Insights from a Southern Turkey Hunters perspective

[Jstocks]

Some of the recent threads got me to thinking, one size usually doesn't work well with all. I am implying that there basically is not necessarily a one way method to fix the population decline/hunting pressure issues that exist with the current state of the union as far as turkeys seasons and limits go.

In my opinion, states need to find a way to take care of their resident hunters. However, this comes at a cost and is hard to get buy the Money managers for those departments, especially when significant license sales come from NR hunters.

Mississippi is in a hard spot. All the surrounding states have pushed back their seasons, and this has created an influx of pressure from NR and even Resident hunters. Yes, "resident" hunters too.

I think theres a lot of folks on here who may not understand the dynamic associated with southern states, leases, and hunting access. Let me explain.....there's a lot of Mississippi residents that have leases or are members of leases in Alabama. The turkey season used to align closely, thus those folks typically hunted Alabama for the most part because that is where their lease was located. Forward to our current status: hunter has a lease in Alabama, but season doesn't open til the end of March. Previously this guy would hunt Alabama, but now, he doesn't want to wait that long to hunt. Figures he'll hunt xyz national forest or management area, even put in for some of the draws, etc..... this guy is added pressure that didn't exist before as a resident.
The adds nonresident pressure from the guys in Alabama, follow the same scenario above but kind of in reverse....tons of Alabama guys now joining the army of Arkansas and Louisiana folks that already flooded the state.

To top it off, now you will have what hunters were spread out between Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi.....all pretty much were relinquished to either wait for a later opening, or go to Mississippi.

The money aspect in the decision making is always there. The private timber industry and the wildlife management folks in the state departments in the southern states are closely tied together. The money is flowing like never before to the private timber industry from hunting leases. They can pretty much demand whatever price per acre they want and hunting clubs are forever to pay and increase dues or increase hunter numbers to keep dues low. This is decreasing quality hunting experiences, as well as increasing public land pressure because the guys who can't afford their private lease anymore are now being replaced by NR hunters from Alabama and other states (in Ms case) and they are displaced back out to the public areas. They aren't going to quit hunting, they just hunt public now. What I'm saying is the timber industry guys eating dinner with the forestry guys at their fancy camps and leases don't see a problem and life is good for them cause money is flowing and they ain't seeing no added pressure to their place cause they control it. For the rest of us, they don't really care. The "wildlife guys" hang in these circles mostly. Paid state officials don't hunt the same properties as the general public most of the time. They actually have far greater access due to the inner circles they run in most of the time.

These statements do not mean these are bad guys. There's some of you on here who fit the descriptions and I'm in no way inferring that a man shouldn't take advantage of whatever situations occur that give him an edge through his professional networks. We all do it. For some of the guys, that's one of the perks. All I'm saying is, perspective is reality. The reality most of the folks who make the decisions about the seasons and laws, aren't necessarily the same realities the rest of us deal with on a more common basis.

Lots of ramblings here, just some thoughts on "paper" so to speak.

[Sixes]

I am a true Georgia native with family roots back to the early 1800s in my area. I say that because our state now has more move ins than natives, especially in my area, and I understand the southern way of hunting clubs, leases, etc. I am 51 and joined my first paid club when I turned 18, before that, I was allowed to hunt on Dad's membership. A lot of other areas do not understand leasing and private lands, we have a fair amount of public land, but it is not just everywhere.  Our state has grown so much, land is getting harder to find and much more expensive to lease.

What I would really like to see here with the influx of the traveling hunter is a separation of big game licenses.  If you want to hunt deer, buy a NR deer permit; turkeys, buy a turkey license; bears, same and hogs.

HUnters are realizing what a deal our state offers . For around $325, hunters can kill 12 deer (2 bucks only), 3 gobblers, 2 bears and unlimited hogs.  And what some hunters do is buy a license either mid turkey or deer and manage to basically get  twice those limits since our licenses run for a year. Plus, you can get bonus deer tags for various WMA hunts.

Ex: Buy a license 11/20, kill your 12 deer (and 2 bears) by January, 3 turkeys in spring and then still be able to kill 12 more deer and 2 more bears by 11/19 the next year. I've discussed with the DNR but they same the number of hunters doing that is not enough to hurt the population, but i view it as ethics. Same with turkeys, if you bought a license in mid April, killed 3 before May 15th, then you could kill 3 more before mid April the following year.


I wish GA would jack the price up or charge a fee for each species. Or better yet, increase the fees and lower the limit for NRs. 

I'm one of the few that does not want further hunter recruitment and wish hunter numbers would fall tremendously.  The ones pushing for recruitment are the same ones taking money from hunters by promoting their groups.

[wchadw]

Some of the recent threads got me to thinking, one size usually doesn't work well with all. I am implying that there basically is not necessarily a one way method to fix the population decline/hunting pressure issues that exist with the current state of the union as far as turkeys seasons and limits go.

In my opinion, states need to find a way to take care of their resident hunters. However, this comes at a cost and is hard to get buy the Money managers for those departments, especially when significant license sales come from NR hunters.

Mississippi is in a hard spot. All the surrounding states have pushed back their seasons, and this has created an influx of pressure from NR and even Resident hunters. Yes, "resident" hunters too.

I think theres a lot of folks on here who may not understand the dynamic associated with southern states, leases, and hunting access. Let me explain.....there's a lot of Mississippi residents that have leases or are members of leases in Alabama. The turkey season used to align closely, thus those folks typically hunted Alabama for the most part because that is where their lease was located. Forward to our current status: hunter has a lease in Alabama, but season doesn't open til the end of March. Previously this guy would hunt Alabama, but now, he doesn't want to wait that long to hunt. Figures he'll hunt xyz national forest or management area, even put in for some of the draws, etc..... this guy is added pressure that didn't exist before as a resident.
The adds nonresident pressure from the guys in Alabama, follow the same scenario above but kind of in reverse....tons of Alabama guys now joining the army of Arkansas and Louisiana folks that already flooded the state.

To top it off, now you will have what hunters were spread out between Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi.....all pretty much were relinquished to either wait for a later opening, or go to Mississippi.

The money aspect in the decision making is always there. The private timber industry and the wildlife management folks in the state departments in the southern states are closely tied together. The money is flowing like never before to the private timber industry from hunting leases. They can pretty much demand whatever price per acre they want and hunting clubs are forever to pay and increase dues or increase hunter numbers to keep dues low. This is decreasing quality hunting experiences, as well as increasing public land pressure because the guys who can't afford their private lease anymore are now being replaced by NR hunters from Alabama and other states (in Ms case) and they are displaced back out to the public areas. They aren't going to quit hunting, they just hunt public now. What I'm saying is the timber industry guys eating dinner with the forestry guys at their fancy camps and leases don't see a problem and life is good for them cause money is flowing and they ain't seeing no added pressure to their place cause they control it. For the rest of us, they don't really care. The "wildlife guys" hang in these circles mostly. Paid state officials don't hunt the same properties as the general public most of the time. They actually have far greater access due to the inner circles they run in most of the time.

These statements do not mean these are bad guys. There's some of you on here who fit the descriptions and I'm in no way inferring that a man shouldn't take advantage of whatever situations occur that give him an edge through his professional networks. We all do it. For some of the guys, that's one of the perks. All I'm saying is, perspective is reality. The reality most of the folks who make the decisions about the seasons and laws, aren't necessarily the same realities the rest of us deal with on a more common basis.

Lots of ramblings here, just some thoughts on "paper" so to speak.

I'm in MS and I agree. The msdwfp should have changed the season couple years back when surrounding states did. Out of state hunting pressure on public land has skyrocketed since MS is first to open. Something needed to be done.
My opinion is MS should push the season back at least 2 weeks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sasquatch1]

I am a true Georgia native with family roots back to the early 1800s in my area. I say that because our state now has more move ins than natives, especially in my area, and I understand the southern way of hunting clubs, leases, etc. I am 51 and joined my first paid club when I turned 18, before that, I was allowed to hunt on Dad's membership. A lot of other areas do not understand leasing and private lands, we have a fair amount of public land, but it is not just everywhere.  Our state has grown so much, land is getting harder to find and much more expensive to lease.

What I would really like to see here with the influx of the traveling hunter is a separation of big game licenses.  If you want to hunt deer, buy a NR deer permit; turkeys, buy a turkey license; bears, same and hogs.

HUnters are realizing what a deal our state offers . For around $325, hunters can kill 12 deer (2 bucks only), 3 gobblers, 2 bears and unlimited hogs.  And what some hunters do is buy a license either mid turkey or deer and manage to basically get  twice those limits since our licenses run for a year. Plus, you can get bonus deer tags for various WMA hunts.

Ex: Buy a license 11/20, kill your 12 deer (and 2 bears) by January, 3 turkeys in spring and then still be able to kill 12 more deer and 2 more bears by 11/19 the next year. I've discussed with the DNR but they same the number of hunters doing that is not enough to hurt the population, but i view it as ethics. Same with turkeys, if you bought a license in mid April, killed 3 before May 15th, then you could kill 3 more before mid April the following year.


I wish GA would jack the price up or charge a fee for each species. Or better yet, increase the fees and lower the limit for NRs. 

I'm one of the few that does not want further hunter recruitment and wish hunter numbers would fall tremendously.  The ones pushing for recruitment are the same ones taking money from hunters by promoting their groups.

Hard for any numbers to fall. Percent of population maybe, but with the compounding growth of the overall nation's population it's near impossible.

Land is limited and rapidly destroyed for our footprint.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Paulmyr]

I am a true Georgia native with family roots back to the early 1800s in my area. I say that because our state now has more move ins than natives, especially in my area, and I understand the southern way of hunting clubs, leases, etc. I am 51 and joined my first paid club when I turned 18, before that, I was allowed to hunt on Dad's membership. A lot of other areas do not understand leasing and private lands, we have a fair amount of public land, but it is not just everywhere.  Our state has grown so much, land is getting harder to find and much more expensive to lease.

What I would really like to see here with the influx of the traveling hunter is a separation of big game licenses.  If you want to hunt deer, buy a NR deer permit; turkeys, buy a turkey license; bears, same and hogs.

HUnters are realizing what a deal our state offers . For around $325, hunters can kill 12 deer (2 bucks only), 3 gobblers, 2 bears and unlimited hogs.  And what some hunters do is buy a license either mid turkey or deer and manage to basically get  twice those limits since our licenses run for a year. Plus, you can get bonus deer tags for various WMA hunts.

Ex: Buy a license 11/20, kill your 12 deer (and 2 bears) by January, 3 turkeys in spring and then still be able to kill 12 more deer and 2 more bears by 11/19 the next year. I've discussed with the DNR but they same the number of hunters doing that is not enough to hurt the population, but i view it as ethics. Same with turkeys, if you bought a license in mid April, killed 3 before May 15th, then you could kill 3 more before mid April the following year.


I wish GA would jack the price up or charge a fee for each species. Or better yet, increase the fees and lower the limit for NRs. 

I'm one of the few that does not want further hunter recruitment and wish hunter numbers would fall tremendously.  The ones pushing for recruitment are the same ones taking money from hunters by promoting their groups.

I respect your opinion but I'm not traveling 18 hrs and paying $130 to shoot  1 bird possibly on the 1st day and come home. Every day after that costs me $15. You want a higher price. Granted I could hit another state. There's another couple hundred. Pretty sure that would ease the pressure from non residents. Mine were the only out of town plates I seen in 11 days from the opener on. Could have been area specific but I didn't see any of the non resident pressure you speak of. Everybody thought I was nuts to drive from MN to turkey hunt.
I agree with separating the licenses. I have no wish to deer or bear hunt in GA. It would give them an exact number of turkey hunters and help them better manage the resource.

[Neill_Prater]

Missouri has always required licences for the separate seasons, as well as tagging requirements for turkey and deer. I agree it should be this way in every state. For one thing, it provides an accurate count of how many hunters you have pursuing the various species. Tagging/check-in requirements provide a much more accurate picture of the true harvest numbers.

These are changes that could be made relatively easily. Lobby officials in your state to make them.

Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk

[shatcher]

Follow the $, but I say hammer nonresidents in TN!.  Won't happen as TWRA is all about the $!.

[Chad]

MS needs a tagging system to help stop poaching, especially during deer season. I would bet a healthy sum that resident deer hunters kill more turkeys in the fall/winter than non-resident turkey hunters kill in the spring - and we don't have a fall season in the county that I am from

[hotspur]

MS needs a tagging system to help stop poaching, especially during deer season. I would bet a healthy sum that resident deer hunters kill more turkeys in the fall/winter than non-resident turkey hunters kill in the spring - and we don't have a fall season in the county that I am from

many good points being made.  I too think deer hunters shoot turkeys at feeders, I have heard some admit to it.

[Spurs Up]

MS needs a tagging system to help stop poaching, especially during deer season. I would bet a healthy sum that resident deer hunters kill more turkeys in the fall/winter than non-resident turkey hunters kill in the spring - and we don't have a fall season in the county that I am from

How would a tagging system stop poachers from doing something that is already illegal?

[Chad]

It wouldn't. I was trying to make two points, but i got to typing faster than I was thinking, lol