Unfortunately it must be all about the money

[dirtnap]

Looks like Ohio would have cut out fall hunting and the killing of hens as one of the first logical things to do.

I tend to agree with what you are saying eggshell, they could be "giving us what the masses ask for".

Serious question though, Did the masses really ask for the limit to be lowered to 1?

I don't live in OH so I really don't have my finger on the pulse of what's going on.  I have hunted up there quite a bit though and adult gobblers and turkeys in general were thick in the areas I hunted.

[eggshell]

Did the masses really ask for the limit to be lowered to 1?

I guess I am speculating on this as I haven't seen the numbers. But what I do know is very few apposed it and the State rarely changes their minds over a minority view. Sure you'll hear a lot of grumbling next spring but I am pretty sure 98% of those complaining never said a word during the public comment period. I guess I made some assumptions, but I seen comments made from members of certain groups that I know have the Division of Wildlife's ear that wanted something done from a perceived decline. Add to that a lot of talk about the studies done down south on spring season dates and breeding dynamics resonated in the right places.

Remember, I came out of this culture inside the ODW. The old timers are gone, retired. The new breed is hungry to make their mark in the field and "do something big". This is not always bad, but sometimes it is not productive. In a strong management system you have a mix of people that police each other and having some old timers sitting there to reign in the aggressive pups is important. Ohio seen a lot of it's old timers leave in the last 20 years and I fear the new managers are just throwing rocks in the pond with no target, to see if they get a splash.

If you read through my comments in other threads you will see I still support fall hunting, but I wholeheartedly agree that it should be the first thing cut if there truly is a big problem. It would make more sense then reducing the bag limit by one gobbler. I would be disappointed, as I love fall hunting, but I would swallow hard and support it if the science dictated. That's what I want to see data supported decisions, that is all I ask.

[quavers59]

  The " other end" of the Spectrum of 1 Gobbler is not good either. At least Pennsylvania  will give you the option of buying a 2nd Turkey Permit Separately. 
     The difference  between Ohio and New Jersey is Stunning as far as a Gobbler Bag Limit.

[scattergun]

That's absolutely ridiculous. In 2020, Ohio reported 17,894 turkeys killed in the spring. and later that year 1,063 in the fall.

You don't need to be a biologist to know that the fall season has no impact at all.

As for banning hunting jakes, why, and how? What difference does it make if you kill a 1 year old tom, or a 4 year old tom? They both do the same thing. It would do the same thing as antler point restrictions, which I am 110% against, and I can't even be in the same room as someone who wants to dictate to others about trophy hunting.

More practically, how are you supposed to enforce such a thing. Are you really going to support a regulation that says a beard must be X inches long? That's outrageous.

[dirtnap]

I'm not trophy hunting scattergun.  I was alluding to the killing of hens in the fall.  Isn't it legal to kill hens in Ohio during the fall season?

[eggshell]

As for banning hunting jakes, why, and how? What difference does it make if you kill a 1 year old tom, or a 4 year old tom? They both do the same thing.

The idea behind a no jakes regulation is thay a jake will be doing the "same thing" for longer into the future. The average life span of a gobbler is 5 to 6 years. So a 4 year old has 1-2 breeding years left, the jake 5+. It has nothing to do with trophy size. Just like bag limits and everything else enforcemnet is mostly the honor system, unless caught in a violation.

[deerhunt1988]

As for banning hunting jakes, why, and how? What difference does it make if you kill a 1 year old tom, or a 4 year old tom? They both do the same thing. It would do the same thing as antler point restrictions, which I am 110% against, and I can't even be in the same room as someone who wants to dictate to others about trophy hunting.

More practically, how are you supposed to enforce such a thing. Are you really going to support a regulation that says a beard must be X inches long? That's outrageous.

Banning hunting jakes is simple. Multiple states do it.

Mississippi was the first to enact a "no jakes" rule in the late 90s to improve hunting quality and increase the availability of adult gobblers. It was overwhelming supported by hunters. Mississippi regulations state "a 6" beard OR adult gobbler" as we all know not all adult gobblers will have a 6" beard. Experienced turkey hunters should have no problem identifying an adult gobbler. And in my opinion, ALL turkey hunters should make an effort to learn how identify adult gobblers (full tail fans, wing feathers, other body and behavior characteristics)

Mississippi does allow youths to harvest a jake. Which I support 100%.

"No jakes" is a way to carry-over more birds without taking away hunting opportunity (decreasing season or bag limit). Jakes have the highest survival rate of any sex/age class of turkey. So once they make it through a spring, good chance they will make it to a 2-year old.

Surveys routinely show that hearing gobbling is one of the leading factors to an enjoyable turkey hunt. Protecting jakes is one way to ensure that you can continue to hear gobbling in successive springs. I'd bet the majority of posters on this forum would much rather hear more gobbling than shoot a non-gobbling jake. And I have nothing against harvesting jakes, I've killed a few myself. But the "no-jake" rule is an easy tool that can help improve hunting quality and ensure more adult birds make it to the following year.

Arkansas is another state that has implemented a "no-jakes" rule in recent times. For the same reasons as outlined above. Before taking away so much opportunity, more states should consider it. ESPECIALLY states where 15-25% of the harvest is jakes, like Ohio.

[3bailey3]

Well said Turkeyhunt88..

[scattergun]

I'm not trophy hunting scattergun.  I was alluding to the killing of hens in the fall.  Isn't it legal to kill hens in Ohio during the fall season?

Using the same data, in Fall 2020, Ohio saw 467 adult hens, and 106 juvenile hens killed. The Spring 2020 saw 333 bearded hens killed. Again, do we really need a biologist to see how ridiculous banning the fall hunt to raise populations would be?

As for the banning hunting jakes, absolutely not. Louisiana is the very last state you should ever be using as an example of a hunting model. If you want to start self imposed limits, great. If you want to share your opinion with others who ask, and you can back it up with data, then fine. If you need to use government to force your ethics down others throats, no, it isn't such a good idea. It is never right for anyone to dictate to others how they should hunt.

You might want to hear gobbling. You aren't everybody. Remember that.

[silvestris]

A dead jake is just that, a dead jake. I have been greatly disappointed in every jake I have killed since my first three or years of my career.  As Kenny Morgan stated in his first book, it is a sin to kill one.

[scattergun]

A dead jake is just that, a dead jake. I have been greatly disappointed in every jake I have killed since my first three or years of my career.  As Kenny Morgan stated in his first book, it is a sin to kill one.

And you can think that all you want. You can think it wrong to kill hens. You can think it wrong to kill any turkey that hasn't been called in.

What is wrong, is forcing everybody else to think as you do by way of government enforcement.

[Crghss]

What is wrong, is forcing everybody else to think as you do by way of government enforcement.

Don't think it is a case of forcing everyone to think in a particular way. It's about maintaining a healthy turkey population. Which falls to the government.

[3bailey3]

 i think wanting our government is to strong, our wildlife departments in most states are working for us hunters, I'am gland to know of one guy that is working for my state, is on here, thanks Nathan!

[silvestris]

And you can think that all you want.

It really doesn't matter what I think; what matters is that I do think.

[scattergun]

What is wrong, is forcing everybody else to think as you do by way of government enforcement.

Don't think it is a case of forcing everyone to think in a particular way. It's about maintaining a healthy turkey population. Which falls to the government.

I can think of 3 things our DNR, GFP, or whatever your state calls them, can help turkey populations without mandating beard length requirements. It frankly makes me very sad to see hunters this willing to just keep dumping regulations like this, and hoping one of them sticks. It is disgusting. I was a waterfowl hunter before I was a turkey hunter. Take a lesson from the waterfowl hunters, don't become them. Duck hunters under stand other duck hunters, and they hate each other.

The great thing about turkey hunting is that we all for the most part get along. I can stop and chat with a stranger on the side of the road in the spring about turkeys for an hour. We all genuinely enjoy it.

As for raising the turkey populations, the good answers are not the easiest solutions. Expanding predator populations of coyote, fox, raccoon, and in the south I can only assume pigs wreak havoc on turkeys. They beat up deer too, but not as bad as the birds. Hunting these is not going to help, the same as our hunting is not declining turkey populations like so many seem to think here. Hunting is simply an ineffective tool for reducing populations. Snow geese are basically a free for all, no limits, no regulations, and they gain numbers every year. We somehow need to step up in trapping. I plan to do a lot more varmint/predator hunting this winter, but it won't do that much. Trapping is a legitimate tool, but with low fur prices, there are not much incentive for most people. I honestly do not know the best way to go about increasing predator harvest. I know I'd like to see a depredation style system, where landowners can call those on a list to trap or hunt their land.

The other thing we have to keep in mind is that our turkey populations are kind of a first time thing. We don't have many decades of data to draw from. Somewhat in the 80's, but really the last 30 years is what our current turkey population stems from. There's more than one study that shows that turkey density, and lack of suitable habitat is a huge driving factor for some declining populations. Not all states are seeing declines mind you. Some are increasing yet. It is very possible we have hit the capacity of turkeys for the land. The only long-term solution if the turkeys we have today are not enough for hunters, is to increase habitat, mainly nesting habitat. I'm a huge proponent of state leasing land for wildlife, CRP and other programs working with farmers, and basically anything that returns land to a natural and effective state for wildlife. Well human populations are growing fast, so something has to give.