Ohio's season summary

[eggshell]

Here's the ODW season summary. It tells a lot about what is happening. I was impressed that after only one season of reduced bag limits the kill went up...they are truly genious in their policy ( extreme sarcasm font). We already new we had a better hatch coming into the system and last years was good, so recruitment will be up, but still reducing opportunity.

https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=683270620499223&set=a.226403159519307

[TauntoHawk]

I guess the good side is with all the complaining most do about non residents in their state 1 bird for over $200 for out of staters should keep it from being a hot spot for a while.

I agree that reduced opportunity is not the way to really affect overall population health but it's the easy button for many states to look like they are taking action.

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

[Cowboy]

Interesting stats. I live in a Midwestern state. Our harvest was up about the same amount as Ohio from last year. Not exact, but similar.  However, we sold more than 30,000 permits more than Ohio did. Our harvest was up but number of issued permits was down from last year in our state.

Sent from my SM-G990U2 using Tapatalk

[doublespurs21]

do you remember years ago,,, it used to be 25,000 turkeys shot

[eggshell]

Yes doublespurs21 I do remember the peak years. There is a saturation phenomena that occurs when wildlife is reintroduced into void habitat. The population explodes to saturation then settles back to a sustainable population or carrying capacity for the given habitat and resources. We were never going to be able to sustain those extraordinary numbers. It has been a flat line with reasonable deviation errors plus or minus a predictable variance associated with brood success for many years now. This is where the available habitat will sustain populations from here on out until it changes. I believe this is what is happening country wide and the biggest issue with falling numbers. That doesn't mean we can't help the birds sustain or improve current levels, but I don't believe we will ever see 25,000 birds harvested again, it was not sustainable.

[Kyle_Ott]

Here's the ODW season summary. It tells a lot about what is happening. I was impressed that after only one season of reduced bag limits the kill went up...they are truly genious in their policy ( extreme sarcasm font). We already new we had a better hatch coming into the system and last years was good, so recruitment will be up, but still reducing opportunity.

https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=683270620499223&set=a.226403159519307

In the event that OH had not reduced the bag limit from 2 to 1, what do you think the outcome would have been on a year like this?

Inevitably, the harvest would have been considerably harder.

Hopefully OH experiences revival among their poult and brood production for several consecutive years and you can once again revisit limits.  But in this era of insane public land hunting pressure and harvest records, it seems prudent to err on the side of caution.

[eggshell]

Kyle, your feelings are in line with most turkey hunters I have discussed this with. They are satisfied the ODW is doing something and believe that it will help the population and kill numbers, eventually. I hope that is true, but I doubt it will make any significant difference 10 years from now. What difference would it have made this year? Going by trends it would have added around 3-4 thousand birds to the kill. That works out to one additional turkey killed for every 20,000+ acres or with the 1 limit it saves 1 gobbler for every 20,000+ acres. I doubt that is a number that will make any difference. In high pressure areas it might be higher.

What sudden regulation changes like this does tell me is that it's not biologically based but socially based. It's a a reg that says, look at us we are doing something and we hear you, here have a cup of kool-aide!

Your last sentence seems to justify the regulation on the grounds of public land pressure. That is not a turkey population problem, but a social dynamics issue. The fact almost all the kill came from private indicates that. If most of the kill is on private then is most of the hunting on private land? I do admit it puts the guy restricted to public in a bad place, but limiting hunters to 1 bird only slightly helps this. I can live with a 1 bird limit, but I don't believe it will fix anything in the long run, it's just a social salve.

I appreciate your thoughts and opinions. An honest and friendly debate is good. I think I am in the minority among die-hard turkey hunters and most are happy the ODW is doing something. So maybe I should just shut up and drink the kool-aide too. I see they are researching brood success and recruitment, now there is a good place to focus.

[deerhunt1988]

Kyle, your feelings are in line with most turkey hunters I have discussed this with. They are satisfied the ODW is doing something and believe that it will help the population and kill numbers, eventually. I hope that is true, but I doubt it will make any significant difference 10 years from now. What difference would it have made this year? Going by trends it would have added around 3-4 thousand birds to the kill. That works out to one additional turkey killed for every 20,000+ acres or with the 1 limit it saves 1 gobbler for every 20,000+ acres. I doubt that is a number that will make any difference. In high pressure areas it might be higher.

And that is assuming a couple things.

1.) The gobbler "saved" is not killed by another hunter. Or even by the aid of the same hunter who took someone else hunting.
2.) The gobbler survives until the next winter. Although gobbler survival through summer and winter is much higher than hen survival, it isn't a guarantee he is making it until next spring

Ohio could have accomplished pretty much the same thing by just eliminating jake harvest rather than reducing the bag limit.

[GobbleNut]

Good discussion,....again....
Without speaking directly about the Ohio situation, which I know little about, here are my repeated and redundant comments.

At the end of the day, the only thing that really matters when discussing spring gobbler bag limits is that you have enough gobblers in the population to ensure that there is "breeding saturation".  That is, every hen (the ones that are trying to breed) is being bred at some point during the spring.  We all know that a single gobbler will/may breed as many hens as he can.  Hence, in any given area, it is not necessary to have a lot of gobblers,...but you have to have enough to ensure full breeding. 

So, the real question regarding gobbler harvest comes down to "do we have enough gobblers in our turkey populations in any given area to ensure that breeding saturation?"  That is a tenuous question, however,...and especially under the current conditions in some areas where recruitment (successful reproduction) on a reliable basis does not seem to be occurring,...which, in turn, is resulting in a steady decline in the overall turkey population.

Simply stated, if wildlife managers see an ongoing decline in turkey numbers,...even in circumstances where short-term increases may occur,...they are likely going to take actions to "conserve" the remaining resource.  Quite honestly, that is the responsible thing to do,...and the one thing they have most direct control over is hunting regulations. 

The real culprit in all of this is the lack of reliable reproductive success.  Except possibly in isolated instances, that has nothing to do with the human-hunting element.  However, without a resolution to the reproduction problem, eventually the human-hunting element is going to take its toll.  We will eventually reduce gobbler numbers to a point where it will have an impact on that first point made,..."breeding saturation". 

Based just on some of the conversations that have taken place on this forum, there is little doubt in my mind that there are some areas in this country where the above is/has been taking place.  Wildlife managers (and many of us hunters) are noticing,...and are concerned,...even in states where it has not reached the "Def-Con Five" stage yet.  The red flag is going up.  Expect to see it get higher before (or if) it goes back down... 

[eggshell]

This is the kind of discussion I like. well thought out and graciously offered opinions.

Deerhunt, it looks like the 1 bird limit almost made jakes illegal. This actually plays into Gobblenut's points on breeding saturation. I wonder if taking too high of a percentage of mature gobblers over jakes is detrimental to breeding saturation. In my area many  of the guys will take a jake as their first bird and then hunt a nice mature tom. I have done this myself and don't apologize for it. In the local contest their were a couple dozen teams of two hunters and only 5 teams had both members fill their tag. This is pretty typical as most springs it usually about 5 guys in the local group that fill both tags or 25%. So in  my area it is insignificant to the resource.

The problem with state wide regulations is our agencies are stuck with making broad sweeping regulations for the whole state or at least a region. Typically this means taking the worse case scenario and applying it across the board to all areas. There is no easy fix for this.

I think breeding and nesting success is a big player in this. I am starting to think that human influence goes much further than hunting. I think human intrusion in many forms is detrimental. A new home built in a travel lane or a woods cleared that was loafing habitat may be a bigger player than we realize. All good questions.

On the flip side, what is good breeding saturation. I looked into this some as our local Mennonite community is big on free range poultry. When you ask about male to female ratios you get numbers from 6-1 to 12-1. Commercial resources put the number between 10-12 males to hens. Also you will find warnings that too many males create a social structure where breeding competition diminishes breeding because males  are too busy fighting and defending territory. I know the hunting is better where you have dense gobbler competition because they want to get to an available hen before the other guys. It is also space dependent, they need room to set up their control space and harem. Encroachment of turfs defer breeding to fighting.

A lot to think about for sure. I try to keep my mind open and consider all aspects, but I do doubt that this bag limit change will bring us more turkeys in the future.

[Kyle_Ott]

This is the kind of discussion I like. well thought out and graciously offered opinions.

Deerhunt, it looks like the 1 bird limit almost made jakes illegal. This actually plays into Gobblenut's points on breeding saturation. I wonder if taking too high of a percentage of mature gobblers over jakes is detrimental to breeding saturation. In my area many  of the guys will take a jake as their first bird and then hunt a nice mature tom. I have done this myself and don't apologize for it. In the local contest their were a couple dozen teams of two hunters and only 5 teams had both members fill their tag. This is pretty typical as most springs it usually about 5 guys in the local group that fill both tags or 25%. So in  my area it is insignificant to the resource.

The problem with state wide regulations is our agencies are stuck with making broad sweeping regulations for the whole state or at least a region. Typically this means taking the worse case scenario and applying it across the board to all areas. There is no easy fix for this.

I think breeding and nesting success is a big player in this. I am starting to think that human influence goes much further than hunting. I think human intrusion in many forms is detrimental. A new home built in a travel lane or a woods cleared that was loafing habitat may be a bigger player than we realize. All good questions.

On the flip side, what is good breeding saturation. I looked into this some as our local Mennonite community is big on free range poultry. When you ask about male to female ratios you get numbers from 6-1 to 12-1. Commercial resources put the number between 10-12 males to hens. Also you will find warnings that too many males create a social structure where breeding competition diminishes breeding because males  are too busy fighting and defending territory. I know the hunting is better where you have dense gobbler competition because they want to get to an available hen before the other guys. It is also space dependent, they need room to set up their control space and harem. Encroachment of turfs defer breeding to fighting.

A lot to think about for sure. I try to keep my mind open and consider all aspects, but I do doubt that this bag limit change will bring us more turkeys in the future.

Unfortunately, I have arrived at the opinion that we have to manage for the lowest common denominator.  Even when that means those who find themselves in surplus situations are forced into unnecessary restraint.

While I am not a biologist, I've done a decent bit of travelling in my day and I help manage some private farms.  I have hunted multiple states with VERY conservative seasons and bag limits that neighbor states with higher bag limits and liberal policies.  The hunting is exponentially better in the conservative states.  You see more turkeys.  You hear more turkeys.  It's a much more enjoyable hunting experience. 

Furthermore, on private farms we adhere to a very strict policy of killing less than 25% of the gobblers off of a piece of ground.  We have found that conservative gobbler harvest provides considerable buffer for years when poult production is poor. 

There is reasonable conversation to be had about how many gobblers are needed to sustain a healthy population.  I'll leave that up to the biologists to quantify that number.  But what I will absolutely say is that hearing 12-15 gobblers in a morning is far more enjoyable than hearing 1 or 2.

Turkey hunting is a visceral experience and I, for one, hunt to hear turkeys gobble.  The more turkeys I hear, the more turkeys I see, the happier I am, whether I kill one or not.  I want my sons to experience mornings where their heads are spinning due the number of gobbling turkeys and there is no doubt based on poult production and harvest data that we are simply killing too many turkeys in a lot of places. 

[eggshell]

Kyle, I actually agree with all your last post. I guess my issue with the new regulation is I feel it was a knee jerk response driven by social pressure "to do soemthing" and not biologic evaluation. I too have played a large roll in manging a large property and I own property. We follow a similar quideline with a 30% kill limit which is rarely hit let alone exceeded. This mixed with extensive forest management has built us a very stable flock of birds. However, that flock is still much smaller than the stauration years that occured about 20-25 years after reintroduction. The habitat and management is the same then and now. Now they have settled into the carrying capacity and that is the way it has been for 30 years.

I want to see some real verifiable facts from ODW that confirms this is indeed a corrective measure and not just keeping the natives fed and fat. In many areas the kill is way below the number we use as strategies. Remember 80+% of the kill is on private land with little or no management, but the birds are still there.

I don't think we disagree on mangement at all, but I want it to be a soundly approached strategy well thought out and with some real conclusive data supportiing a solution and not just pandering to the public outcry. I do realize that it is good they listen to the public, but the public is usually wrong and sentimental if not selfish in their motives.

FYI - I do have a degree in wildlife management and I worked for ODNR for over 30 years. I know a little bit about the process. I am actually taking my old friends to task.

[joey46]

Even though I was born and raised in Ohio and hunted Ohio turkey since the season first was implemented I no longer have a "dog in the fight" since moving to Florida.  The Ohio private properties I once accessed have been sold or the owner's have died.  Just the way things go.  I have no desire to hunt the Ohio public land.  The change to a Saturday opener was a public land fiasco IMO.
A few comments on what has been posted -
Non-residents - a fact of life,  the cost of the license is of no consequence to most, shutting the state to non-res during covid was a political folly.  Many with private land access simply ignored it.  Those birds killed didn't generate revenue or were counted by telecheck.  Yes they were violators but to think non-resident landowners weren't going to do this is goofy.  These guys always played fair in the past but decided enough was enough (all rumor and hearsay so don't bother).
One bird limit -  a good thing IMO.  More states should follow suit.  Took years for Ohio to go to a two bird limit.  Everyone seemed much more selective when it was one and done.  If there is a jake harvesting problem that should solve it.
I have fond memories of my first Ohio bird taken at Tar Hollow and my last Ohio bird taken in Meigs County.  Good times spanning several decades.  I hope Ohio doesn't micro-manage the big birds to death.  Good luck to all.
 

[eggshell]

Joey, The Saturday opener was indeed a huge mistake and created a all out charge of the brigade on public land. Ohio's public land hunting for the most part is a poor quality hunt. We lost 10s of thousands of acres of public access when Mead paper decided to withdraw all their land and either sell or lease it. Then AEP and Ohio power started doing the same and Ohio's public access declined by a large percentage in just a few years. These companies had every right to do it, and the ODW did not have the funds to buy it all up. They bought what they could but it was just a drop in the bucket. I would say Ohio is a poor state to come hunt from out of state if you are only hunting public. Just look at the kill and you'll realize there was a lot of disappointed public land hunters. Some of the western states have a cooperative agreement to pay landowners for access, I'm not sure it would work here but it would be worth a look. Right now a huge part of Ohio's private land is leased by out of staters. There are 1500 acres all around my house that is leased and now closed to all but a hand full of Out of staters. All this was huntable 15 years ago. They priced the local guys out with paying huge prices. I know I can't afford $10,000 to hunt the 500 acres that joins my family property, and that is what a Tenn. guy is paying. Oh yeah, they still come on your property but throw a fit if you make one step across onto their lease. Sorry I had to vent.