Harvest numbers don't reflect the season

[woodsman87]

I would still be willing to try a three bird or two bird limit for a couple of years and see what happened.

Sent from my Lumia 900 using Tapatalk

 

[catman529]

Serious question - do you think the TWRA wildlife managers and turkey biologists read this forum? To be more specific, I wonder if Daryl Ratajczak and Roger Applegate are following all of these recent threads about the perceived decline of turkey hunting in TN?

I have always wondered this. Although they got the degree, they aren't out there living our life either. They have no clue, and probably never heard of the area names i hunt....





Sent from my Lumia 900 using Tapatalk

Daryl most likely knows or cares a lot more than the Applegate guy.


Sent from the talk of tap

 

[PickettSFHunter]

Serious question - do you think the TWRA wildlife managers and turkey biologists read this forum? To be more specific, I wonder if Daryl Ratajczak and Roger Applegate are following all of these recent threads about the perceived decline of turkey hunting in TN?

I have always wondered this. Although they got the degree, they aren't out there living our life either. They have no clue, and probably never heard of the area names i hunt....





Sent from my Lumia 900 using Tapatalk

When thinking of a degree in wildlife, you really have to consider that it's one of the easiest degrees to get, in other words, the degree doesn't mean you know much, especially about game animals. I got out of it after I realized what an easy degree it was and almost nothing about game species was taught where I was.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bone Collector]

what year did we go to a 4 bird limit?

I think the graph covers enough years before and after, but that is important to know so you can see kill levels before, immediately after it was raised, and then after a couple years of the new 4 bird limit. I can't remember a 3 bird limit, so I figure the change was made before 2010.

the graph above got me thinking and I wondered what about Maury, Wilson, Rutherford, and Williamson County? I see birds all the time and can attest that in a lot of the Williamson county areas that I see them, I don't think any turkey hunting occurs or very little. However in the Rutherford, and Wilson areas there is hunting going on.

That being said, a lot of what I said, about turkeys appearing not to be in decline is based off what I see. Likewise many that questioned it, are basing their opinions on what they see. The only way to know is to pull the harvest #s and see.

I have done that to an extent, but will not post the graph until 2015 season is over and all kills are in.

 

[Bone Collector]

Also another thought. is there anyway we can see how many people are hunting turkey each year? I bet we can't because you'd have to count the sportsman license holders as turkey hunters and that is not always true, but I would bet the # of people hunting turkeys has declined over the years. In addition, I would bet the amount of hunting land has decreased as well.

Both would have negative impacts on the harvest #'s.

 

[Roost 1]

I can almost assure you the number of turkey hunters has increased.... The number of license holders may decrease but more people are turkey hunting than ever before....What you need to wonder about is how many birds are NOT being tagged since checks stations have been done away with.... This new tagging, checking system is a joke...

 

[scn]

IMO, harvest numbers ARE NOT a great indicator of the condition of the statewide population. As an example, when the population was at its peak, a good turkey hunter (not me) may have had 25 gobblers on a farm to hunt, and it may have taken him/her a half dozen hunts to kill a limit of four. Fast forward to the present, and that turkey hunter may only have 10 gobblers on that same farm to hunt, and it may take them the whole season to take their four. But, guess what, the harvest figures at the end are going to reflect the very same numbers for that hunter no matter the total decline.

When I am receiving professional observations from across the state from wildlife officers that say we are in a rapid, downhill slide, I temper what the harvest numbers may or may not be showing. Add to it turkey hunters that live for the spring season that are now saying my flock is a third of what it used to be and I get concerned. I am convinced that the blinds, decoys, fanning, etc. are also masking the decline and keeping the numbers higher than they would have been without those tactics to rely on. Right or wrong, they are allowing hunters to kill multiple birds that very likely would not have been killing any years ago. Comparing harvest figures in the times before and after the addition of these modern tactics sort of makes it like comparing apples to oranges.

Bean counting has a place in decision making. But, so does professional observations from people that are out there every day. IMO, agency decision makers are relying way too much on some harvest figures that very likely ARE NOT a valid comparison of the present and our flock at its peak. Hopefully the Commission will add some common sense to the equation and try to do something to slow down the decline.

 

[Setterman]

I had a big response typed out but saw scn's post and he summed up everything I was going to say.

I don't put any stock in the harvest numbers really, not with how dumbed down the sport has become. There's more turkey hunters then ever before and it takes no skill for most if not all to have success with the fans, blinds, decoys etc. therefore the numbers of birds that would normally survive is minimal.

if decoys and fans were illegal I bet our harvest would be half what it is now and maybe 30%

 

[TheLBLman]

SCN is "spot on" with every statement in his post.

IMO, harvest numbers ARE NOT a great indicator of the condition of the statewide population.

. . . . . Comparing harvest figures in the times before and after the addition of these modern tactics sort of make it like comparing apples to oranges.

Bean counting has a place in decision making. But, so does professional observations from people that are out there every day. IMO, agency decision makers are relying way too much on some harvest figures that very likely ARE NOT a valid comparison of the present and our flock at its peak. Hopefully the Commission will add some common sense to the equation and try to do something to slow down the decline.

Totally agree, and sadly, that last sentence seems to be our best hope for some common sense regarding Tennessee's current and future management of it's wild turkey resources. TWRA did an incredible job of restoring Tennessee's wild turkey, but, imo, have more recently fumbled when they went to a 4-bird spring limit and started the fall hen killing.

As has been pointed out by many, our neighboring KY hunters have a higher success rate, and they're having that with a 2-bird limit, not to mention a shorter turkey season.

 

[deerchaser007]

what year did we go to a 4 bird limit?

I think the graph covers enough years before and after, but that is important to know so you can see kill levels before, immediately after it was raised, and then after a couple years of the new 4 bird limit. I can't remember a 3 bird limit, so I figure the change was made before 2010.

the graph above got me thinking and I wondered what about Maury, Wilson, Rutherford, and Williamson County? I see birds all the time and can attest that in a lot of the Williamson county areas that I see them, I don't think any turkey hunting occurs or very little. However in the Rutherford, and Wilson areas there is hunting going on.

That being said, a lot of what I said, about turkeys appearing not to be in decline is based off what I see. Likewise many that questioned it, are basing their opinions on what they see. The only way to know is to pull the harvest #s and see.

I have done that to an extent, but will not post the graph until 2015 season is over and all kills are in.

2004 was 3 bearded birds, if I'm not mistaken 2005 was 1st year with 4 bird limit. If not 05, for sure 2006 was 4 bird limit. Remember it very well, many hunters complained when the 07 severe poult recruitment hit and begged for a reduction. For the most part, most areas have never fully recovered from that either. TWRA regularly says its stabilization, that is the not the case. Broad surveys have never touched numbers to pre 07. AND never will with liberal limits and ridiculous fall limits. In 04 and 05 TWRA fully expected our spring harvest to exceed 40,000. It was never allowed to reach this goal.
SO, if you intend to get a honest to goodness trend on the harvest, you would need county data from 2000 til 2015. Good luck with that!

BTW, agree with SCN and setterman. BUT, none of us would be having this conversation if action was took in 2007 to 2008. Sure areas that have not been hunted hard since those years have rebounded to a certain percentage, but with just average hunting and smart hunters making smart decisions, the population cannot still fully rebound due to liberal limits, 7 years later!

 

[Roost 1]

IMO, harvest numbers ARE NOT a great indicator of the condition of the statewide population. As an example, when the population was at its peak, a good turkey hunter (not me) may have had 25 gobblers on a farm to hunt, and it may have taken him/her a half dozen hunts to kill a limit of four. Fast forward to the present, and that turkey hunter may only have 10 gobblers on that same farm to hunt, and it may take them the whole season to take their four. But, guess what, the harvest figures at the end are going to reflect the very same numbers for that hunter no matter the total decline.

When I am receiving professional observations from across the state from wildlife officers that say we are in a rapid, downhill slide, I temper what the harvest numbers may or may not be showing. Add to it turkey hunters that live for the spring season that are now saying my flock is a third of what it used to be and I get concerned. I am convinced that the blinds, decoys, fanning, etc. are also masking the decline and keeping the numbers higher than they would have been without those tactics to rely on. Right or wrong, they are allowing hunters to kill multiple birds that very likely would not have been killing any years ago. Comparing harvest figures in the times before and after the addition of these modern tactics sort of make it like comparing apples to oranges.

Bean counting has a place in decision making. But, so does professional observations from people that are out there every day. IMO, agency decision makers are relying way too much on some harvest figures that very likely ARE NOT a valid comparison of the present and our flock at its peak. Hopefully the Commission will add some common sense to the equation and try to do something to slow down the decline.

Great post!!!!!

 

[8 POINTS OR BETTER]

IMO, harvest numbers ARE NOT a great indicator of the condition of the statewide population. As an example, when the population was at its peak, a good turkey hunter (not me) may have had 25 gobblers on a farm to hunt, and it may have taken him/her a half dozen hunts to kill a limit of four. Fast forward to the present, and that turkey hunter may only have 10 gobblers on that same farm to hunt, and it may take them the whole season to take their four. But, guess what, the harvest figures at the end are going to reflect the very same numbers for that hunter no matter the total decline.

When I am receiving professional observations from across the state from wildlife officers that say we are in a rapid, downhill slide, I temper what the harvest numbers may or may not be showing. Add to it turkey hunters that live for the spring season that are now saying my flock is a third of what it used to be and I get concerned. I am convinced that the blinds, decoys, fanning, etc. are also masking the decline and keeping the numbers higher than they would have been without those tactics to rely on. Right or wrong, they are allowing hunters to kill multiple birds that very likely would not have been killing any years ago. Comparing harvest figures in the times before and after the addition of these modern tactics sort of make it like comparing apples to oranges.

Bean counting has a place in decision making. But, so does professional observations from people that are out there every day. IMO, agency decision makers are relying way too much on some harvest figures that very likely ARE NOT a valid comparison of the present and our flock at its peak. Hopefully the Commission will add some common sense to the equation and try to do something to slow down the decline.

Great Post

 

[Bone Collector]

IMO, harvest numbers ARE NOT a great indicator of the condition of the statewide population. As an example, when the population was at its peak, a good turkey hunter (not me) may have had 25 gobblers on a farm to hunt, and it may have taken him/her a half dozen hunts to kill a limit of four. Fast forward to the present, and that turkey hunter may only have 10 gobblers on that same farm to hunt, and it may take them the whole season to take their four. But, guess what, the harvest figures at the end are going to reflect the very same numbers for that hunter no matter the total decline.

When I am receiving professional observations from across the state from wildlife officers that say we are in a rapid, downhill slide, I temper what the harvest numbers may or may not be showing. Add to it turkey hunters that live for the spring season that are now saying my flock is a third of what it used to be and I get concerned. I am convinced that the blinds, decoys, fanning, etc. are also masking the decline and keeping the numbers higher than they would have been without those tactics to rely on. Right or wrong, they are allowing hunters to kill multiple birds that very likely would not have been killing any years ago. Comparing harvest figures in the times before and after the addition of these modern tactics sort of make it like comparing apples to oranges.

Bean counting has a place in decision making. But, so does professional observations from people that are out there every day. IMO, agency decision makers are relying way too much on some harvest figures that very likely ARE NOT a valid comparison of the present and our flock at its peak. Hopefully the Commission will add some common sense to the equation and try to do something to slow down the decline.

Great post, but there is a couple issues with it. If harvest data, isn't the best indicator, what is? It doesn't matter what is, because we probably don't have it. Bean counting will be used in every decision, you acknowledge that in your post, but if the only beans they have to count are harvest numbers, then that is what they will go off of. Unless they see a dramatic drop in harvest #'s they will believe the population is just fine.

If so many of you believe the "professional observations" AKA avid turkey hunters, maybe some biological surveys???, then I say do what the deer hunters have done and start the petition to lower the limit and it may get done. My observation this year is I have seen just as many birds as I have in years past. However on my brothers property in Wilson County, the birds are in the area, but not using his property as much. Therefore gobbling, and kills are down this year there, but we can see the birds over in fields across property lines, just can't hunt over there.... Got a place I don't turkey hunt. saw 20+ Toms in the field there in Dec. I hear turkeys on roost 95% of the time while i am deer hunting there. Guess what county.... Giles. "But Giles county is suffering a mass turkey decline..." Just ask the folks that hunt on here.

All this made me ponder a few questions. Many on this thread have been saying, "I've noticed a decline for the last few years and have been saying the limit should be 3 or less for years now."
How many of you avid turkey hunters have shot 4 birds a year on your places for the last 4-5 years? If you did shoot 4 and you saw a decline, why didn't you go somewhere else for some of your birds, or just not fill the 4th tag? How many posts on this site have we seen this year or in past years, where members post and say "Bird # (number over 4) in TN that I have been part of" ? If you kill 4, call in 3 for your son, 3 for your buddy, and 2 for your dad, odds are you just wiped out a lot of your birds. How many of those that post those types of posts or are known for being good turkey hunters on here, have disdain for strut decoys, fanning, blinds, etc.?

It almost seems that as it has become easier for less skilled hunters to be successful, the more skilled, are complaining about the lack of game. Could it be that we (and the TWRA) are facing the dilemma of needing to recruit new hunters to the sport, but in doing so we are seeing the effects of doing so (more kills = less population)?

I can probably answer most of these questions, as can most of you. I think we probably need to reduce it to 3, and limit the fall harvest, but if it doesn't happen, it will require that you guys that talk about this the most to limit yourself. JMO

 

[scn]

IMO, harvest numbers ARE NOT a great indicator of the condition of the statewide population. As an example, when the population was at its peak, a good turkey hunter (not me) may have had 25 gobblers on a farm to hunt, and it may have taken him/her a half dozen hunts to kill a limit of four. Fast forward to the present, and that turkey hunter may only have 10 gobblers on that same farm to hunt, and it may take them the whole season to take their four. But, guess what, the harvest figures at the end are going to reflect the very same numbers for that hunter no matter the total decline.

When I am receiving professional observations from across the state from wildlife officers that say we are in a rapid, downhill slide, I temper what the harvest numbers may or may not be showing. Add to it turkey hunters that live for the spring season that are now saying my flock is a third of what it used to be and I get concerned. I am convinced that the blinds, decoys, fanning, etc. are also masking the decline and keeping the numbers higher than they would have been without those tactics to rely on. Right or wrong, they are allowing hunters to kill multiple birds that very likely would not have been killing any years ago. Comparing harvest figures in the times before and after the addition of these modern tactics sort of make it like comparing apples to oranges.

Bean counting has a place in decision making. But, so does professional observations from people that are out there every day. IMO, agency decision makers are relying way too much on some harvest figures that very likely ARE NOT a valid comparison of the present and our flock at its peak. Hopefully the Commission will add some common sense to the equation and try to do something to slow down the decline.

Great post, but there is a couple issues with it. If harvest data, isn't the best indicator, what is? It doesn't matter what is, because we probably don't have it. Bean counting will be used in every decision, you acknowledge that in your post, but if the only beans they have to count are harvest numbers, then that is what they will go off of. Unless they see a dramatic drop in harvest #'s they will believe the population is just fine.

If so many of you believe the "professional observations" AKA avid turkey hunters, maybe some biological surveys???, then I say do what the deer hunters have done and start the petition to lower the limit and it may get done. My observation this year is I have seen just as many birds as I have in years past. However on my brothers property in Wilson County, the birds are in the area, but not using his property as much. Therefore gobbling, and kills are down this year there, but we can see the birds over in fields across property lines, just can't hunt over there.... Got a place I don't turkey hunt. saw 20+ Toms in the field there in Dec. I hear turkeys on roost 95% of the time while i am deer hunting there. Guess what county.... Giles. "But Giles county is suffering a mass turkey decline..." Just ask the folks that hunt on here.

All this made me ponder a few questions. Many on this thread have been saying, "I've noticed a decline for the last few years and have been saying the limit should be 3 or less for years now."
How many of you avid turkey hunters have shot 4 birds a year on your places for the last 4-5 years? If you did shoot 4 and you saw a decline, why didn't you go somewhere else for some of your birds, or just not fill the 4th tag? How many posts on this site have we seen this year or in past years, where members post and say "Bird # (number over 4) in TN that I have been part of" ? If you kill 4, call in 3 for your son, 3 for your buddy, and 2 for your dad, odds are you just wiped out a lot of your birds. How many of those that post those types of posts or are known for being good turkey hunters on here, have disdain for strut decoys, fanning, blinds, etc.?

It almost seems that as it has become easier for less skilled hunters to be successful, the more skilled, are complaining about the lack of game. Could it be that we (and the TWRA) are facing the dilemma of needing to recruit new hunters to the sport, but in doing so we are seeing the effects of doing so (more kills = less population)?

I can probably answer most of these questions, as can most of you. I think we probably need to reduce it to 3, and limit the fall harvest, but if it doesn't happen, it will require that you guys that talk about this the most to limit yourself. JMO

I think one year I killed three birds, but other than that, it has been two or less. Part of that is lack of skill on my part to kill more, but part is being pretty selective about what I shoot. I won't shoot a jake if I know it isn't a mature bird. There are times when size and beard length have caused me to shoot a tweener, but only a couple of times in 40+ years.

It just doesn't make any sense to me to keep pounding turkeys at the same level we did when the population was at its peak.

 

[Bone Collector]

IMO, harvest numbers ARE NOT a great indicator of the condition of the statewide population. As an example, when the population was at its peak, a good turkey hunter (not me) may have had 25 gobblers on a farm to hunt, and it may have taken him/her a half dozen hunts to kill a limit of four. Fast forward to the present, and that turkey hunter may only have 10 gobblers on that same farm to hunt, and it may take them the whole season to take their four. But, guess what, the harvest figures at the end are going to reflect the very same numbers for that hunter no matter the total decline.

When I am receiving professional observations from across the state from wildlife officers that say we are in a rapid, downhill slide, I temper what the harvest numbers may or may not be showing. Add to it turkey hunters that live for the spring season that are now saying my flock is a third of what it used to be and I get concerned. I am convinced that the blinds, decoys, fanning, etc. are also masking the decline and keeping the numbers higher than they would have been without those tactics to rely on. Right or wrong, they are allowing hunters to kill multiple birds that very likely would not have been killing any years ago. Comparing harvest figures in the times before and after the addition of these modern tactics sort of make it like comparing apples to oranges.

Bean counting has a place in decision making. But, so does professional observations from people that are out there every day. IMO, agency decision makers are relying way too much on some harvest figures that very likely ARE NOT a valid comparison of the present and our flock at its peak. Hopefully the Commission will add some common sense to the equation and try to do something to slow down the decline.

Great post, but there is a couple issues with it. If harvest data, isn't the best indicator, what is? It doesn't matter what is, because we probably don't have it. Bean counting will be used in every decision, you acknowledge that in your post, but if the only beans they have to count are harvest numbers, then that is what they will go off of. Unless they see a dramatic drop in harvest #'s they will believe the population is just fine.

If so many of you believe the "professional observations" AKA avid turkey hunters, maybe some biological surveys???, then I say do what the deer hunters have done and start the petition to lower the limit and it may get done. My observation this year is I have seen just as many birds as I have in years past. However on my brothers property in Wilson County, the birds are in the area, but not using his property as much. Therefore gobbling, and kills are down this year there, but we can see the birds over in fields across property lines, just can't hunt over there.... Got a place I don't turkey hunt. saw 20+ Toms in the field there in Dec. I hear turkeys on roost 95% of the time while i am deer hunting there. Guess what county.... Giles. "But Giles county is suffering a mass turkey decline..." Just ask the folks that hunt on here.

All this made me ponder a few questions. Many on this thread have been saying, "I've noticed a decline for the last few years and have been saying the limit should be 3 or less for years now."
How many of you avid turkey hunters have shot 4 birds a year on your places for the last 4-5 years? If you did shoot 4 and you saw a decline, why didn't you go somewhere else for some of your birds, or just not fill the 4th tag? How many posts on this site have we seen this year or in past years, where members post and say "Bird # (number over 4) in TN that I have been part of" ? If you kill 4, call in 3 for your son, 3 for your buddy, and 2 for your dad, odds are you just wiped out a lot of your birds. How many of those that post those types of posts or are known for being good turkey hunters on here, have disdain for strut decoys, fanning, blinds, etc.?

It almost seems that as it has become easier for less skilled hunters to be successful, the more skilled, are complaining about the lack of game. Could it be that we (and the TWRA) are facing the dilemma of needing to recruit new hunters to the sport, but in doing so we are seeing the effects of doing so (more kills = less population)?

I can probably answer most of these questions, as can most of you. I think we probably need to reduce it to 3, and limit the fall harvest, but if it doesn't happen, it will require that you guys that talk about this the most to limit yourself. JMO

I think one year I killed three birds, but other than that, it has been two or less. Part of that is lack of skill on my part to kill more, but part is being pretty selective about what I shoot. I won't shoot a jake if I know it isn't a mature bird. There are times when size and beard length have caused me to shoot a tweener, but only a couple of times in 40+ years.

It just doesn't make any sense to me to keep pounding turkeys at the same level we did when the population was at its peak.

Maybe it is time to start the 3 bird limit petition... This seems to have more biological reasoning behind it than the 2 buck limit proposal. JMO

 

[Setterman]

I'm one of the ones that feel fanning, decoys, and blinds are causing more turkeys to get killed then ever before. It allows the worst hunters to kill birds, sometimes 4 birds when prior to this fad these same hunters would've killed zero.

I'm also one of those hunters that has tagged all my legal birds for as long as I've hunted in TN. Sure it's hypocritical to a degree, and my hands are not clean. However, I spread my misery out over 300,000 acres and 4-5 counties. I also am on public ground obviously so it's much harder if not impossible to control the number of birds removed each year.

If anything since I'm one of the tiny percentage killing a limit each year, I should be vehemently against a lower limit. However, I'm all for it, and want it to go back to 2 for several years to let things recover from the damage by us hunters and natural events.

I'm also all for the outlawing of decoys and fans, people can learn to hunt or have unfilled tags. There's plenty of turkey hunters, we don't need to recruit anymore, and if they want to take up the sport bad enough they can learn to hunt rather then just shoot. Our society is so f-ed up that for someone to get "hooked" they have to have instant success. That in and of itself if complete garbage. Gone are the days of earning something, and being better for it.

 

[woodsman87]

Too much to read the whole thread, yes I am lazy. 30,000 dead birds is 30,000 dead, doesn't matter if it took a guy 4 days to limit out or forty days. Harvest numbers show some of population trends, but there are not an all go.

Because of the use a full strut decoy crowd everybody kills turkeys. Harvest numbers look similar to years past, but there are less than half of the numbers we used to have in Giles, Lawrence, and Lincoln county. I would go ahead and say that it is about a tenth of what it used to be. But people still kill turkeys because they use full strut decoys.
Why can't twra just outlaw them? I wish the entire nation would. It is easier than hunting turkeys over a corn feeder. Leave hen and Jake decoys alone so the decoy people will still have something.

Sent from my Lumia 900 using Tapatalk

 

[Setterman]

Too much to read the whole thread, yes I am lazy. 30,000 dead birds is 30,000 dead, doesn't matter if it took a guy 4 days to limit out or forty days. Harvest numbers show some of population trends, but there are not an all go.

Because of the use a full strut decoy crowd everybody kills turkeys. Harvest numbers look similar to years past, but there are less than half of the numbers we used to have in Giles, Lawrence, and Lincoln county. I would go ahead and say that it is about a tenth of what it used to be. But people still kill turkeys because they use full strut decoys.
Why can't twra just outlaw them? I wish the entire nation would. It is easier than hunting turkeys over a corn feeder. Leave hen and Jake decoys alone so the decoy people will still have something.

Sent from my Lumia 900 using Tapatalk

I say outlaw them all, including fans. Make people learn to hunt. If they can't learn they'll either get better or quit.

 

[FARMTOFIELD]

IMO, harvest numbers ARE NOT a great indicator of the condition of the statewide population. As an example, when the population was at its peak, a good turkey hunter (not me) may have had 25 gobblers on a farm to hunt, and it may have taken him/her a half dozen hunts to kill a limit of four. Fast forward to the present, and that turkey hunter may only have 10 gobblers on that same farm to hunt, and it may take them the whole season to take their four. But, guess what, the harvest figures at the end are going to reflect the very same numbers for that hunter no matter the total decline.

When I am receiving professional observations from across the state from wildlife officers that say we are in a rapid, downhill slide, I temper what the harvest numbers may or may not be showing. Add to it turkey hunters that live for the spring season that are now saying my flock is a third of what it used to be and I get concerned. I am convinced that the blinds, decoys, fanning, etc. are also masking the decline and keeping the numbers higher than they would have been without those tactics to rely on. Right or wrong, they are allowing hunters to kill multiple birds that very likely would not have been killing any years ago. Comparing harvest figures in the times before and after the addition of these modern tactics sort of make it like comparing apples to oranges.

Bean counting has a place in decision making. But, so does professional observations from people that are out there every day. IMO, agency decision makers are relying way too much on some harvest figures that very likely ARE NOT a valid comparison of the present and our flock at its peak. Hopefully the Commission will add some common sense to the equation and try to do something to slow down the decline.

Great post, but there is a couple issues with it. If harvest data, isn't the best indicator, what is? It doesn't matter what is, because we probably don't have it. Bean counting will be used in every decision, you acknowledge that in your post, but if the only beans they have to count are harvest numbers, then that is what they will go off of. Unless they see a dramatic drop in harvest #'s they will believe the population is just fine.

If so many of you believe the "professional observations" AKA avid turkey hunters, maybe some biological surveys???, then I say do what the deer hunters have done and start the petition to lower the limit and it may get done. My observation this year is I have seen just as many birds as I have in years past. However on my brothers property in Wilson County, the birds are in the area, but not using his property as much. Therefore gobbling, and kills are down this year there, but we can see the birds over in fields across property lines, just can't hunt over there.... Got a place I don't turkey hunt. saw 20+ Toms in the field there in Dec. I hear turkeys on roost 95% of the time while i am deer hunting there. Guess what county.... Giles. "But Giles county is suffering a mass turkey decline..." Just ask the folks that hunt on here.

All this made me ponder a few questions. Many on this thread have been saying, "I've noticed a decline for the last few years and have been saying the limit should be 3 or less for years now."
How many of you avid turkey hunters have shot 4 birds a year on your places for the last 4-5 years? If you did shoot 4 and you saw a decline, why didn't you go somewhere else for some of your birds, or just not fill the 4th tag? How many posts on this site have we seen this year or in past years, where members post and say "Bird # (number over 4) in TN that I have been part of" ? If you kill 4, call in 3 for your son, 3 for your buddy, and 2 for your dad, odds are you just wiped out a lot of your birds. How many of those that post those types of posts or are known for being good turkey hunters on here, have disdain for strut decoys, fanning, blinds, etc.?

It almost seems that as it has become easier for less skilled hunters to be successful, the more skilled, are complaining about the lack of game. Could it be that we (and the TWRA) are facing the dilemma of needing to recruit new hunters to the sport, but in doing so we are seeing the effects of doing so (more kills = less population)?

I can probably answer most of these questions, as can most of you. I think we probably need to reduce it to 3, and limit the fall harvest, but if it doesn't happen, it will require that you guys that talk about this the most to limit yourself. JMO

Well if the turkeys are still in Lawrence County as you say they probably are I've hiked countless miles and haven't ever found them. I found 1 and a couple hens this year, never hunted him, and I'm not sure what his fate was I hope he's still alive and he was about 2 weeks ago.

Af far as the other 100 or so birds that use to roam around here, if they are here they have, stopped scratching for food, quit making noise, went nocturnal, and started living in holes. Because I sure can't find them.

 

[deerchaser007]

Bone collector, biological facts have been posted all over this forum, its great you are not seeing a decline in your flock the few short years you hunted. But guess what, I managed my way thru the hard years of 07 to 11. But all my work can only hold so much for so long. It has finally came to an end. I can no longer sustain the flock around my farm nor the other property I hunt. I hope yours stays well for you, but with the thousands I spent and the hours of hard work, I failed. Did I do it to myself, 0 birds this year, 1 bird killed last year on other property, 1 bird killed on my farm 2013. I have never limited out, 3 is the most I ever killed in one season, that was 2006. My brother is the only other person with permission to hunt my farm. 0 birds for him past 3 years. I am done with TN, I will provide info for those that wish for change, such as the info in my thread do you remember, but will never spend another dime after this year. Its not worth it anymore