Way to go Alabama!

[Mossyguy]

Sure does suck for Mississippi public land though. Will be record sales of non-resident licenses next year.

I don't hunt public but I feel for those that do...unfortunately it doesn't matter to those who sit behind a desk watching the revenue pour in.

[Hevishot 13]

If anyone has the "scientific research" that has been done to bring about this change, I would love to see it. I'm talking about legitimate research proving how this shortened limit and later season will magically bring up turkey numbers. Not chuckle saying how he feels that this is a good idea. How about some research data that show turkey population numbers in areas vs. population numbers of areas that get hunted on 3/15. I would love to see that data since that would prove that the change is justified. Anyone have that available?

[Extendo Clip]

If anyone has the "scientific research" that has been done to bring about this change, I would love to see it. I'm talking about legitimate research proving how this shortened limit and later season will magically bring up turkey numbers. Not chuckle saying how he feels that this is a good idea. How about some research data that show turkey population numbers in areas vs. population numbers of areas that get hunted on 3/15. I would love to see that data since that would prove that the change is justified. Anyone have that available?

How do you propose doing that research without making the change at a meaningful scale?

[Hevishot 13]

If anyone has the "scientific research" that has been done to bring about this change, I would love to see it. I'm talking about legitimate research proving how this shortened limit and later season will magically bring up turkey numbers. Not chuckle saying how he feels that this is a good idea. How about some research data that show turkey population numbers in areas vs. population numbers of areas that get hunted on 3/15. I would love to see that data since that would prove that the change is justified. Anyone have that available?

How do you propose doing that research without making the change at a meaningful scale?

Two controlled properties with similar habitat, populations, and weather. Like maybe adjacent or adjoining large scale properties. No close enough that birds will wander from one property to the other, but close enough to keep the variables consistent between the two. I'm no scientist (like others claim are making these changes) but it seems like that's the only way to prove that the season start date and bag limit are contributing factors for the turkey decline.

[g8rvet]

I don't have a stake in the southeast's current situation but I know there's a portion of turkey hunters who seem to be the only fools on earth who don't believe that bag limit reductions and shortened seasons would help more turkeys survive each year.

When goose or duck numbers go down, USFWS reduce the limits and shorten the seasons.  When whitetail deer numbers go down, state agencies decrease the bag limits.  Wild turkey numbers were highest when we had considerably fewer hunters killing them.

There are too many examples of well managed private lands where harvest management is implemented with public land pieces immediately adjacent to them to dispute the efficacy of harvest reduction.  The better hunting is simply across the line on private.  It's not this great mystery as to why the higher quality hunting is on the private.  It's because they don't have every Tom, Dick and Harry filling their limits over there.  Clearly, part of the solution to the wild turkey's decline, particularly on public ground, is to simply reduce the number of turkeys Tom, Dick and Harry can kill on public lands

I have listened to multiple podcasts with popular turkey hunting figures who want to fight bag limit reductions/shortened seasons and I've read hundreds of comments on Facebook boards fighting against these ideas.  Meanwhile, these guys are all running around public lands filling their limits promoting public land as it continues to become depleted.....

The status quo is simply not working in most parts of the country and I'm glad to see AL taking steps in the right direction.  I have some friends who are stakeholders down there who lobbied hard for a 3 bird bag limit and a March 25th start date; they were optimistic that some change was implemented instead of maintaining the status quo but the fight is not over.

While I agree that population decline is a multi-dimensional issue, what's best for the wild turkey certainly isn't good for the turkey hunter right now.  Contrary to popular opinion, these are mutually exclusive things and there are some guys in this community who need to start to realize that.  I'll be in a southern state next week and I'll be happy to kill one turkey(instead of 2) and drive home; I think the turkeys would be a whole lot better off if more people did the same.

Nail, meet head.  Good post.  And furthering that point is that hunter induced mortality is a small drop in the bucket on migrating ducks and geese.  The same is not true for turkey at all.  Way higher hunter mortality in the male turkey population.  Way higher.

I practice what I preach on Redfish too-only kept one in the two days most times, sometimes none.  I don't keep ANY spotted seatrout over 20" unless gut hooked (one over 20 is legal).

Certainly in the Spring, and perhaps for the entire year if total mortality were examined, the main predator for adult male wild turkeys walks on two legs. I`ve been satisfied with a self imposed limit of one bird/season here in Georgia.

Good point.  I just started fall hunting again (legal in Florida) and if I kill a Gobbler in the fall, I will only kill one in the spring. 

[g8rvet]

If anyone has the "scientific research" that has been done to bring about this change, I would love to see it. I'm talking about legitimate research proving how this shortened limit and later season will magically bring up turkey numbers. Not chuckle saying how he feels that this is a good idea. How about some research data that show turkey population numbers in areas vs. population numbers of areas that get hunted on 3/15. I would love to see that data since that would prove that the change is justified. Anyone have that available?

Good points as well. In Florida we just went through this in our zone for redfish.  They proposed lowering again to one per day.  Guides started losing their minds.  Wanted data to prove they needed to lower the limit.  Many of us pointed out that there was no data that led to them increasing our limit to 2 (rest of state was one).  Sometimes, season dates and bag limits are set on a "best guess" situation.  I don't like that either though.  Probably the only way to know would be to change it.  But then if the MS dates were like those in nearby states, the only reason for lesser kills would be lesser OOS hunters. 

To someone that asked for more money for habitat, I would ask the Feds to use the Pittman Robertson money correctly.  We are already paying!  I know I don't trust them to spend it wisely. 

[Neill_Prater]

What I don't get is insisting on a 45 day season. Why not just end on April 30?

Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk

[3bailey3]

I think the University of Auburn has been conducting a study of later dates for a few years now, i think Ms dept of wildlife has had later start dates on a few WMA's  for a few years now , should be able to see the results!

[3bailey3]

and Auburn study might be the cause of the Al. changes.

[Hevishot 13]

The only study auburn has done is delaying the season by a week on the wma's and recording how many birds were taken. Not a very good study to delay the season on public land and record the results. We are talking about an astronomical Of hunting pressure on these places. Those studies wouldn't show much.

[3chunter]

The decoys will do 10 times more than any date or limit decrease.   Need that outside the box thinking.  Open season on predators year round any and all means necessary.  That will do more than anything. Do it.

[Kyle_Ott]

If anyone has the "scientific research" that has been done to bring about this change, I would love to see it. I'm talking about legitimate research proving how this shortened limit and later season will magically bring up turkey numbers. Not chuckle saying how he feels that this is a good idea. How about some research data that show turkey population numbers in areas vs. population numbers of areas that get hunted on 3/15. I would love to see that data since that would prove that the change is justified. Anyone have that available?

I'm a little confused how anyone could question if decreasing the number of animals killed would contribute to a higher quality hunting experience through higher population?  Haven't modern conservation practices validated its an effective tactic with virtually every species regulated by game laws?

To address the question regarding studies, MS jakes are protected because there was a study conducted indicating a jake had a 94% chance of making it to its second year of life.  It isn't exactly what you're asking for but it is a quality example of harvest management leading to a higher number of gobblers in the population. 

I am 100% for shooting less turkeys to ensure there are more turkeys gobbling each year on public and private lands across the US. 

I was terrible at turkey hunting for a long time and the only reason I continued to hunt was because I continually heard turkeys gobble.  Gobbling turkeys continued to allure me back despite the considerable odds stacked against me as a young boy with no mentor.  But I kept going back to the woods, and I kept going back and they kept gobbling.  Sometimes 3 of them; sometimes 15 of them.  But I almost always heard gobbling despite rarely seeing one and it allowed me to develop from a terrible turkey hunter into a decent one today. 

I cannot imagine being a kid on some of the public land around the United States where I am walking 6-12 miles per day to find a bird.  I cannot imagine being a new hunter going turkey hunting on public ground for consecutive days without hearing a gobble.  Public land in many places around the US will never be as good as private but the number of gobbling turkeys heard on many public lands around the country is considerably fewer and the pressure is now considerably higher.

Killing more turkeys is not the answer.  This shouldn't even need to debated among intelligent people.  We need more people to get on board with killing fewer.  It doesn't mean the turkey hunting lifestyle can't continue to thrive.  It just means you don't go out of state on public land and fill your damn limit.  It means you think about the consequences of killing on a macro level and you do less of it to ensure these birds and a quality hunting experience is ensured in the future. 

[roberthyman14]

Ok hear me out.  Decoys don't matter to me, kinda like people hunting deer over corn feeders.  Corn is for women, children and boys that don't know how.  If you can't figure out how to kill a turkey without a decoy then you need to give up.  Start date of season still doesn't matter at all if, all states don't go to a mandatory tag system.  Because, who knows how many birds are being killed.  If everyone is worried about out of state hunters, let's try this.   For example: Mississippi gonna get ha.mered next season by folks cause Bama is opening later.  What if Mississippi starts same date as always for residents but is pushed back a couple weeks for non residents.  Also just like fish: when numbers are low the states say you can't keep them during spawning season, or in times that they are easily harvested.  Example in my part of Florida you can't keep a speckled trout in February. Not because of spawning but when it gets cold they congregate in deep holes in the river.  Find the hole and everybody gets a limit for a few days until they are all gone.   So many its time for no more spring turkey season when birds are the most vulnerable.

Prostaff member for Old Crow Custom Calls

[GobbleNut]

Here's another thought worthy of consideration in the debate over hunting pressure.  Much of the concern for nonresident state-hopping appears to be a function of varying starting dates in the different states. If the southern tier of states would consult with each other and agree to start their hunts all at the same time, it would solve some of the problems being discussed here. 

[Paulmyr]

If anyone has the "scientific research" that has been done to bring about this change, I would love to see it. I'm talking about legitimate research proving how this shortened limit and later season will magically bring up turkey numbers. Not chuckle saying how he feels that this is a good idea. How about some research data that show turkey population numbers in areas vs. population numbers of areas that get hunted on 3/15. I would love to see that data since that would prove that the change is justified. Anyone have that available?

The scientific data is there supporting later starting dates. Not comparison studies that you desire but studies of breeding habits and how hunting pressure effects recruitment.

With advancements in GPS tracking biologist have been able to gain extensive valuable info on the habits of these birds. In the past they used to have to manually track these birds with radio collars and receivers. Now all they have to do is show up, connect to the transmitter, and download the data. The amount of data they gather dwarfs radio collar/ receiver data they collected in the past.

These studies are showing that turkeys breed in an expanded/exploded Lek type system similar to sharptail grouse/prairie chicken Leks where all the birds in an area show up to these Leks to breed. Turkeys are the same but on an expanded level. These Leks allow hens to choose the dominant toms to breed with.

What studies are showing, contrary to popular belief, is when a hen chooses a dominant Tom to breed with its not a decision made on the spur of the moment. The future of the species depends on it. Its not a decision she takes lightly. When these dominant toms are taken out of the population too early in the breeding cycle it delays/prolongs the breeding cycle. Hens don't just breed with next available Tom. She has to go through  the whole process of selecting a dominant Tom again. The decision might take a day it might take 2 weeks or more depending on the social structure of the toms in the area.
What they are finding also is that hens don't just breed willy nilly. They breed according to their pecking order. The Dominant hen breeds 1st. This might take a day or 2 even more. When she's done the second in line takes her turn and so on.
You might say "so what at least the hens are getting bred".

Well  they are also finding turkeys use a saturation type nesting system. Most hens in an area will nest and hatch their polts during short period of time. Saturating the landscape with predator food. Eating is good but only for a short period of time.
Delaying the breeding by taking dominant toms out of the population prolongs the availability of these polts and vulnerable hens to predators allowing for more to be taken.

Findings also show polts that hatch later in the breeding cycle are less likely to survive their 1st year simply because they are just not big enough.

There is scientific data that supports later starting dates.
It's not the end all be all solution to falling turkey numbers but it is one of the factors we can control.