Fanning

[duxrus]

AMEN

[renegade19]

I wasn't gonna post on this topic again but what the heck. Everyone out there who considers fanning unethical because it's so highly effective is basing their opinion off videos and story's. A successful story or video sells much better than an unsuccessful one. I just saw a turkey video for sale the other day that said on the cover "22 successful hunts caught on film". How well do you think a video would sell if it said "22 unsuccessful hunts caught on film"?  And if I didn't know any better I'd watch any turkey hunting video or show out there and say "wow, calling to a turkey is a sure way to kill him. These guys do it every time!!"  Another thing to remember to all the ethical police out there is that we are hunting these birds during their most vulnerable time. Archibald Rutledge said in his writings that to kill a gobbler in breeding season is nothing. He considered it unethical to use the turkeys sexual weakness to call him in. Also, think what the internet has done to compound all this. It's the reason we are all discussing this. If fanning became popular in the pre-internet days, most people would have never cared. Think about if the internet was around when compound bows first started being used. Or portable climbing stands. After all, Saxton Pope and Art Young both thought it to be unethical to ambush an animal from a tree. People's ideas change with time and with them so do ethics. They always have. The differance is that today these changes are broadcast instantly, and those who oppose them can post there objections on the web instead of just doing their own thing and letting others do theirs.

There you go, making sense and sounding intelligent again!     Well said!

I say Farmboy for President!!!

[VaTuRkStOmPeR]

I wasn't gonna post on this topic again but what the heck. Everyone out there who considers fanning unethical because it's so highly effective is basing their opinion off videos and story's. A successful story or video sells much better than an unsuccessful one. I just saw a turkey video for sale the other day that said on the cover "22 successful hunts caught on film". How well do you think a video would sell if it said "22 unsuccessful hunts caught on film"?  And if I didn't know any better I'd watch any turkey hunting video or show out there and say "wow, calling to a turkey is a sure way to kill him. These guys do it every time!!"  Another thing to remember to all the ethical police out there is that we are hunting these birds during their most vulnerable time. Archibald Rutledge said in his writings that to kill a gobbler in breeding season is nothing. He considered it unethical to use the turkeys sexual weakness to call him in. Also, think what the internet has done to compound all this. It's the reason we are all discussing this. If fanning became popular in the pre-internet days, most people would have never cared. Think about if the internet was around when compound bows first started being used. Or portable climbing stands. After all, Saxton Pope and Art Young both thought it to be unethical to ambush an animal from a tree. People's ideas change with time and with them so do ethics. They always have. The differance is that today these changes are broadcast instantly, and those who oppose them can post there objections on the web instead of just doing their own thing and letting others do theirs.

There are outfitters in Nebraska killing over 150 turkeys per season, an astounding percentage of which are killed with fanning.

There are guys in the mid-west who use this tactic almost exclusively and kill over 80% of the time.

It's an insanely effective tactic and I don't care how progressive a guy is, there comes a point where ya gotta say enough is enough.  Technology ruins culture.  It ruins tradition.  No one is naive enough to dispute that all of us embrace it to a certain extent but for me, the quality of a kill is significantly influenced by how it is achieved.  Maybe a guy who has only killed 20, 30 or 50 birds in his lifetime can't see the forest for the trees but the truth is, we're pushing the ethical threshold. 

At what point does a human being recognize the significant advantage they already have over our quarry and suspend the pursuit of additional advantages?

At what point do you guys finally realize that turkey hunting is the fastest growing genre of hunting and we can't be promoting tactics that increase harvest numbers while we have organizations like the d.a.m.n NWTF recruiting to increase hunter numbers.  The resource can't withstand the length of current seasons as they are,  the bag limits we now have and the number of people killing birds.

20 years from now. Guys that have been hunting turkeys for a while are going to look back on the early- mid 2000s as the glory days of turkey hunting.  The spring weather was good, the habitat supported high poult recruitment, the hunter numbers were low and very few people were discussing bullshit tactics like this.

[Bill Cooksey]

I wasn't gonna post on this topic again but what the heck. Everyone out there who considers fanning unethical because it's so highly effective is basing their opinion off videos and story's. A successful story or video sells much better than an unsuccessful one. I just saw a turkey video for sale the other day that said on the cover "22 successful hunts caught on film". How well do you think a video would sell if it said "22 unsuccessful hunts caught on film"?  And if I didn't know any better I'd watch any turkey hunting video or show out there and say "wow, calling to a turkey is a sure way to kill him. These guys do it every time!!"  Another thing to remember to all the ethical police out there is that we are hunting these birds during their most vulnerable time. Archibald Rutledge said in his writings that to kill a gobbler in breeding season is nothing. He considered it unethical to use the turkeys sexual weakness to call him in. Also, think what the internet has done to compound all this. It's the reason we are all discussing this. If fanning became popular in the pre-internet days, most people would have never cared. Think about if the internet was around when compound bows first started being used. Or portable climbing stands. After all, Saxton Pope and Art Young both thought it to be unethical to ambush an animal from a tree. People's ideas change with time and with them so do ethics. They always have. The differance is that today these changes are broadcast instantly, and those who oppose them can post there objections on the web instead of just doing their own thing and letting others do theirs.

Nope. My opinion is based on personal experience. I've seen a couple of hundred turkeys die in front of me. First time I fanned one was exciting. Second time, it just didn't feel right. Third time, I didn't pull the trigger. I pulled out the fan a few more times on bad birds just to see. It's simply too damn easy. I'm not advocating a nationwide ban, but I won't congratulate someone for killing a bird that way. Shootimg a bird of the limb is more challenging.

[Bill Cooksey]

I wasn't gonna post on this topic again but what the heck. Everyone out there who considers fanning unethical because it's so highly effective is basing their opinion off videos and story's. A successful story or video sells much better than an unsuccessful one. I just saw a turkey video for sale the other day that said on the cover "22 successful hunts caught on film". How well do you think a video would sell if it said "22 unsuccessful hunts caught on film"?  And if I didn't know any better I'd watch any turkey hunting video or show out there and say "wow, calling to a turkey is a sure way to kill him. These guys do it every time!!"  Another thing to remember to all the ethical police out there is that we are hunting these birds during their most vulnerable time. Archibald Rutledge said in his writings that to kill a gobbler in breeding season is nothing. He considered it unethical to use the turkeys sexual weakness to call him in. Also, think what the internet has done to compound all this. It's the reason we are all discussing this. If fanning became popular in the pre-internet days, most people would have never cared. Think about if the internet was around when compound bows first started being used. Or portable climbing stands. After all, Saxton Pope and Art Young both thought it to be unethical to ambush an animal from a tree. People's ideas change with time and with them so do ethics. They always have. The differance is that today these changes are broadcast instantly, and those who oppose them can post there objections on the web instead of just doing their own thing and letting others do theirs.

Great post.


There are outfitters in Nebraska killing over 150 turkeys per season, an astounding percentage of which are killed with fanning.

There are guys in the mid-west who use this tactic almost exclusively and kill over 80% of the time.

It's an insanely effective tactic and I don't care how progressive a guy is, there comes a point where ya gotta say enough is enough.  Technology ruins culture.  It ruins tradition.  No one is naive enough to dispute that all of us embrace it to a certain extent but for me, the quality of a kill is significantly influenced by how it is achieved.  Maybe a guy who has only killed 20, 30 or 50 birds in his lifetime can't see the forest for the trees but the truth is, we're pushing the ethical threshold. 

At what point does a human being recognize the significant advantage they already have over our quarry and suspend the pursuit of additional advantages?

At what point do you guys finally realize that turkey hunting is the fastest growing genre of hunting and we can't be promoting tactics that increase harvest numbers while we have organizations like the d.a.m.n NWTF recruiting to increase hunter numbers.  The resource can't withstand the length of current seasons as they are,  the bag limits we now have and the number of people killing birds.

20 years from now. Guys that have been hunting turkeys for a while are going to look back on the early- mid 2000s as the glory days of turkey hunting.  The spring weather was good, the habitat supported high poult recruitment, the hunter numbers were low and very few people were discussing bullshit tactics like this.

[GobbleNut]

I wasn't gonna post on this topic again but what the heck. Everyone out there who considers fanning unethical because it's so highly effective is basing their opinion off videos and story's. A successful story or video sells much better than an unsuccessful one. I just saw a turkey video for sale the other day that said on the cover "22 successful hunts caught on film". How well do you think a video would sell if it said "22 unsuccessful hunts caught on film"?  And if I didn't know any better I'd watch any turkey hunting video or show out there and say "wow, calling to a turkey is a sure way to kill him. These guys do it every time!!"  Another thing to remember to all the ethical police out there is that we are hunting these birds during their most vulnerable time. Archibald Rutledge said in his writings that to kill a gobbler in breeding season is nothing. He considered it unethical to use the turkeys sexual weakness to call him in. Also, think what the internet has done to compound all this. It's the reason we are all discussing this. If fanning became popular in the pre-internet days, most people would have never cared. Think about if the internet was around when compound bows first started being used. Or portable climbing stands. After all, Saxton Pope and Art Young both thought it to be unethical to ambush an animal from a tree. People's ideas change with time and with them so do ethics. They always have. The differance is that today these changes are broadcast instantly, and those who oppose them can post there objections on the web instead of just doing their own thing and letting others do theirs.

To take this a bit further, if turkey hunting had started in its initial stages with hunters using fans, and with the idea of "real hunting" consisting of getting close enough to a gobbler to show him the fan and have him approach you because of it,....and then some hunters started using turkey calls to get a gobbler to come,....we would all be having the exact opposite discussion right now.  We would all be complaining about how turkey calling had ruined the sport and was unethical.  ...Go figure....   

[Bill Cooksey]

That makes as much sense as a hemorrhoid transplant.

[Cottonmouth]

My take on fanning is its not for me. I'd rather use my calling skills to bring the bird in. Might as well shoot them off the roost or chase them down in a corn field with your truck. In this day and age, it seems like everybody wants instant success without putting in the required effort or skill. I fully expect in 10 yrs, hunting over corn piles with a rifle will be legal in Mississippi.  The legislature just recently legalized feeders for deer and I despise it. If a man can't kill a deer in Mississippi without sitting over a feeder, he's not much of a hunter.

[silvestris]

To take this a bit further, if turkey hunting had started in its initial stages with hunters using fans, and with the idea of "real hunting" consisting of getting close enough to a gobbler to show him the fan and have him approach you because of it,....and then some hunters started using turkey calls to get a gobbler to come,....we would all be having the exact opposite discussion right now.  We would all be complaining about how turkey calling had ruined the sport and was unethical.  ...Go figure....   

I doubt that very seriously.  There have been essentially three eras of turkey hunting.  In the first, turkeys were plentiful and sports hunters hunted them with callers and primarily with rifles.  The first era was virtually ended by the destruction of habitat and the hiatus lasted for about thirty years or so until the invention of the cannon net which was the beginning of the second era which consisted of sports hunters hunting with callers and shotguns.  The third era began in the 80s as videos and decoys of all kinds began to be used primarily by deer hunters who were attracted to turkey hunting by the videos.  How much farther the decoy technology will progress is anyone's guess (we already have radio-controlled strutting gobblers on wheels capable of turning their fans from side-to-side), but I fear that the technology and the increasing numbers being "introduced" to the sport will lead to a fourth era, an era in which the young hunters of today will be telling their grandchildren of a time when a magnificent bird roamed the forests of this continent.

[Bowguy]

My take on fanning is its not for me. I'd rather use my calling skills to bring the bird in. Might as well shoot them off the roost or chase them down in a corn field with your truck. In this day and age, it seems like everybody wants instant success without putting in the required effort or skill. I fully expect in 10 yrs, hunting over corn piles with a rifle will be legal in Mississippi.  The legislature just recently legalized feeders for deer and I despise it. If a man can't kill a deer in Mississippi without sitting over a feeder, he's not much of a hunter.

On the money!

[Cutt]

We all have different opinions on what methods of hunting are fair or ethical?

To me it more about the challenge and have no interest in fanning. Nor do I have any interest in using any decoys or shot gunning within a blind. As I feel all these methods in my eyes are all an unfair advantage. Decoys and fanning both work as visual aids to dupe turkeys, where a blind is a crutch to conceal yourself and movement, but this is my opinion as to the style of hunting I enjoy for the challenge.

But on the other hand, some may say my hunting sitting against a tree in camo with a shot gun and using calls is unfair? It all comes down to what type of hunting one is looking for, but doesn't neccessarily mean all should, just because you don't.

[VaTuRkStOmPeR]

I wasn't gonna post on this topic again but what the heck. Everyone out there who considers fanning unethical because it's so highly effective is basing their opinion off videos and story's. A successful story or video sells much better than an unsuccessful one. I just saw a turkey video for sale the other day that said on the cover "22 successful hunts caught on film". How well do you think a video would sell if it said "22 unsuccessful hunts caught on film"?  And if I didn't know any better I'd watch any turkey hunting video or show out there and say "wow, calling to a turkey is a sure way to kill him. These guys do it every time!!"  Another thing to remember to all the ethical police out there is that we are hunting these birds during their most vulnerable time. Archibald Rutledge said in his writings that to kill a gobbler in breeding season is nothing. He considered it unethical to use the turkeys sexual weakness to call him in. Also, think what the internet has done to compound all this. It's the reason we are all discussing this. If fanning became popular in the pre-internet days, most people would have never cared. Think about if the internet was around when compound bows first started being used. Or portable climbing stands. After all, Saxton Pope and Art Young both thought it to be unethical to ambush an animal from a tree. People's ideas change with time and with them so do ethics. They always have. The differance is that today these changes are broadcast instantly, and those who oppose them can post there objections on the web instead of just doing their own thing and letting others do theirs.

To take this a bit further, if turkey hunting had started in its initial stages with hunters using fans, and with the idea of "real hunting" consisting of getting close enough to a gobbler to show him the fan and have him approach you because of it,....and then some hunters started using turkey calls to get a gobbler to come,....we would all be having the exact opposite discussion right now.  We would all be complaining about how turkey calling had ruined the sport and was unethical.  ...Go figure....   

I find this hypothesis illogical,

Go find 10 gobblers in various situations (solo, henned up, etc)and call to them.  Tell me how many you kill.

Go find 10 gobblers put a fan in front of you and crawl at them.  Tell me how many you kill.

No one has ever called in birds with the consistency that you can crawl/reap em.

[Bill Cooksey]

Hence my hemorrhoid comment.

[g8rvet]

Have not fanned, will not fan, not my thing.  But I am not judging.

Anecdotal stories of mythical outfitters is meaningless to me.  Harvest numbers of birds taken and sustainability of populations is what should determine legal seasons and methods of take.  I knew guys when I was a kid that felt that way about compound bows.  Said they gave archers an unfair advantage and there would be no deer left for rifle season.   

Internet + opinion = forums.  I can be swayed in my opinions on what should be legal, but with science.  It would be very interesting to see a study on success rates of reaping.  Also, injury rates.  Also rates of turkey hunters that have put a lifetime in to acquire the skills and then see some new guy go out and have the same success rates they do get ticked off.  All would be interesting. 

[spaightlabs]

I think Stomper's comment and Bill C's comments on effectiveness are pretty spot on.  Ultimately, over-harvesting in certain areas will prove detrimental to the population and in areas where there was once excellent hunting will see dramatic declines in opportunities and success. 

There will still be birds around because not everyone will switch to this type of tactic just for the sake of tipping a bird over, but there will come a time when the folks that set seasons and limits have to address this due to declining populations.

Bill's observations about bird numbers in his area are noteworthy.  In an area once crawling with turkeys, the combination of long seasons, multiple bird limits and extremely effective tactics will aggregate to the detriment of the population quickly.  throw in a bad hatch or bad weather and bam, you are staring down a potential several year problem.