Oklahoma regulation changes proposal

[blake_08]

Received an email from the ODWC that contained a survey about some proposed changes. Anyone who hunts Oklahoma should have gotten the survey, but if not I'm sure it's on their website. Basically it's proposing to shift the statewide season by 10 days (later), go from 3 tom limit to 2 toms, and a few other changes. If you hunt Oklahoma or think you might in the future, i encourage you to voice your opinion. There's also a section you can type additional comments in to the survey.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[deerhunt1988]

And another state jumps on the bandwagon.

Just remember, there is no scientific evidence that shifting seasons to later starting dates will have an effect on turkey populations. At this point it is theory. And reducing the bag limit by 1 bird will not have a significant impact on overall population levels across the landscape.

If these changes had significant impacts, why hasn't Arkansas made a huge rebound? They've had similar changes in place for quite a while now.

This a dangerous path many states are taking. Now if the changes were 100% backed by peer-reviewed science, I wouldn't be so wary.

The only way to really make a difference is to manage habitat and/or predators. It all boils down to nest success and recruitment.

As a wildlife professional, it somewhat blows my mind at some of the regulation changes we are seeing at such a fast pace. What if some of this theory is wrong? We've taken away opportunity by jumping the gun. Once hunting opportunity is taken away, don't expect to get it back!

[Sanders153]

Here in Eastern Oklahoma, we are overrun with hogs, coyotes, and raccoons. All three of these will hurt turkey numbers is left unchecked I believe. I wish the state of Oklahoma would put a priority on curtailing some of their numbers back. Surely it would help out birds some

[dah]

 I just did the survey and laid it on them . Our department has lacked vision for a long time unless it swims or its venison . They hang their degrees on the wall and dont think they come out of the office . I will give some of the points I made .
1 . They have not done any research , none that I know of . How do you treat an illness if you dont identify the disease .
2. Late controlled burns in several wma's , the woods smoking coming in to set up camp .
3. They have been starting later in the south east a long time but have not seen bird numbers increase .
4.Horse back riding up to and right after season , and yes even into the set up during season all though not suppose to .
5. No law enforcement , have hunted a lot of wma's a long time and only seen a warden in one of them .
6. Allowed harvesting bearded hens in spring , fall , some areas either sex and hens with bow .
7. Later start date to do battle with snakes , ticks , poison ivy and heat , not to mention tornadoes .
8. I  know game wardens saying they wont listen to them and other department personnel say they they try to talk to the biologist but no good .
9. No testing of blood samples from harvested birds .
I am not opposed to doing what is right for the birds , we owe them that , to be good stewards . I do expect decisions to be made after research , fact based and sound logic . Our department is not taxpayer funded , they are charged with a great responsibility and I expect them to operate at a very high level . The department years ago was something to be proud of , and they didnt have degrees .

[Sanders153]

I just did the survey and laid it on them . Our department has lacked vision for a long time unless it swims or its venison . They hang their degrees on the wall and dont think they come out of the office . I will give some of the points I made .
1 . They have not done any research , none that I know of . How do you treat an illness if you dont identify the disease .
2. Late controlled burns in several wma's , the woods smoking coming in to set up camp .
3. They have been starting later in the south east a long time but have not seen bird numbers increase .
4.Horse back riding up to and right after season , and yes even into the set up during season all though not suppose to .
5. No law enforcement , have hunted a lot of wma's a long time and only seen a warden in one of them .
6. Allowed harvesting bearded hens in spring , fall , some areas either sex and hens with bow .
7. Later start date to do battle with snakes , ticks , poison ivy and heat , not to mention tornadoes .
8. I  know game wardens saying they wont listen to them and other department personnel say they they try to talk to the biologist but no good .
9. No testing of blood samples from harvested birds .
I am not opposed to doing what is right for the birds , we owe them that , to be good stewards . I do expect decisions to be made after research , fact based and sound logic . Our department is not taxpayer funded , they are charged with a great responsibility and I expect them to operate at a very high level . The department years ago was something to be proud of , and they didnt have degrees .

Amen. The department has done near nothing for our birds for years. Why? You put it perfectly, because they are not deer of fish. That's all who ever is running things seems to care about and our birds have suffering greatly. The last Oklahoma longbeard is shot was 2007. After that, they were going downhill way more. Oklahoma used to be packed with turkeys before then. I fear for them now unless something changes

[TonyTurk]

I got the survey too.  It sounds to me like the department already has their mind made up regarding these changes.  I don't mind pushing the season back by 10 days, if it helps.  But is that really going to help?  Like dah said, it doesn't seem to have helped in the SE counties. 

[Sanders153]

I honestly wish they would shut all turkey season down a few years, and dedicate that time to doing whatever it took to start bringing them back

[silvestris]

The two main factors affecting turkey hunting are habitat degradation and hunter recruitment. 

[Sir-diealot]

I do plan to hunt OK in the future after all the covid stuff lifts. I do not know if moving the dates will make a difference but I am not opposed to 1 less male bird there or here in NY and am totally for ending the taking of hens all together in all states, killing a hen is killing the future and makes no sense to me at all.


Sent from my S30U+ using Tapatalk

[blake_08]

I honestly wish they would shut all turkey season down a few years, and dedicate that time to doing whatever it took to start bringing them back

I know they would never go for it because of revenue loss, but that would probably be of some help honestly. Also, I don't know why they don't do more to encourage trapping and predator control. I'm not saying monetize anything for an incentive, but public awareness campaigns on trapping or the benefits of predator control would only be a few hours of a department employees time. I feel like they could be doing a lot more than what they're doing, other than just making some regulation changes. I hope they figure something out pretty quickly.

By the way, I have lived in SE Oklahoma all of my life. Best I can recall, they started opening our season later than the rest of the state in 2007 or 2008 and in the time since, I have not noticed any significant increase in our population. Only an increase in hunting pressure and hunting before the opener. Also, I have never been checked by a game warden in any SE counties while turkey hunting, and I take a lot of time off of work and hunt almost every morning of our season. Even after I kill a bird, I hunt with family and friends. I got checked one time in NW Oklahoma a few years ago, and that is the only time I've ever been checked in about 20 years of turkey hunting in Oklahoma. Our department has a lot of room for improvement.

[WV Flopper]

 I would like to add.

I was in Oklahoma this year for the opener, thank you Oklahoma for the opportunity!

Never stepping foot in Oklahoma before I had 3 days scouting built into my hunt, before the 6th. On day one of scouting I ran into a Biologist, In The Field. In 32 years of hunting WV this has never happened to me! Also seen a GW first day of season.

We had a good chat. Very nice man, that seemed dedicated to his career. I asked the question of population. It's not just Oklahoma, it's the vast majority of the country that is experiencing this decline.

He and I had some very similar view points, and none of his I could disagree with, none.

He also told me they were looking at some rule changes, and some of them were up for restructure. He ran through a list of them.

One of these changes was to the land itself. In Western Oklahoma you are allowed one Tom per WMA/County. This rule is a speed bump for hunters. They were looking to make regions in the state, which may contain several WMA's/Counties. With the same one Tom rule. Bigger speed bump.

This Biologist agreed that the taking of Tom's had no adverse effects on the population. As long as done within moderation of the Local population.  The rule of one Tom per WMA/County is for us, the hunter. To help spread the resource to multiple hunters, not just one guy tagging out in one little area. I liked the rule myself.

Predators... That is such a big, broad discussion. Let me put it my terms because that's all I know.
Remember back when Europe's economy went to crap? Then China? Then add in the Covid on the end of that. You have a string now of 6-7 years of poor to nothing fur prices. It's not worth it to trap, or it is not worth nearly what is was to trap. That has taking thousands of trappers out of the field country wide. Of those thousand most of them are hobby trappers like myself, but some were professionals as well.

Do a little research and you can see the difference in the last ten years of what has been available at international fur auctions. This has added, kept, a lot of predators in the field. These numbers are represented by thousands of trappers. Do you think a state field staff of 50-100 people can make up the difference? No, they can not, and most states do not have nearly that many boots on the ground anyway!

  One other point I found interesting from the conversation I had with the Biologist. Hunting pressure. These people are aware of hunting pressure, not just who is in the field today, but 10 years ago as well. He sees an uptick in Non Res hunters and the amount of time spent in the field. This does effect population. Some of these original rules were not put in place to allow for a sustained pressure like has been seen in the last few years.

Lastly, I will throw out, weather. No state can control this. This is a huge portion of poult survival. What can we do about it?

During my scouting I ran a lot of Oklahoma's reported numbers, population, harvest reports, WMA harvest, county harvest, poult survival. Now, add in a number for mortality, poaching/unreported harvests. The numbers do not add up. The population is not self sustaining in Oklahoma at present.

I offered my thoughts of this to the Biologist. He gave me a funny look. I would bet a dollar he has put some time in those numbers since I brought it up to him in that manner.

I expect, we as hunters, if we continue to hunt the King of Spring  will all endure some upcoming changes to help stabilize the populations we have across the country.


While in Oklahoma I seen 7 hens and 9 male turkeys. This was covering two different WMA areas, two different counties. 6 days of boots on the ground and a few miles of scouting. 7 hens, 9 males, anyone see a problem with this other than me?

[AndyN]

And another state jumps on the bandwagon.

Just remember, there is no scientific evidence that shifting seasons to later starting dates will have an effect on turkey populations. At this point it is theory. And reducing the bag limit by 1 bird will not have a significant impact on overall population levels across the landscape.

If these changes had significant impacts, why hasn't Arkansas made a huge rebound? They've had similar changes in place for quite a while now.

This a dangerous path many states are taking. Now if the changes were 100% backed by peer-reviewed science, I wouldn't be so wary.

The only way to really make a difference is to manage habitat and/or predators. It all boils down to nest success and recruitment.

As a wildlife professional, it somewhat blows my mind at some of the regulation changes we are seeing at such a fast pace. What if some of this theory is wrong? We've taken away opportunity by jumping the gun. Once hunting opportunity is taken away, don't expect to get it back!

How is reducing tag numbers therefore spreading out the resource to more people a dangerous path? By increasing individual hunter success you keep people buying tags. If they do nothing things will stay how they are and people will stop coming. Less tags available=less hunter hours in the field bumping hens off of nests that they likely won't come back to unless they're far along in incubation. Later season dates means the hens will be further along in incubation and are more likely to return to a nest. I'm sure many other southern states would love to make the move to lower tag numbers to increase success but everyone is too greedy needing to shoot 3+ in a single state and they don't want to deal with the pushback.

[Gooserbat]

Well I probably have as much vested interest in the Oklahoma turkey season as anyone else.  I talk to a lot of people who are in the field besides game wardens and biologist.  Hunters, ranchers and outfitters to name some.  All these and some wardens and biologist will tell you when the hogs moved in the turkeys moved out. I don't know what percentage of the problem hogs are but I know they are a part of the problem.

There are factors that can't be controlled, weather, wildfire not controlled burning, and microbes aka disease. I do believe that predator numbers are through the roof, both fur bearers and hogs.  I also think farming practices are not helping.  Less herbicides more broadleaf plants and that translates to healthy poults. 

I agree with above post that blood samples should be taken by biologist on WMAs and birds killed on a WMA should physical be checked in at headquarters for samples to be taken. 

Here in NE Oklahoma I'm of the opinion that the poultry industry is a part of the problem but that's a financial storm if you ever mention Tyson and negative effects on wildlife.  No one is going to touch it. 

How do we fix it?  I don't know but I am at least glad the department is doing something.   I'd start with a zero hen harvest, and no Jakes except for youth tags.  No biological reason not to shoot Jakes other than it gives another year for a bird to mature and breed the next spring.  The season date change is fine by me.

[Gentry]

The Louisiana wildlife professionals made the decision to move our opener back a few years ago and in my opinion it has helped. My understanding is that it allows more hens to be bred simple as that. I have seen without a doubt more turkey numbers on most places that I hunt. Coincidence? Maybe.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[deerhunt1988]

And another state jumps on the bandwagon.

Just remember, there is no scientific evidence that shifting seasons to later starting dates will have an effect on turkey populations. At this point it is theory. And reducing the bag limit by 1 bird will not have a significant impact on overall population levels across the landscape.

If these changes had significant impacts, why hasn't Arkansas made a huge rebound? They've had similar changes in place for quite a while now.

This a dangerous path many states are taking. Now if the changes were 100% backed by peer-reviewed science, I wouldn't be so wary.

The only way to really make a difference is to manage habitat and/or predators. It all boils down to nest success and recruitment.

As a wildlife professional, it somewhat blows my mind at some of the regulation changes we are seeing at such a fast pace. What if some of this theory is wrong? We've taken away opportunity by jumping the gun. Once hunting opportunity is taken away, don't expect to get it back!

How is reducing tag numbers therefore spreading out the resource to more people a dangerous path? By increasing individual hunter success you keep people buying tags. If they do nothing things will stay how they are and people will stop coming. Less tags available=less hunter hours in the field bumping hens off of nests that they likely won't come back to unless they're far along in incubation. Later season dates means the hens will be further along in incubation and are more likely to return to a nest. I'm sure many other southern states would love to make the move to lower tag numbers to increase success but everyone is too greedy needing to shoot 3+ in a single state and they don't want to deal with the pushback.

Well, if you support hunting moving a toward a more Democratic/Liberal approach, I don't guess there is a thing wrong with "spreading the wealth". Such a small percentage of hunters actually kill 3 birds in states that allow it, that it really has no significant effect on the overall population. Now it could have an effect on smaller localized areas. Or in areas where there aren't many turkey to begin with.

Personally, I think the hunters who have spent the time to craft their skill and become sure enough good turkey hunters, shouldn't have their opportunities reduced so "You get a bird! You get a bird! EVERYBODY GETS A BIRD!" But that seems to be the way our nation is going in everything. Now even turkey hunting.

If the state agencies are TRULY concerned birds aren't getting bred and want to make a difference...Ban male decoys and fanning. Especially in an open environment like western Oklahoma. Now THAT will make a difference! And I thought we'd never see a state agency do that in today's current environment...But i'll be danged, Alabama actually did it!

As far as hunters buying tags...If that turkey tag money was earmarked for TURKEY management or for purchasing more public lands...I'd be more concerned with declining turkey tag sales. But the truth is that license money is more than likely put in a 'Wildlife General Fund' where it is liable to spent wherever. And one key thing to remember is that the breadwinner is white-tailed deer, not turkey.

There is no peer-reviewed scientific research on hunters bumping hens off nest and hens not returning. That is why more states are are going to all-day hunting. There is research showing that early openers lead to increased hen mortality (hunters not ID'ing their target, hens getting caught in crossfire, etc.).

One of the biggest saviors to turkey hunting, especially public lands, would be to outlaw filming on public lands and do away with social media. But we know that is never going to happen. So in the meantime we get to deal with newer hunters introduced to the sport through social media, whining because they aren't good enough to kill their turkey and get their 'likes and subscribes'. And good turkey hunters will be punished through reduced opportunities.