Unfortunately it must be all about the money

[Tom007]

Hope all is well with all of you. I have been waiting to review the turkey harvest results from last spring in NJ. It was a tough year last year here. The results showed the story. The harvest last spring was 2327 gobblers, down from 2850 in 2020. That is a 17 year low since 2004. The harvest was lower by 523 birds, roughly 18.5% from the previous year. I reviewed the 2022 regulations and was surprised to see no quota/permit changes. They must make too much money with the permits. I myself have seen this coming for awhile, thus I have been limiting what I take on the properties that I hunt. I know this is definitely not unique to NJ, reading all the forum feedback last spring shows this is a big problem in our country. Hopefully this trend turns around, but a 17 year slide here tells me it doesn't look good. I guess all we can do now is control what we do and hope.....thanks for listening, be safe.

[GobbleNut]

First of all, I admire your willingness to limit your own harvests by assessing the health of your turkey population each year and voluntarily choosing to kill fewer birds than the state allows if conditions seem to call for it.  Turkey hunters should all have that mind-set, regardless of where we hunt. 

Having said that, I don't necessarily think that wildlife agencies look at it from the perspective of how many dollars they can bring in.  Personally, I believe it all comes down to understanding that harvest in any given year is going to be a function of reproductive success in the preceding years.  Short term harvest numbers, especially in the spring season, can be greatly affected by how many turkeys were born and survived in the preceding two or three years, in particular. The decrease in harvest you cite in your example could very easily be a function of the number of two and three-year-old gobblers that were present in your turkey population, and that would directly correlate to reproductive success in the preceding, corresponding years.

Long term, precipitous declines in turkey population numbers are another matter altogether.  If that is happening, and it appears it is in a number of places, there comes a time when the "human hunting" element in the equation must be evaluated and, if needed, addressed.  Wildlife managers, if they are paying attention and are conscientious about doing their jobs, should have their "fingers on the pulse" of what is happening, both short term and long term, with their wild turkey populations and adjust the elements they can control accordingly. 

We, as conscientious hunters, are all "wildlife managers" in our own right to some degree. Recognizing when to stop pulling the trigger is a virtue that is sometimes hard to grasp for the guy that is just counting bodies without any forethought as to how that is impacting the resource.   

[Tom007]

Great info, thanks. I know the biologists definitely are handling it, I hate to see decline. Let's pray it changes direction to a healthy population we all can continue to enjoy.....

[Tail Feathers]

Some years ago it was easy enough to buy lots of turkey tags in NJ.  Did they ever change that?  They really should have a reasonable limit, particularly given the declining numbers.

[NCL]

Tom,

A question regarding the comparison of hunter/permit sales between 2020 and 2021? Here there seems to be a greater number of hunters out during the Spring of 2020 opposed to 2021. The difference in hunter numbers could account for some of the reduced harvest. Just a thought for a possible cause.

[Tom007]

Some years ago it was easy enough to buy lots of turkey tags in NJ.  Did they ever change that?  They really should have a reasonable limit, particularly given the declining numbers.

Yes, the permit system is still the same. 2020 was a pretty good year, but there might have been more hunters due to COVID. Thanks....

[Tom007]

Tom,

A question regarding the comparison of hunter/permit sales between 2020 and 2021? Here there seems to be a greater number of hunters out during the Spring of 2020 opposed to 2021. The difference in hunter numbers could account for some of the reduced harvest. Just a thought for a possible cause.

I will try to get number of permits sold in 2021 and 2020. Good point , there could have been more hunters in 2020 due to COVID. I did notice it was tougher to find birds last year compared to previous years. I really had to grind to locate them....nothing wrong there though. Makes it more rewarding...Thx again...

[Timmer]

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.

[scattergun]

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.

[Tom007]

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....

[eggshell]

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. 

[Tom007]

Great info, thank you........

[Spurs Up]

Yep. Great info here. I always learn a lot. How do they count them to establish those population trends?

[Tom007]

Yep. Great info here. I always learn a lot. How do they count them to establish those population trends?

Great question? My though maybe aerial?

[eggshell]

Yep. Great info here. I always learn a lot. How do they count them to establish those population trends?

Great question? My though maybe aerial?

I am not sure anymore as I have been out of the loop too long. They used to do it by various methods. Mail carriers used to report sightings, they had public sighting reports and they used to do a winter fly over in some areas. Also, wildlife officers would report on flock sightings. It just an estimate, but it's does give a general idea of trends.  I came back to add that this is how Ohio does it.