comment.
Have not fanned, will not fan, not my thing. But I am not judging.
Anecdotal stories of mythical outfitters is meaningless to me. Harvest numbers of birds taken and sustainability of populations is what should determine legal seasons and methods of take. I knew guys when I was a kid that felt that way about compound bows. Said they gave archers an unfair advantage and there would be no deer left for rifle season.
Internet + opinion = forums. I can be swayed in my opinions on what should be legal, but with science. It would be very interesting to see a study on success rates of reaping. Also, injury rates. Also rates of turkey hunters that have put a lifetime in to acquire the skills and then see some new guy go out and have the same success rates they do get ticked off. All would be interesting.
I think Stomper's comment and Bill C's comments on effectiveness are pretty spot on. Ultimately, over-harvesting in certain areas will prove detrimental to the population and in areas where there was once excellent hunting will see dramatic declines in opportunities and success.
There will still be birds around because not everyone will switch to this type of tactic just for the sake of tipping a bird over, but there will come a time when the folks that set seasons and limits have to address this due to declining populations.
Bill's observations about bird numbers in his area are noteworthy. In an area once crawling with turkeys, the combination of long seasons, multiple bird limits and extremely effective tactics will aggregate to the detriment of the population quickly. throw in a bad hatch or bad weather and bam, you are staring down a potential several year problem.
Quote from: spaightlabs on May 07, 2016, 09:05:17 AM
I think Stomper's comment and Bill C's comments on effectiveness are pretty spot on. Ultimately, over-harvesting in certain areas will prove detrimental to the population and in areas where there was once excellent hunting will see dramatic declines in opportunities and success.
There will still be birds around because not everyone will switch to this type of tactic just for the sake of tipping a bird over, but there will come a time when the folks that set seasons and limits have to address this due to declining populations.
Bill's observations about bird numbers in his area are noteworthy. In an area once crawling with turkeys, the combination of long seasons, multiple bird limits and extremely effective tactics will aggregate to the detriment of the population quickly. throw in a bad hatch or bad weather and bam, you are staring down a potential several year problem.
All of this is true,...butttt, the leap from decreasing populations to the conclusion that it is in any way being caused by "additive", rather than "compensatory", mortality due to human hunting and the tactics we use should be demonstrated before we condemn hunting tactics that we may not personally agree with. The fundamental premise regarding spring gobbler hunting is that, because wild turkeys are polygamous and dominant gobblers do most of the breeding, most gobblers in any population are considered "surplus" and can be harvested without any impact on that population,...
if the spring season is properly timed such that hens have been bred prior to the start of hunting.
The use of "visual aids" (gobbler decoys and fans, in particular) certainly has an impact on the number of mature gobblers that are available to hunters each spring. There is little evidence, however, to suggest that employing those tactics has any impact whatsoever on overall turkey populations. In fact, it is highly unlikely, except in the rarest of circumstances, that they do.
The bottom line is that the guy that kills his limit in two days using a fan or gobbler decoy has no more impact on the gobbler population in any area than the guy that kills his limit in a month by calling them in. The impact on the turkey population in the area is exactly the same. One could reasonably argue that the "decoyer/fanner" is not capable of killing his limit by using calling alone,...but that is a pretty elitist attitude,...not to mention pretty tenuous.
If we truly want to address declining turkey populations, we should be looking at changing land uses and habitat destruction,....and probably the biggest factor of all,...climate change,... which is resulting in widespread reproductive failure due to annual springtime flooding in areas where that did not take happen just a few decades ago.
Quote from: GobbleNut on May 07, 2016, 09:58:29 AM
Quote from: spaightlabs on May 07, 2016, 09:05:17 AM
I think Stomper's comment and Bill C's comments on effectiveness are pretty spot on. Ultimately, over-harvesting in certain areas will prove detrimental to the population and in areas where there was once excellent hunting will see dramatic declines in opportunities and success.
There will still be birds around because not everyone will switch to this type of tactic just for the sake of tipping a bird over, but there will come a time when the folks that set seasons and limits have to address this due to declining populations.
Bill's observations about bird numbers in his area are noteworthy. In an area once crawling with turkeys, the combination of long seasons, multiple bird limits and extremely effective tactics will aggregate to the detriment of the population quickly. throw in a bad hatch or bad weather and bam, you are staring down a potential several year problem.
All of this is true,...butttt, the leap from decreasing populations to the conclusion that it is in any way being caused by "additive", rather than "compensatory", mortality due to human hunting and the tactics we use should be demonstrated before we condemn hunting tactics that we may not personally agree with. The fundamental premise regarding spring gobbler hunting is that, because wild turkeys are polygamous and dominant gobblers do most of the breeding, most gobblers in any population are considered "surplus" and can be harvested without any impact on that population,...if the spring season is properly timed such that hens have been bred prior to the start of hunting.
The use of "visual aids" (gobbler decoys and fans, in particular) certainly has an impact on the number of mature gobblers that are available to hunters each spring. There is little evidence, however, to suggest that employing those tactics has any impact whatsoever on overall turkey populations. In fact, it is highly unlikely, except in the rarest of circumstances, that they do.
The bottom line is that the guy that kills his limit in two days using a fan or gobbler decoy has no more impact on the gobbler population in any are than the guy that kills his limit in a month by calling them in. The impact on the turkey population in the area is exactly the same. One could reasonably argue that the "decoyer/fanner" is not capable of killing his limit by using calling alone,...but that is a pretty elitist attitude,...not to mention pretty tenuous.
If we truly want to address declining turkey populations, we should be looking at changing land uses and habitat destruction,....and probably the biggest factor of all,...climate change,... which is resulting in widespread reproductive failure due to annual springtime flooding in areas where that did not take happen just a few decades ago.
[/quote x2
The on thing I am noticing in this whole conversation is that no one has any data to back up and validate their OPINION. No one can give a number of hunters who actually fan/reap, or their success ratios. Anyone who tries to base success ratios off hunting videos would be laughed out of town by anyone with any scientific knowledge. Everybody has an opinion on what the cause of something is. But no one has any proof, that the cause they claim, if causing the effect. Look at the crossbow argument. Can any of you prove that it has added to the decline in deer numbers? Because it has not. People scream that it will ruin the sport, but is has not.
Again I say; people need to learn the difference between opinion and fact.
Quote from: HogBiologist on May 07, 2016, 10:25:15 AM
The on thing I am noticing in this whole conversation is that no one has any data to back up and validate their OPINION. No one can give a number of hunters who actually fan/reap, or their success ratios. Anyone who tries to base success ratios off hunting videos would be laughed out of town by anyone with any scientific knowledge. Everybody has an opinion on what the cause of something is. But no one has any proof, that the cause they claim, if causing the effect. Look at the crossbow argument. Can any of you prove that it has added to the decline in deer numbers? Because it has not. People scream that it will ruin the sport, but is has not.
Again I say; people need to learn the difference between opinion and fact.
Go to your local spot, find a bird in a field and reap him. Then repeat. Then repeat. You'll have 3 dead turkeys.
You people want studies from accredited institutions when all you need to do is talk to someone in SE Kansas or parts of Nebraska where the practice is most heavily utilized.
If you want empirical data instead of accusing us of using anecdotal references, go reap some damn turkeys; in fact, book a ticket to Nebraska and buy 3 tags. Don't take a call. If you have any skill at crawling and any hand eye coordination, you'll see the results for yourself.
Quote from: VaTuRkStOmPeR on May 07, 2016, 12:33:23 PM
Quote from: HogBiologist on May 07, 2016, 10:25:15 AM
The on thing I am noticing in this whole conversation is that no one has any data to back up and validate their OPINION. No one can give a number of hunters who actually fan/reap, or their success ratios. Anyone who tries to base success ratios off hunting videos would be laughed out of town by anyone with any scientific knowledge. Everybody has an opinion on what the cause of something is. But no one has any proof, that the cause they claim, if causing the effect. Look at the crossbow argument. Can any of you prove that it has added to the decline in deer numbers? Because it has not. People scream that it will ruin the sport, but is has not.
Again I say; people need to learn the difference between opinion and fact.
Go to your local spot, find a bird in a field and reap him. Then repeat. Then repeat. You'll have 3 dead turkeys.
You people want studies from accredited institutions when all you need to do is talk to someone in SE Kansas or parts of Nebraska where the practice is most heavily utilized.
If you want empirical data instead of accusing us of using anecdotal references, go reap some damn turkeys; in fact, book a ticket to Nebraska and buy 3 tags. Don't take a call. If you have any skill at crawling and any hand eye coordination, you'll see the results for yourself.
I'm like you. I'm getting tired of all this fanning and reappp.
Quote from: VaTuRkStOmPeR on May 07, 2016, 12:33:23 PM
Quote from: HogBiologist on May 07, 2016, 10:25:15 AM
The on thing I am noticing in this whole conversation is that no one has any data to back up and validate their OPINION. No one can give a number of hunters who actually fan/reap, or their success ratios. Anyone who tries to base success ratios off hunting videos would be laughed out of town by anyone with any scientific knowledge. Everybody has an opinion on what the cause of something is. But no one has any proof, that the cause they claim, if causing the effect. Look at the crossbow argument. Can any of you prove that it has added to the decline in deer numbers? Because it has not. People scream that it will ruin the sport, but is has not.
Again I say; people need to learn the difference between opinion and fact.
Go to your local spot, find a bird in a field and reap him. Then repeat. Then repeat. You'll have 3 dead turkeys.
You people want studies from accredited institutions when all you need to do is talk to someone in SE Kansas or parts of Nebraska where the practice is most heavily utilized.
If you want empirical data instead of accusing us of using anecdotal references, go reap some damn turkeys; in fact, book a ticket to Nebraska and buy 3 tags. Don't take a call. If you have any skill at crawling and any hand eye coordination, you'll see the results for yourself.
"You People" lol. I will trust the opinion of someone with supporting data any day over someone who says "I see it all the time". Just think where we would be if we took the "because I saw it" attitude. We would have a Sasquatch or Nessie season and people complaining they couldn't find one so the biologists don't know nothing.
Agencies can't make scientific decisions on "because my brothers-sisters-cousins-friends-barber said so.
Quote from: HogBiologist on May 07, 2016, 02:56:02 PM
Quote from: VaTuRkStOmPeR on May 07, 2016, 12:33:23 PM
Quote from: HogBiologist on May 07, 2016, 10:25:15 AM
The on thing I am noticing in this whole conversation is that no one has any data to back up and validate their OPINION. No one can give a number of hunters who actually fan/reap, or their success ratios. Anyone who tries to base success ratios off hunting videos would be laughed out of town by anyone with any scientific knowledge. Everybody has an opinion on what the cause of something is. But no one has any proof, that the cause they claim, if causing the effect. Look at the crossbow argument. Can any of you prove that it has added to the decline in deer numbers? Because it has not. People scream that it will ruin the sport, but is has not.
Again I say; people need to learn the difference between opinion and fact.
Go to your local spot, find a bird in a field and reap him. Then repeat. Then repeat. You'll have 3 dead turkeys.
You people want studies from accredited institutions when all you need to do is talk to someone in SE Kansas or parts of Nebraska where the practice is most heavily utilized.
If you want empirical data instead of accusing us of using anecdotal references, go reap some damn turkeys; in fact, book a ticket to Nebraska and buy 3 tags. Don't take a call. If you have any skill at crawling and any hand eye coordination, you'll see the results for yourself.
"You People" lol. I will trust the opinion of someone with supporting data any day over someone who says "I see it all the time". Just think where we would be if we took the "because I saw it" attitude. We would have a Sasquatch or Nessie season and people complaining they couldn't find one so the biologists don't know nothing.
Agencies can't make scientific decisions on "because my brothers-sisters-cousins-friends-barber said so.
Don't argue with va Turk whatever. He has seen it all and knows it all. He kills 99 percent of the birds he calls to and has proof that for every bird that is shot fanning, 2 others die from shame! If you don't believe me about how amazingly great he is, just ask him.
Quote from: Farmboy27 on May 07, 2016, 03:40:17 PM
Quote from: HogBiologist on May 07, 2016, 02:56:02 PM
Quote from: VaTuRkStOmPeR on May 07, 2016, 12:33:23 PM
Quote from: HogBiologist on May 07, 2016, 10:25:15 AM
The on thing I am noticing in this whole conversation is that no one has any data to back up and validate their OPINION. No one can give a number of hunters who actually fan/reap, or their success ratios. Anyone who tries to base success ratios off hunting videos would be laughed out of town by anyone with any scientific knowledge. Everybody has an opinion on what the cause of something is. But no one has any proof, that the cause they claim, if causing the effect. Look at the crossbow argument. Can any of you prove that it has added to the decline in deer numbers? Because it has not. People scream that it will ruin the sport, but is has not.
Again I say; people need to learn the difference between opinion and fact.
Go to your local spot, find a bird in a field and reap him. Then repeat. Then repeat. You'll have 3 dead turkeys.
You people want studies from accredited institutions when all you need to do is talk to someone in SE Kansas or parts of Nebraska where the practice is most heavily utilized.
If you want empirical data instead of accusing us of using anecdotal references, go reap some damn turkeys; in fact, book a ticket to Nebraska and buy 3 tags. Don't take a call. If you have any skill at crawling and any hand eye coordination, you'll see the results for yourself.
"You People" lol. I will trust the opinion of someone with supporting data any day over someone who says "I see it all the time". Just think where we would be if we took the "because I saw it" attitude. We would have a Sasquatch or Nessie season and people complaining they couldn't find one so the biologists don't know nothing.
Agencies can't make scientific decisions on "because my brothers-sisters-cousins-friends-barber said so.
Don't argue with va Turk whatever. He has seen it all and knows it all. He kills 99 percent of the birds he calls to and has proof that for every bird that is shot fanning, 2 others die from shame! If you don't believe me about how amazingly great he is, just ask him.
Only 1/3 this week, hot shot. Farmer closed a gate that hasn't been closed for years and it saved that bird's life yesterday morning. Shoulda been 2/3 but shoulda doesn't count in turkey hunting.
Tomorrow starts a new week.... We'll see if we can keep the kill % above 50%.
Hogbiologist,
Aren't you an Arkansas guy? Please tell me what data the Arkansas DNR used to decide how to obliterate the turkey population? Did they need more studies to confirm what hunters around the state were saying for years before Arkansas became a has-been in the group of turkey states that once were? How many studies do you wildlife guys need before you actually listen to people that are in the field day, day out, year after year?
My brother is in South Dakota on Rosebud right now with a couple boys from Alabama that reap 75% of the turkeys they kill out west. He personally won't do it but watched 2 get reaped yesterday afternoon. 2 crawls with modified gobbler decoys and 2 dead birds at 5 yards.
It's not good for the resource, man. It's not good for the sport. If you're into quantifiable data, book a ticket and see it done. Go do it yourself. You're not qualified to speak to the skepticism on the matter unless you've been there, done it or seen it. It'll blow your mind.
Turkey populations are down in a lot of places. They are certainly down here in central PA. The thing is reaping is not legal here and I don't know anyone who has ever done it. So either reaping has nothing to do with the decline in this area and many other areas, or reaping and fanning are so incredibly effective and detrimental that it can affect the population in another state. Dang! Now that is a heck of a method! Of course some guys on here hate fanning but also try to make you believe that they could single handed kill every turkey in their area with their tactical calling and decision making. If they are such incredibly efficient killers, maybe they are the problem. Lol.
Quote from: Farmboy27 on May 07, 2016, 05:44:11 PM
Turkey populations are down in a lot of places. They are certainly down here in central PA. The thing is reaping is not legal here and I don't know anyone who has ever done it. So either reaping has nothing to do with the decline in this area and many other areas, or reaping and fanning are so incredibly effective and detrimental that it can affect the population in another state. Dang! Now that is a heck of a method! Of course some guys on here hate fanning but also try to make you believe that they could single handed kill every turkey in their area with their tactical calling and decision making. If they are such incredibly efficient killers, maybe they are the problem. Lol.
[/quote x2
Quote from: Farmboy27 on May 07, 2016, 03:40:17 PM
Quote from: HogBiologist on May 07, 2016, 02:56:02 PM
Quote from: VaTuRkStOmPeR on May 07, 2016, 12:33:23 PM
Quote from: HogBiologist on May 07, 2016, 10:25:15 AM
The on thing I am noticing in this whole conversation is that no one has any data to back up and validate their OPINION. No one can give a number of hunters who actually fan/reap, or their success ratios. Anyone who tries to base success ratios off hunting videos would be laughed out of town by anyone with any scientific knowledge. Everybody has an opinion on what the cause of something is. But no one has any proof, that the cause they claim, if causing the effect. Look at the crossbow argument. Can any of you prove that it has added to the decline in deer numbers? Because it has not. People scream that it will ruin the sport, but is has not.
Again I say; people need to learn the difference between opinion and fact.
Go to your local spot, find a bird in a field and reap him. Then repeat. Then repeat. You'll have 3 dead turkeys.
You people want studies from accredited institutions when all you need to do is talk to someone in SE Kansas or parts of Nebraska where the practice is most heavily utilized.
If you want empirical data instead of accusing us of using anecdotal references, go reap some damn turkeys; in fact, book a ticket to Nebraska and buy 3 tags. Don't take a call. If you have any skill at crawling and any hand eye coordination, you'll see the results for yourself.
"You People" lol. I will trust the opinion of someone with supporting data any day over someone who says "I see it all the time". Just think where we would be if we took the "because I saw it" attitude. We would have a Sasquatch or Nessie season and people complaining they couldn't find one so the biologists don't know nothing.
Agencies can't make scientific decisions on "because my brothers-sisters-cousins-friends-barber said so.
Don't argue with va Turk whatever. He has seen it all and knows it all. He kills 99 percent of the birds he calls to and has proof that for every bird that is shot fanning, 2 others die from shame! If you don't believe me about how amazingly great he is, just ask him.
x2
Quote from: Farmboy27 on May 07, 2016, 05:44:11 PM
Turkey populations are down in a lot of places. They are certainly down here in central PA. The thing is reaping is not legal here and I don't know anyone who has ever done it. So either reaping has nothing to do with the decline in this area and many other areas, or reaping and fanning are so incredibly effective and detrimental that it can affect the population in another state. Dang! Now that is a heck of a method! Of course some guys on here hate fanning but also try to make you believe that they could single handed kill every turkey in their area with their tactical calling and decision making. If they are such incredibly efficient killers, maybe they are the problem. Lol.
No one single handedly attributed declining turkey populations to reaping. In some areas of the country, it has provided significant assistance in depleting the numbers in conjunction with poor hatches and increases in hunting pressure.
The discussion is really about what reaping means when married with increased hunting pressure, poor hatches, and other higher percentage tactics. The discussion is about whether restraint is something we should be considering all of the dynamics influencing the future of wild turkey management.
What did Arkansas do to obliterate the turkey population??
Climate change?
I don't know how effective reaping is. I do know one thing from the videos I have suffered through, it is rather silly, and when it comes to turkey hunting, there is one thing I do not want to be, and that is fist pumping silly.
Quote from: owlhoot on May 07, 2016, 09:23:07 PM
What did Arkansas do to obliterate the turkey population??
Arkansas was formerly a premier turkey hunting state. It's now surrounded by premier turkey hunting states( Missouri,Kentucky, etc) but is not even close to their caliber.
What Arkansas did to obliterate the turkey population was essentially wait until it was in a state of disrepair to do anything.
Quote from: silvestris on May 07, 2016, 09:48:31 PM
Climate change?
I don't know how effective reaping is. I do know one thing from the videos I have suffered through, it is rather silly, and when it comes to turkey hunting, there is one thing I do not want to be, and that is fist pumping silly.
Watch some snow goose "stalks" with cow decoys. The reapers have a rival for silly. Lots of fist pumping there too.
All in all, if fanning, decoying, or whatever is so great at killing birds, states will need to adjust their tag limits to accommodate it. That said, I believe habit destruction, predators, and rainy hatch seasons have a MUCH BIGGER impact on populations than hunter success.
Quote from: VaTuRkStOmPeR on May 07, 2016, 05:21:45 PM
Quote from: Farmboy27 on May 07, 2016, 03:40:17 PM
Quote from: HogBiologist on May 07, 2016, 02:56:02 PM
Quote from: VaTuRkStOmPeR on May 07, 2016, 12:33:23 PM
Quote from: HogBiologist on May 07, 2016, 10:25:15 AM
The on thing I am noticing in this whole conversation is that no one has any data to back up and validate their OPINION. No one can give a number of hunters who actually fan/reap, or their success ratios. Anyone who tries to base success ratios off hunting videos would be laughed out of town by anyone with any scientific knowledge. Everybody has an opinion on what the cause of something is. But no one has any proof, that the cause they claim, if causing the effect. Look at the crossbow argument. Can any of you prove that it has added to the decline in deer numbers? Because it has not. People scream that it will ruin the sport, but is has not.
Again I say; people need to learn the difference between opinion and fact.
Go to your local spot, find a bird in a field and reap him. Then repeat. Then repeat. You'll have 3 dead turkeys.
You people want studies from accredited institutions when all you need to do is talk to someone in SE Kansas or parts of Nebraska where the practice is most heavily utilized.
If you want empirical data instead of accusing us of using anecdotal references, go reap some damn turkeys; in fact, book a ticket to Nebraska and buy 3 tags. Don't take a call. If you have any skill at crawling and any hand eye coordination, you'll see the results for yourself.
"You People" lol. I will trust the opinion of someone with supporting data any day over someone who says "I see it all the time". Just think where we would be if we took the "because I saw it" attitude. We would have a Sasquatch or Nessie season and people complaining they couldn't find one so the biologists don't know nothing.
Agencies can't make scientific decisions on "because my brothers-sisters-cousins-friends-barber said so.
Don't argue with va Turk whatever. He has seen it all and knows it all. He kills 99 percent of the birds he calls to and has proof that for every bird that is shot fanning, 2 others die from shame! If you don't believe me about how amazingly great he is, just ask him.
Only 1/3 this week, hot shot. Farmer closed a gate that hasn't been closed for years and it saved that bird's life yesterday morning.
The problem isn't the closed gate, the problem is you. Not being aware of the the terrain is what saved that birds life, not some gate......Sound familiar? LOL
Quote from: johnplesh on May 08, 2016, 12:35:28 AM
Quote from: VaTuRkStOmPeR on May 07, 2016, 05:21:45 PM
Quote from: Farmboy27 on May 07, 2016, 03:40:17 PM
Quote from: HogBiologist on May 07, 2016, 02:56:02 PM
Quote from: VaTuRkStOmPeR on May 07, 2016, 12:33:23 PM
Quote from: HogBiologist on May 07, 2016, 10:25:15 AM
The on thing I am noticing in this whole conversation is that no one has any data to back up and validate their OPINION. No one can give a number of hunters who actually fan/reap, or their success ratios. Anyone who tries to base success ratios off hunting videos would be laughed out of town by anyone with any scientific knowledge. Everybody has an opinion on what the cause of something is. But no one has any proof, that the cause they claim, if causing the effect. Look at the crossbow argument. Can any of you prove that it has added to the decline in deer numbers? Because it has not. People scream that it will ruin the sport, but is has not.
Again I say; people need to learn the difference between opinion and fact.
Go to your local spot, find a bird in a field and reap him. Then repeat. Then repeat. You'll have 3 dead turkeys.
You people want studies from accredited institutions when all you need to do is talk to someone in SE Kansas or parts of Nebraska where the practice is most heavily utilized.
If you want empirical data instead of accusing us of using anecdotal references, go reap some damn turkeys; in fact, book a ticket to Nebraska and buy 3 tags. Don't take a call. If you have any skill at crawling and any hand eye coordination, you'll see the results for yourself.
"You People" lol. I will trust the opinion of someone with supporting data any day over someone who says "I see it all the time". Just think where we would be if we took the "because I saw it" attitude. We would have a Sasquatch or Nessie season and people complaining they couldn't find one so the biologists don't know nothing.
Agencies can't make scientific decisions on "because my brothers-sisters-cousins-friends-barber said so.
Don't argue with va Turk whatever. He has seen it all and knows it all. He kills 99 percent of the birds he calls to and has proof that for every bird that is shot fanning, 2 others die from shame! If you don't believe me about how amazingly great he is, just ask him.
Only 1/3 this week, hot shot. Farmer closed a gate that hasn't been closed for years and it saved that bird's life yesterday morning.
The problem isn't the closed gate, the problem is you. Not being aware of the the terrain is what saved that birds life, not some gate......Sound familiar? LOL
Lol, the gate was closed at some point between Tuesday morning and Friday. Would've been hard to know that but technically you're right.
Quote from: VaTuRkStOmPeR on May 08, 2016, 04:32:09 AM
Quote from: johnplesh on May 08, 2016, 12:35:28 AM
Quote from: VaTuRkStOmPeR on May 07, 2016, 05:21:45 PM
Quote from: Farmboy27 on May 07, 2016, 03:40:17 PM
Quote from: HogBiologist on May 07, 2016, 02:56:02 PM
Quote from: VaTuRkStOmPeR on May 07, 2016, 12:33:23 PM
Quote from: HogBiologist on May 07, 2016, 10:25:15 AM
The on thing I am noticing in this whole conversation is that no one has any data to back up and validate their OPINION. No one can give a number of hunters who actually fan/reap, or their success ratios. Anyone who tries to base success ratios off hunting videos would be laughed out of town by anyone with any scientific knowledge. Everybody has an opinion on what the cause of something is. But no one has any proof, that the cause they claim, if causing the effect. Look at the crossbow argument. Can any of you prove that it has added to the decline in deer numbers? Because it has not. People scream that it will ruin the sport, but is has not.
Again I say; people need to learn the difference between opinion and fact.
Go to your local spot, find a bird in a field and reap him. Then repeat. Then repeat. You'll have 3 dead turkeys.
You people want studies from accredited institutions when all you need to do is talk to someone in SE Kansas or parts of Nebraska where the practice is most heavily utilized.
If you want empirical data instead of accusing us of using anecdotal references, go reap some damn turkeys; in fact, book a ticket to Nebraska and buy 3 tags. Don't take a call. If you have any skill at crawling and any hand eye coordination, you'll see the results for yourself.
"You People" lol. I will trust the opinion of someone with supporting data any day over someone who says "I see it all the time". Just think where we would be if we took the "because I saw it" attitude. We would have a Sasquatch or Nessie season and people complaining they couldn't find one so the biologists don't know nothing.
Agencies can't make scientific decisions on "because my brothers-sisters-cousins-friends-barber said so.
Don't argue with va Turk whatever. He has seen it all and knows it all. He kills 99 percent of the birds he calls to and has proof that for every bird that is shot fanning, 2 others die from shame! If you don't believe me about how amazingly great he is, just ask him.
Only 1/3 this week, hot shot. Farmer closed a gate that hasn't been closed for years and it saved that bird's life yesterday morning.
The problem isn't the closed gate, the problem is you. Not being aware of the the terrain is what saved that birds life, not some gate......Sound familiar? LOL
Lol, the gate was closed at some point between Tuesday morning and Friday. Would've been hard to know that but technically you're right.
Haha better luck next time
As a master woodsman and turkey killer with a 74.37% effective rate, I know that status of all gates prior to stepping foot on any property I hunt, every time. It is the difference between me and the typical "hunter" that is not willing to put in the effort to be a master woodsman like me. 09.4% of the time, I can tell you if a new branch has fallen from a tree, before I have even seen it. I could explain it to you guys, but without the vast amount of effort I put in, you would not understand.
Quote from: g8rvet on May 08, 2016, 08:58:07 AM
As a master woodsman and turkey killer with a 74.37% effective rate, I know that status of all gates prior to stepping foot on any property I hunt, every time. It is the difference between me and the typical "hunter" that is not willing to put in the effort to be a master woodsman like me. 09.4% of the time, I can tell you if a new branch has fallen from a tree, before I have even seen it. I could explain it to you guys, but without the vast amount of effort I put in, you would not understand.
what is this about the gates, keep the tame penned up turkeys penned . They are not good mixed with the wild ones.
This is my fan. There are no others like it. I love my fan.
(http://i251.photobucket.com/albums/gg299/TrackeySauresRex/image.jpg1_zpsegtbmswm.jpg) (http://s251.photobucket.com/user/TrackeySauresRex/media/image.jpg1_zpsegtbmswm.jpg.html)
And it helps keep the skeeters away!
:goofball:
Quote from: Bill Cooksey on May 06, 2016, 11:17:54 PM
Quote from: Farmboy27 on May 06, 2016, 07:21:28 PM
I wasn't gonna post on this topic again but what the heck. Everyone out there who considers fanning unethical because it's so highly effective is basing their opinion off videos and story's. A successful story or video sells much better than an unsuccessful one. I just saw a turkey video for sale the other day that said on the cover "22 successful hunts caught on film". How well do you think a video would sell if it said "22 unsuccessful hunts caught on film"? And if I didn't know any better I'd watch any turkey hunting video or show out there and say "wow, calling to a turkey is a sure way to kill him. These guys do it every time!!" Another thing to remember to all the ethical police out there is that we are hunting these birds during their most vulnerable time. Archibald Rutledge said in his writings that to kill a gobbler in breeding season is nothing. He considered it unethical to use the turkeys sexual weakness to call him in. Also, think what the internet has done to compound all this. It's the reason we are all discussing this. If fanning became popular in the pre-internet days, most people would have never cared. Think about if the internet was around when compound bows first started being used. Or portable climbing stands. After all, Saxton Pope and Art Young both thought it to be unethical to ambush an animal from a tree. People's ideas change with time and with them so do ethics. They always have. The differance is that today these changes are broadcast instantly, and those who oppose them can post there objections on the web instead of just doing their own thing and letting others do theirs.
Nope. My opinion is based on personal experience. I've seen a couple of hundred turkeys die in front of me. First time I fanned one was exciting. Second time, it just didn't feel right. Third time, I didn't pull the trigger. I pulled out the fan a few more times on bad birds just to see. It's simply too damn easy. I'm not advocating a nationwide ban, but I won't congratulate someone for killing a bird that way. Shootimg a bird of the limb is more challenging.
I wish I knew what I was doing wrong. I tried using a Turkey Fan once and when I showed it to the birds, they turned and went the other direction. Haven't tried it since.
Quote from: TrackeySauresRex on May 08, 2016, 09:59:44 AM
This is my fan. There are no others like it. I love my fan.
(http://i251.photobucket.com/albums/gg299/TrackeySauresRex/image.jpg1_zpsegtbmswm.jpg) (http://s251.photobucket.com/user/TrackeySauresRex/media/image.jpg1_zpsegtbmswm.jpg.html)
And it helps keep the skeeters away!
:goofball:
I bet you use one those "fancy" new-fangled magnum extension cords too. That's where I draw the ethical line... :TooFunny:
I guess this type of Fanning is popular in both the Dakotas AND Hollywood. She's a very nice person. Why would anyone want to outlaw her?...
(http://images2.fanpop.com/image/photos/13700000/D-F-dakota-fanning-13703447-1280-1024.jpg)
Quote from: stinkpickle on May 07, 2016, 10:53:15 PM
All in all, if fanning, decoying, or whatever is so great at killing birds, states will need to adjust their tag limits to accommodate it. That said, I believe habit destruction, predators, and rainy hatch seasons have a MUCH BIGGER impact on populations than hunter success.
I agree, the best thing one can do is predator hunt and trap.
Quote from: SteelerFan on May 08, 2016, 10:29:50 AM
Quote from: TrackeySauresRex on May 08, 2016, 09:59:44 AM
This is my fan. There are no others like it. I love my fan
I bet you use one those "fancy" new-fangled magnum extension cords too. That's where I draw the ethical line... :TooFunny:
:TooFunny:
I think all of you have got fanning on the brain...lol..funny
Bunch of new age hunters. My family was using these during the Xia Dynasty - 21st BC. Now that is tradition!
Whats all the fuss about? This looks harmless enough. All I need is an oasis and a cool drink!
Quote from: g8rvet on May 08, 2016, 05:41:41 PM
Bunch of new age hunters. My family was using these during the Xia Dynasty - 21st BC. Now that is tradition!
That's funny
Quote from: renegade19 on May 08, 2016, 08:58:30 PM
Whats all the fuss about? This looks harmless enough. All I need is an oasis and a cool drink!
Concur ... Well said :-)
Killed 5 birds in Alabama on public land with a diaphragm call and no decoys and wanted to go on my first Rio hunt so I spent my money drove 800 something miles. Hunted hard all of my first day and had a chance to reap a double my second morning and I took it, probably the most exciting turkey hunt I've ever had. Three of us went and we tagged out in two days mine were the only ones that were reaped, we had a good time and made memories that'll last forever. Alot of these negative comments remind me of the demotards that hate my 2nd amendment rights. Were all on the same team guys...