Unfortunately it must be all about the money

[quavers59]

   Tom007-- I was hoping that when,I bought my new 2022 New Jersey Hunting License  in January  that,I would see Big Time Changes in the Spring Gobbler Limit . But you viewed the New Regs Guide and no Changes.
   That is both Sad and not at all good for the Spring Turkey Hunter in New Jersey looking for Turkey numbers to increase in NJ.
   As it stands now a Spring Turkey Hunter with very Deep Pockets,Alot of Free Time on his Hands, as well as both Private + Public Lands to hunt on in possibly Several Zones can buy up to 25 or so Spring Turkey Permits "if" those Turkey Permits are still available  in that Zone after the Lottery and during the " over the Counter" sale of Leftover Turkey Permits.
   And at 22 Bucks for a Turkey Permit,I usually Buy 3 to 4 during the much later- over the Counter process.
   The Problem is and it is a Problem that expands every Spring before the Spring Turkey Season Starts is Turkey Hunters  who are Rich- perhaps retired or the ability to hunt every morning before working later will Buy as many Spring Turkey Permits as they can possibly afford!
     Especially that opening "A" Week of 5 Days as well as that 1st Saturday.
    Now imagine  someone who Hunts 2 or more Zones with good Private Land in each Zone as well as nearby Public Dirt.  Alot of Gobblers could be killed in just those 1st 6 Days..
     No one here will hear about how many Gobblers some of these Guys will ultimately  take in 1 Small State.
   This System makes it Tougher for the Poor Sap who Hunts Public and has been struggling  to take even 1 Gobbler because perhaps his Calling Skills are nothing compared to the Guy who has already killed 6 Gobblers and now easily Calls that Gobbler up and away from that Poor Sap.
     The New Jersey Spring Turkey Limit should be 5 Gobblers Max. Many would say 2 or at the most 3 Gobblers.
    Unfortunately  this outdated System probably  won't  change because- Money Talks and Bull@#$% walks.

[Tom007]

If the harvest continues to decline, we all have to hope changes are made. I fall into the category of retired, but not rich. I do love to hunt turkey, l go out everyday that the weather dictates in NY and NJ. But like all valuable resources, over harvesting and not paying attention to brood size and reproduction numbers will certainly lead to a decline. Like others have said in this thread, we hope the biologists have the correct info and foresight to keep our populations strong and healthy for generations to come....have a safe season...

[Tom007]

Another scary issue that started last spring is you now phone in your harvest results instead of checking them in in person in NJ. which I believe is not good. In person check in to me is essential to keep the numbers correct. We can only hope that the final numbers account for all the birds taken and that all the hunters that harvest birds do the right thing and phone them in....

[quavers59]

  Retired  here also and hunt in both New York + New Jersey.
   I enjoyed taking my Gobbler to the Check Stations and meeting  other successful  Turkey Hunters,I otherwise would never have met.
    Without a Doubt- there will be some who do not call in their Harvest.

[Mossberg90MN]

I was a committee member and officer for a large NWTF chapter for many years.  I saw the push over time to liberalize hunting seasons here in Minnesota.  The whole lottery and limited hunting season process was dismantled.  It is not a change for the better.  I can't say that it directly impacted populations (although it might have), but you can bet that if there is a natural declining population cycle it surely doesn't help to have things wide open.  I enjoy turkey hunting above all other recreation and I would support more conservative management.

Minnesota's turkey lottery was basically 100% success for as long as I've been hunting. I never failed to draw the A season tag. Eliminating the lottery had absolutely zero impact on the turkeys or turkey hunting in Minnesota. The limit is still the same. One spring, one fall. Minnesota has never seen a drop in turkey harvest. The last 10 years have been the best 10 years the state has had since it started in 1978.

The one bird limit keeps the population up. It's great to see your population remaining strong.....best of luck....

Yes I'm very grateful for the Minnesota Turkey hunting. Fortunately our turkey population is doing very well and I'm seeing birds way up north. And I'm certain parts of the state the hunting is absolute dynamite.

I agree that the 1 bird limit is what keeps things good. And the mid April start date.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tom007]

Ament to all, thanks for the great info. We will keep it all going together...best of luck

[deerhunt1988]

Evaluating population trends in wildlife is an extremely long term and complex thing for states. Many states approach it on a state wide basis, but I think that may be an error. Doing it as a one regulation fits all means averaging. What's average usually only is optimum for a very limited area. In most areas it's either less or more restricting then necessary. What I am saying is don't be too harsh on state biologist, they usually have good reasons behind what they are doing. However, they do sometimes screw up and sometimes regulations are socially driven. Being informed and involved is your best bet.

On the declining flocks problem, When looking at what the trend is for a population you need  to look back at many years of data on harvest, poult survival and habitat changes. Looking at anything less then tens years of datat is usually not indicative. Many times what you find is a graph that looks like a roller coaster, with ups and downs. What is important is what does the trend line look line. Does the regression show a mean/average line sloping upward or sloping Downward. Then transpose the harvest and reproduction charts and see if the mean average is consistent on both. Like I said, it's not as simple as we didn't kill as many birds this year.

One other thing  that happens that alarms hunters is the dynamic way stocked or reintroduced birds react. The most common response to introduction into a habitat void of birds is to saturate this habitat and the  excess spread into new areas. I have seen it happen over and over and over. So, after years of this explosion all of a sudden some areas are super saturated with birds and it seems like they are everywhere. I know a valley you could hear 25 gobblers in about 10-15 years after initial stocking. Hunters make an assumption this is normal, it is not.

Any given habitat will have a carrying capacity, or a level that is annually sustainable. All flocks will decrease back to this level after a few years of saturation. It often appears like a mass disappearance of your birds and often invokes panic among hunters. Biologist understand this and watch the long-term trends. They watch to see if the population is just leveling out or actually falling, it takes time. I saw this in my home area. We had a period in the mid to late 80s there were birds galore in the original stocked areas and everyone was having success. Then within a few years everyone was screaming about losing our flock. Within a short period a valley that you heard 10 gobblers in only had 3-5. The good news is for the last 20 years that valley always has 3-5 gobblers, with only year to year fluctuations. The other good news is there are birds everywhere in all the available habitat. In those boom years you had to hunt limited areas. Now you can throw a dart at a map in our area and it will hit an area that has turkeys. So, I suggest we don't panic and let the biologist work. Sure there are bad trends in some areas, but for the most part the states are working on it.

One thing will often happen is this scenario. State wildlife agencies will give hunters what they want if it will not adversely affect the population, even if it means less harvest. If enough people lobby for a more restricted harvest and the population is stable, they may just reduce your tags to "give hunters what they ask for", even if it's not a necessary management move. Regardless of what we often think, they do realize they serve us and as long as it's not  harmful to wildlife, they will give you what the masses ask for.

EVERYONE on the forum needs to read this and take it to heart.

We are entering pivotal times in the turkey hunting world. The last paragraph in particular is very applicable to today's environment. Be careful what you wish/ask for, because if hunting opportunity is taken away, it just may not come back!

[silvestris]

Good post, Nathan.

[Ol timer]

Good Post but if you think the DF&W in NJ will make it better for you as a Hunter I got a bridge I'd like to sell you. If you want things to change  for the better Move out of the State Murphy back for another term to control your life.

[quavers59]

   Of course,I read all the replys. I Stand behind what,I posted. A Small State like New Jersey should have a set Bag Limit of Gobblers then can be Taken. 5 should be the absolute limit.
   I don't  think any one Spring Turkey Hunter should be able to Kill 6-8-10 or more Gobblers in New Jersey.   

[TurkeyReaper69]

Evaluating population trends in wildlife is an extremely long term and complex thing for states. Many states approach it on a state wide basis, but I think that may be an error. Doing it as a one regulation fits all means averaging. What's average usually only is optimum for a very limited area. In most areas it's either less or more restricting then necessary. What I am saying is don't be too harsh on state biologist, they usually have good reasons behind what they are doing. However, they do sometimes screw up and sometimes regulations are socially driven. Being informed and involved is your best bet.

On the declining flocks problem, When looking at what the trend is for a population you need  to look back at many years of data on harvest, poult survival and habitat changes. Looking at anything less then tens years of datat is usually not indicative. Many times what you find is a graph that looks like a roller coaster, with ups and downs. What is important is what does the trend line look line. Does the regression show a mean/average line sloping upward or sloping Downward. Then transpose the harvest and reproduction charts and see if the mean average is consistent on both. Like I said, it's not as simple as we didn't kill as many birds this year.

One other thing  that happens that alarms hunters is the dynamic way stocked or reintroduced birds react. The most common response to introduction into a habitat void of birds is to saturate this habitat and the  excess spread into new areas. I have seen it happen over and over and over. So, after years of this explosion all of a sudden some areas are super saturated with birds and it seems like they are everywhere. I know a valley you could hear 25 gobblers in about 10-15 years after initial stocking. Hunters make an assumption this is normal, it is not.

Any given habitat will have a carrying capacity, or a level that is annually sustainable. All flocks will decrease back to this level after a few years of saturation. It often appears like a mass disappearance of your birds and often invokes panic among hunters. Biologist understand this and watch the long-term trends. They watch to see if the population is just leveling out or actually falling, it takes time. I saw this in my home area. We had a period in the mid to late 80s there were birds galore in the original stocked areas and everyone was having success. Then within a few years everyone was screaming about losing our flock. Within a short period a valley that you heard 10 gobblers in only had 3-5. The good news is for the last 20 years that valley always has 3-5 gobblers, with only year to year fluctuations. The other good news is there are birds everywhere in all the available habitat. In those boom years you had to hunt limited areas. Now you can throw a dart at a map in our area and it will hit an area that has turkeys. So, I suggest we don't panic and let the biologist work. Sure there are bad trends in some areas, but for the most part the states are working on it.

One thing will often happen is this scenario. State wildlife agencies will give hunters what they want if it will not adversely affect the population, even if it means less harvest. If enough people lobby for a more restricted harvest and the population is stable, they may just reduce your tags to "give hunters what they ask for", even if it's not a necessary management move. Regardless of what we often think, they do realize they serve us and as long as it's not  harmful to wildlife, they will give you what the masses ask for.

EVERYONE on the forum needs to read this and take it to heart.

We are entering pivotal times in the turkey hunting world. The last paragraph in particular is very applicable to today's environment. Be careful what you wish/ask for, because if hunting opportunity is taken away, it just may not come back!

I hate that Eggshell can relate to the last paragraph of his comment, Ohio immediately comes to mind. Judging from the data over 10+ years the decrease in bag limit was meritless and that of grievances from uneducated hunters. My prediction for Ohio in 2022 is the harvest will remain the same but will be spread out amongst a larger pool of hunters rather than those killers who've managed to tag out on 2 birds year after year. Smells like socialism and the "everyone deserves a trophy mindset" has entered the hunting world.

[dirtnap]

Evaluating population trends in wildlife is an extremely long term and complex thing for states. Many states approach it on a state wide basis, but I think that may be an error. Doing it as a one regulation fits all means averaging. What's average usually only is optimum for a very limited area. In most areas it's either less or more restricting then necessary. What I am saying is don't be too harsh on state biologist, they usually have good reasons behind what they are doing. However, they do sometimes screw up and sometimes regulations are socially driven. Being informed and involved is your best bet.

On the declining flocks problem, When looking at what the trend is for a population you need  to look back at many years of data on harvest, poult survival and habitat changes. Looking at anything less then tens years of datat is usually not indicative. Many times what you find is a graph that looks like a roller coaster, with ups and downs. What is important is what does the trend line look line. Does the regression show a mean/average line sloping upward or sloping Downward. Then transpose the harvest and reproduction charts and see if the mean average is consistent on both. Like I said, it's not as simple as we didn't kill as many birds this year.

One other thing  that happens that alarms hunters is the dynamic way stocked or reintroduced birds react. The most common response to introduction into a habitat void of birds is to saturate this habitat and the  excess spread into new areas. I have seen it happen over and over and over. So, after years of this explosion all of a sudden some areas are super saturated with birds and it seems like they are everywhere. I know a valley you could hear 25 gobblers in about 10-15 years after initial stocking. Hunters make an assumption this is normal, it is not.

Any given habitat will have a carrying capacity, or a level that is annually sustainable. All flocks will decrease back to this level after a few years of saturation. It often appears like a mass disappearance of your birds and often invokes panic among hunters. Biologist understand this and watch the long-term trends. They watch to see if the population is just leveling out or actually falling, it takes time. I saw this in my home area. We had a period in the mid to late 80s there were birds galore in the original stocked areas and everyone was having success. Then within a few years everyone was screaming about losing our flock. Within a short period a valley that you heard 10 gobblers in only had 3-5. The good news is for the last 20 years that valley always has 3-5 gobblers, with only year to year fluctuations. The other good news is there are birds everywhere in all the available habitat. In those boom years you had to hunt limited areas. Now you can throw a dart at a map in our area and it will hit an area that has turkeys. So, I suggest we don't panic and let the biologist work. Sure there are bad trends in some areas, but for the most part the states are working on it.

One thing will often happen is this scenario. State wildlife agencies will give hunters what they want if it will not adversely affect the population, even if it means less harvest. If enough people lobby for a more restricted harvest and the population is stable, they may just reduce your tags to "give hunters what they ask for", even if it's not a necessary management move. Regardless of what we often think, they do realize they serve us and as long as it's not  harmful to wildlife, they will give you what the masses ask for.

EVERYONE on the forum needs to read this and take it to heart.

We are entering pivotal times in the turkey hunting world. The last paragraph in particular is very applicable to today's environment. Be careful what you wish/ask for, because if hunting opportunity is taken away, it just may not come back!

I hate that Eggshell can relate to the last paragraph of his comment, Ohio immediately comes to mind. Judging from the data over 10+ years the decrease in bag limit was meritless and that of grievances from uneducated hunters. My prediction for Ohio in 2022 is the harvest will remain the same but will be spread out amongst a larger pool of hunters rather than those killers who've managed to tag out on 2 birds year after year. Smells like socialism and the "everyone deserves a trophy mindset" has entered the hunting world.

No doubt.  I can't believe they dropped it to 1.  What was their justification for doing so?

[eggshell]

turkeyreaper69. You may be right about OHIO and that is exactly what the masses want and had in mind. They think, "hey if those guys aren't killing their second birds there will be more out there and I will get mine easier". The thing is, from what I've seen, those types still won't put anymore time or effort in, they just think that extra turkey will waltz right up to them. Most of those hunters who think that way, will hunt the first couple days and weekends. However, there will be exactly the same amount of pressure on the same group of birds and the kill will change very little the first 10 days of season. I would guess Most of the second tags are filled after the first 10 days. By that time a lot of those guys are not hunting at all. So I won't be surprised if the kill does drop. 
You are right about state management wanting to spread the harvest out to more. They are deluded into thinking it is a way to retain hunters and sell license. I have bad news for them, it won't matter. The fact we are losing hunters has very little to do with success rates, it's a social mindset we are fighting. It's a smoke screen. That's why this move is not a biological strategy, it's manged by, as you say, socialism. 

Dirtnap, They said it was becasue of lower poult production and survival. but this doesn't address that at all. This at best means possibly 1-2 more gobblers survive per Ohio township (~23,000 acres). That means nothing to poult survival. It's about what reaper and I said before. They made no changes to dates, zones, fall season, times or length of season.

[deerhunt1988]

turkeyreaper69. You may be right about OHIO and that is exactly what the masses want and had in mind. They think, "hey if those guys aren't killing their second birds there will be more out there and I will get mine easier". The thing is, from what I've seen, those types still won't put anymore time or effort in, they just think that extra turkey will waltz right up to them. Most of those hunters who think that way, will hunt the first couple days and weekends. However, there will be exactly the same amount of pressure on the same group of birds and the kill will change very little the first 10 days of season. I would guess Most of the second tags are filled after the first 10 days. By that time a lot of those guys are not hunting at all. So I won't be surprised if the kill does drop. 
You are right about state management wanting to spread the harvest out to more. They are deluded into thinking it is a way to retain hunters and sell license. I have bad news for them, it won't matter. The fact we are losing hunters has very little to do with success rates, it's a social mindset we are fighting. It's a smoke screen. That's why this move is not a biological strategy, it's manged by, as you say, socialism. 

Dirtnap, They said it was becasue of lower poult production and survival. but this doesn't address that at all. This at best means possibly 1-2 more gobblers survive per Ohio township (~23,000 acres). That means nothing to poult survival. It's about what reaper and I said before. They made no changes to dates, zones, fall season, times or length of season.

While on the subject of Ohio.

Basically a straight trendline. The harvest spike in 2017 and 2018 is directly attributed to a periodical cicada hatch in 2015 that lead to banner hatch and tons of 2 year olds for 2017 (and 3 year olds for 2018). Those harvest levels were not sustainable, any biologist worth a darn could have told you that.






Ohio could likely save just as many adult gobblers by simply eliminating jake harvest rather than dropping the bag limit. See below:

[eggshell]

deerhunt, you are right, a no jakes regulation would indeed have more impact for the future. I could swallow that as at least having some biological rational. Thanks for posting the stats