SCDNR turkey hunting survey

[TXFowler]

The last several years of DNR turkey reports give figures on hunter numbers and hunter effort. But hunter density is relative. I own 380+ acres never more than 2 hunters and they are together only one shooting, so practically one hunter. Another 1200 that only 2 can hunt. Another 1000 that only 2 can hunt and 1 hunter only hunted twice, for less than 3 total hrs( no kill). And I know of 6000 acre tract, with optimal, highly managed habitat, had 10 total hunt days over 4 days, not sure of kills but not many. No more than 5. If the hunter density numbers and how much people are hunting or killing are as crucial as you make out, I should be able to walk across the turkeys on this property,, but you can’t. Yes it’s better than most but not what it has been and could be.

In contrast I have a small, 160+ tract with 400 next door( about 3/4 mile of property border). I’m alone on 160+, the 400 is part of club with multiple leases, it has 60-70 members who have access. The turkeys there are as good or better than my other properties.
This is a biological issue, what biological issue? I haven’t a clue. But scientists are working theories, and right now they seem to be disproving more theories than they are proving, but that is progress by elimination.
The legislature and and us hunters need to settle down, quit calling for drastic changes that won’t fix the issue until the science and data point in the right direction.

You have some good points that I can agree with. I still don’t think there will ever be a “smoking gun”, they’re getting hit with it all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AnythingFeathers]

So what is your argument? You want to look at last 70+ years? Turkeys were virtually non-existent in many parts of the southeast. Some stocking programs (Oklahoma started in the 50’s) started early. But most heavy stocking efforts started in the 70’s and turkeys thrived through the 80’s and 90’s and even the early 2000’s. We lost land to development and urbanization at relatively high rates, especially the 90’s, in those times also. So did habitat loss make them grow then, but not now? Turkeys can and do adapt to some levels of development, not to high density urban development as much. But, that type of development usually is fairly concentrated. Over 90% of southeast is still considered rural.

Land loss does idea does not hold water

[TXFowler]

So what is your argument? You want to look at last 70+ years? Turkeys were virtually non-existent in many parts of the southeast. Some stocking programs (Oklahoma started in the 50’s) started early. But most heavy stocking efforts started in the 70’s and turkeys thrived through the 80’s and 90’s and even the early 2000’s. We lost land to development and urbanization at relatively high rates, especially the 90’s, in those times also. So did habitat loss make them grow then, but not now? Turkeys can and do adapt to some levels of development, not to high density urban development as much. But, that type of development usually is fairly concentrated. Over 90% of southeast is still considered rural.

Land loss does idea does not hold water

It’s all of it.

Land loss is displacing and condensing them, new and improved hunter means and methods are killing them a high rates (camo, decoys, blinds, tss, red dots), predators are more efficient due to the lack of suitable habitat, more cars on the roads are killing them, densification of planted pines is displacing them due to lack of nesting/brooding cover and forage aka habitat, hunting season being during the time that they are most vocal, visible, and vulnerable makes them easier to locate for both hunters and predators. This was kind of all over the place, but you get the picture. They have a lot going against them and not much going for them. I’m not saying we need to change everything, or anything for that matter. I’m suggesting there’s not 1 thing that we can do or change that will increase the population unless we just stop hunting them-which I don’t want. There is a huge effort going on by great biologist that are literally working around the clock and leaving no leaf unturned to figure it out, and I applaud that and will accept and advocate whatever outcome their research yields as long as it is sound research. I just don’t think they will ever find the smoking gun because I don’t think it is one gun. It’s a damn drive by shooting.

If there was one thing that I think most folks should focus on, it would be improving habitat. There are more benefits from doing this one thing than any other on the list above. Habitat will help hens and poults survive longer and make predators less efficient and less successful. You’re allowing them to better protect themselves while increasing recruitment and nest success.

Will killing varmints help? Absolutely, but you won’t kill them all and you’re not helping the birds recruit.

Will outlawing decoys and blinds help? Absolutely, but you’re not aiding in nest success though possibly helping in recruitment by making that boss Tom a little harder to kill.

Will pushing the season back help? The Tennessee study says no, but I don’t think it could necessarily hurt recruitment, but definitely isn’t helping with creditors or nest success.

You’re not going to reduce cars running them over, this will likely keep increasing.

And I hope we never get to the point where we can’t hunt them anymore or only have a fall season, that would be boring!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AnythingFeathers]

One bright spot- Jake harvest percentage is lower. Maybe it’s because there are less of them. But I’d like to think that less people are intentionally shooting them.

[AnythingFeathers]

Lower limit helps that. Less likely to burn tag on one, or more likely to hide one????
Not sure which. But those numbers are better

[TXFowler]

One bright spot- Jake harvest percentage is lower. Maybe it’s because there are less of them. But I’d like to think that less people are intentionally shooting them.

I’d say there’s at least 23% of SC that kills them! I think Jake’s need to be taken off the table except for the yutes!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TXFowler]

Lower limit helps that. Less likely to burn tag on one, or more likely to hide one????
Not sure which. But those numbers are better

That 23%….


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AnythingFeathers]

That’s an issue I’m torn on. Because sometimes it just happens. I have two friends who are some of the most successful, and purist turkey hunters you will ever meet. Close to 90 years of turkey hunting and countless gobblers between them. Over the 22 and 23 seasons each one dropped a full fanned Jake. Fair beards, 1/4” or less spurs, 15-16 lbs. Definitely Jakes. These are guys who will berate you publicly for shooting a Jake, especially if it meets all Jake criteria. Is actually fun being able to give’s hell about it. But honestly, 99.9% of us would have done the same. The DNR goes as far to define a Jake, which includes the description of the longer tail feathers.

Do you fine them? It would be a hard sale. Most “crimes” require a level of intent. So what do you do?


And our legislature is notorious for not willing to define what quality of animal you kill on your own land. They crossed a big hurdle when they put a limit on bucks in Lowstate. They probably want go much farther than limits.

[FULLCHOKE]

but in the grand scheme of thing it’s not a huge loss.

That’s an area almost the entire size of Greenwood county…

And like you said, just farmland. That doesn’t count timber, old hunt clubs turned into development, the family land subdivided and sold by the children, developments, industrial boom, etc, etc, etc…

You’re from the burg. Take a ride down 85 these days and look to your left and right. If you can’t see it, then I can’t help you much more and I guess you’re just blind.

[TXFowler]

That’s an issue I’m torn on. Because sometimes it just happens. I have two friends who are some of the most successful, and purist turkey hunters you will ever meet. Close to 90 years of turkey hunting and countless gobblers between them. Over the 22 and 23 seasons each one dropped a full fanned Jake. Fair beards, 1/4� or less spurs, 15-16 lbs. Definitely Jakes. These are guys who will berate you publicly for shooting a Jake, especially if it meets all Jake criteria. Is actually fun being able to give’s hell about it. But honestly, 99.9% of us would have done the same. The DNR goes as far to define a Jake, which includes the description of the longer tail feathers.

Do you fine them? It would be a hard sale. Most “crimes� require a level of intent. So what do you do?


And our legislature is notorious for not willing to define what quality of animal you kill on your own land. They crossed a big hurdle when they put a limit on bucks in Lowstate. They probably want go much farther than limits.

They limit all big game species in everybody’s land. What’s the difference?

You have to be able to ID waterfowl in flight to stay within the limits, surely identifying a turkey at 40 yards is easier. I think they call a “Jake” specifically based on the fan. Gobblers have been killed with no spurs, with “rotted” beards, etc. no Gobblers have been killed with 2-6 longer primary feathers to my knowledge.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TXFowler]

That’s an area almost the entire size of Greenwood county…

And like you said, just farmland. That doesn’t count timber, old hunt clubs turned into development, the family land subdivided and sold by the children, developments, industrial boom, etc, etc, etc…

You’re from the burg. Take a ride down 85 these days and look to your left and right. If you can’t see it, then I can’t help you much more and I guess you’re just blind.

Yes and sadly I’ve paved the roads and parking lots for most of these massive concrete buildings. Each one gets bigger than the last. As a matter of fact, the GC of one of those buildings obliged to my request to put a turkey on the table.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AnythingFeathers]

[QUOTE=TXFowler;3161176]They limit all big game species in everybody’s land. What’s the difference?

You have to be able to ID waterfowl in flight to stay within the limits, surely identifying a turkey at 40 yards is easier. I think they call a “Jake” specifically based on the fan. Gobblers have been killed with no spurs, with “rotted” beards, etc. no Gobblers have been killed with 2-6 longer primary feathers to my knowledge.


Well, you can add to your knowledge. The beard was short, the spurs were bumps, they weighed 15-16 lbs. only the last two feathers on each side were slightly (1/4”) shorter. THEY WERE JAKES. These were not rookies, we should all hope to have the turkey know how that these guys have one day.

[AnythingFeathers]

That’s an area almost the entire size of Greenwood county…

And like you said, just farmland. That doesn’t count timber, old hunt clubs turned into development, the family land subdivided and sold by the children, developments, industrial boom, etc, etc, etc…

You’re from the burg. Take a ride down 85 these days and look to your left and right. If you can’t see it, then I can’t help you much more and I guess you’re just blind.

Spartanburg is just one county. Only a portion of the overall picture. And still mostly rural. I never said there wasn’t development that is taking away habitat. And a lot places down an interstate are seeing some level of development. Have you gone down 26? Miles and miles of absolutely nothing. Development is taking a very small portion of the state as a whole. And the level of land loss is nowhere near the level of turkey population loss. I hunt Union primarily, and own land there. Some, but not much, development has happened down 176, probably no more than 5-600 acres. They just got 2nd new neighborhood development in 25 years. 2 or three big warehouses and a couple of relatively small factories. The first neighborhood never filled out. My Spartanburg spots have more turkeys. Try reading what I said. Your OPINION may be that there is a massive amount of loss, but the numbers don’t support it.
Are you making fun of my glasses? I’m not blind, I see just fine. And definitely don’t need your help.
And you may be able to see better than me, but must not be able to read or, at least, comprehend.

[joshua2]

They limit all big game species in everybody’s land. What’s the difference?

You have to be able to ID waterfowl in flight to stay within the limits, surely identifying a turkey at 40 yards is easier. I think they call a “Jake” specifically based on the fan. Gobblers have been killed with no spurs, with “rotted” beards, etc. no Gobblers have been killed with 2-6 longer primary feathers to my knowledge.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I killed one this year with a full fan @ 30 yds. Based on his actions to the call and willingness to die with a mature gobble, I presumed him to be a ready 2 year old that had no visible beard. When I ground checked him, I found an 18# bird with 1/2 inch pointed spurs with 5 jake beards all put together wouldn't qualify as a mature bird per the DNRs criteria. He also had underdeveloped primary feathers to be considered a 2 year old. I just called him a super jake even tho the term is cringe worthy in itself.

[joshua2]

Spartanburg is just one county. Only a portion of the overall picture. And still mostly rural. I never said there wasn’t development that is taking away habitat. And a lot places down an interstate are seeing some level of development. Have you gone down 26? Miles and miles of absolutely nothing. Development is taking a very small portion of the state as a whole. And the level of land loss is nowhere near the level of turkey population loss. I hunt Union primarily, and own land there. Some, but not much, development has happened down 176, probably no more than 5-600 acres. They just got 2nd new neighborhood development in 25 years. 2 or three big warehouses and a couple of relatively small factories. The first neighborhood never filled out. My Spartanburg spots have more turkeys. Try reading what I said. Your OPINION may be that there is a massive amount of loss, but the numbers don’t support it.
Are you making fun of my glasses? I’m not blind, I see just fine. And definitely don’t need your help.
And you may be able to see better than me, but must not be able to read or, at least, comprehend.

I live and hunt southern Spartanburg County and the bird population has nosedived tremendously in the last 5 years. The farms and 3-500 acre blocks of woods that I grew up knowing are long gone. Development has wreaked havoc in this small area that used to be booming in turkeys. I also frequent Union and Laurens County as well. Birds are still in those places but so are more hunters than I'm used to seeing.

[AnythingFeathers]

The only way we , as the hunting public, can make a real difference is to take an objective and not subjective stance. And urge our DNR and legislators to do the same.

By the way, you missed the point. I know they limit all big game. But up until a few years ago they DID NOT limit bucks in Lowstate. That was a huge step in the right direction. It was also a difficult one.

[TXFowler]

[QUOTE=AnythingFeathers;3161180]

They limit all big game species in everybody’s land. What’s the difference?

You have to be able to ID waterfowl in flight to stay within the limits, surely identifying a turkey at 40 yards is easier. I think they call a “Jake� specifically based on the fan. Gobblers have been killed with no spurs, with “rotted� beards, etc. no Gobblers have been killed with 2-6 longer primary feathers to my knowledge.


Well, you can add to your knowledge. The beard was short, the spurs were bumps, they weighed 15-16 lbs. only the last two feathers on each side were slightly (1/4�) shorter. THEY WERE JAKES. These were not rookies, we should all hope to have the turkey know how that these guys have one day.

I’m not arguing that you’re wrong, I’m saying, make the law plain and simple and ID a Jake based solely upon the fan. The birds you are referencing would not be considered “Jakes” under that definition.

Hens can have beards too…but if you mix that up, well you need to hang it up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AnythingFeathers]

The only way we , as the hunting public, can make a real difference is to take an objective and not subjective stance. And urge our DNR and legislators to do the same.

By the way, you missed the point. I know they limit all big game. But up until a few years ago they DID NOT limit bucks in Lowstate. That was a huge step in the right direction. It was also a difficult one.

[TXFowler]

The only way we , as the hunting public, can make a real difference is to take an objective and not subjective stance. And urge our DNR and legislators to do the same.

By the way, you missed the point. I know they limit all big game. But up until a few years ago they DID NOT limit bucks in Lowstate. That was a huge step in the right direction. It was also a difficult one.

Old Lowcountry money almost always prevails. Alex is the only reason they don’t ALWAYS prevail. I grew up in TX and it didn’t take me long to figure out the low country folks set their own rules as they see fit and will do what it takes to keep it that way. It also didn’t take long to realize SC was left in the stone ages on many aspects and I struggled for the longest time to figure it out. How are you an original 13 colony and you are decades behind the rest of the world??? Well, that old money has ways of controlling a lot more than you think….


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tman]

Pic of bird from last year. Gobbled and strutted all the way to the call. Was very surprised to walk up and find a short beard and bubble spurs..... ya hunt em long enough and you'll get one that surprises ya



Sent from my SM-G781V using Tapatalk