spring 2019 total harvest numbers

[TheLBLman]

I don't see how we can put much faith in any these harvest numbers
regardless whether "public wma" or "county".

I really, really want to have faith in them. But the fact that public land is being reported as an abnormally high number has me concerned.

Agreed on both accounts.

x AGAIN

Also, calling a "Regional" TWRA office and getting any numbers matching the "Hunters' Toolbox" data
may just mean they also have wrong numbers?

Regardless the numbers, who is minding the store?
Why the data glitches still at this point?

Most hunters across most the state appear to be seeing fewer turkeys than last year and years past?

 

[TheLBLman]

Just some data from the TWRA "Hunters' Toolbox" from this morning . . . . . . .

LBL Spring Turkey Harvest (dates ran March 1 thru June 1 of respective years):

2014 = 92 Total Harvest
2015 = 89 Total Harvest
2016 = 112 Total Harvest
2017 = 89 Total Harvest
2018 = 43 Total Harvest
2019 = 70 Total Harvest (2019 March 1 thru May 7, but turkey season already ended at LBL)

Over the past few years, how does it appear the turkey population is likely "trending"?

But think about this:

LBL is much more conservatively managed for turkeys by having a shorter, later-opening season, with a 2-bird limit rather than the 4-bird limit of most TWRA-managed WMAs. AND, this 2-bird limit counts towards the TN statewide 4-bird limit! No "bonus" birds at LBL.

Also, it's my opinion that LBL has better turkey habitat, plus more contiguous acreage, plus loses fewer birds to poachers than most TWRA-managed WMAs across TN.

Yet, even with this more conservative turkey management at LBL, still appears the turkey population is going down?

What might this suggest about the TN "statewide" turkey population, particularly on TN's WMAs currently "reporting" such relatively high turkey harvests?

To what extent the TWRA numbers may be true, I believe they are allowing an over-harvest of the available turkey resource,
and it is not sustainable.

 

[Boll Weevil]

Report run at 816a today.

 

[Andy S.]

^^^^That graphic pretty much aligns with A LOT of the comments/opinions on this page about sightings, opportunity and bag limits, based on one's geographic location. A lot of the hunters that hunt the dark blue counties cannot understand, or fathom, other hunter's viewpoints that hunt the light blue counties. Thanks for sharing.

 

[Andy S.]

28,708 total turkeys as of right now. 216 of them are hens. Dates are March 13 to today, statewide, WMAs, etc, all included.

what are you using to get this data? I can't seem to find anything that's putting us over 20k yet.

TWRA On the Go App on my iPhone.

 

[Shooter77]

28,708 total turkeys as of right now. 216 of them are hens. Dates are March 13 to today, statewide, WMAs, etc, all included.

what are you using to get this data? I can't seem to find anything that's putting us over 20k yet.

TWRA On the Go App on my iPhone.

Thanks! I'm using the website and getting totally different numbers

I can't get the APP to include WMA.

 

[TheLBLman]

^^^^That graphic pretty much aligns with A LOT of the comments/opinions on this page about sightings, opportunity and bag limits, based on one's geographic location. A lot of the hunters that hunt the dark blue counties cannot understand, or fathom, other hunter's viewpoints that hunt the light blue counties

And, a "lot" of those turkey killers are relatively "young" hunters will little long-term experience?
A "lot" of those are using much more effective, longer-range killing weapons (and "crutches") than some of us older guys could have imagined a decade or so ago?

There is also very strong evidence that a growing percentage of the birds killed each spring are being whacked over a corn pile, or perhaps only 300 yards from one?

Just saying, I believe we're killing a progressively higher percentage each year of whatever's available,
and it's taking a toll on the ONGOING turkey population.
That ONGOING population appears to be slowly dwindling, year by year,
CAMOUFLAGED by a number of turkeys being shot, that number more reflective of longer-range weapons and "easier" accomplished killing tactics,
than the actual turkey population.

Further "camouflaging" the dwindling population are they youthful hunters finding it so "easy" so simply go out and "kill" a turkey by the widely used tactics of today compared to yesteryear.

I spend most of my time in one of those darker "blue" counties, and there are not as many birds this year as last,
nor were there as many birds last year as a decade earlier,
nor were there as many birds a decade ago as there was the prior decade.

We can debate the various causes of the statewide decline, and false perceptions to the contrary.

But there is no debate that "Nero" (TWRA's turkey biologist) continues to "fiddle"
as our statewide turkey population continues to fall.

It's not that reg changes can turn this around,
but regs are the main thing we can change that does in fact effect our ongoing turkey population.

In retrospect, it was a big mistake for TWRA to increase the spring turkey limit from 2 to 3, and then to 4 (where it's at now).

It would really help our ongoing turkey population if the spring season opened at least a week later,
and the limit reduced to 2 or 3.

 

[Southern Sportsman]

^^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^^

I think 2000-2010 was the peak. Since then the populations have been in slow decline. Which roughly coincides with the advent of "strutter" decoys and increased bag limits.

 

[TheLBLman]

It's not so much what any one of us experiences or observes
as it is the collective effect of the statewide "hunters".

On average, particularly increased over the past 3 years,
the "average" statewide turkey hunters have . . . . .

1) Greatly increased the effective range of his turkey killing weapon, and the average distance at which turkeys are being killed.
. . . . . . . this in turn increases unreported, little realized, wounding mortality both at the targeted bird as well as the collateral damage to other nearby birds, more of which tend to be hens.

Just take this one item alone, provided the shooter really doesn't care exactly HOW he kills the turkey, it is likely that by increasing one's effective range by 20%, then that same individual has increased his kill rate per hour afield by also about 20%?
Never mind we're now talking, just over the past 3 years, more like a 30% to 40% increase for the average shooter afield?

2) Increased his ability to kill older Toms via the use of more realistic, even battery-operated strutting Tom decoys

3) Increased his ability to kill a longbeard via increased use of a tactic referred to as "reaping" or "fanning".

4) Increased use of bait stations being used to concentrate turkeys in an area, making it yet easier to kill one,
particularly for those more focusing on the killing than the hunting, which is a growing number.

5) Increased use of blinds (allowing hunters' movements to be unseen by turkeys).
- - - - - - - Only a few years ago, most 4-sided hunting blinds required the effort of "construction" and they weren't mobile
which is so unlike today's easily "popped up" mobile blinds.
Also, since a hunter using one of these can sit in more comfort, one will also spend more hours afield "hunting",
just another way we're collectively killing a higher percentage of the available birds,
because we (collectively) are "hunting" in more comfort and logging more hours afield "hunting".

Although many (perhaps most) of the more avid, experienced turkey hunters use the above 5 items to a much lesser extent,
those using these items "more" are in fact killing more turkeys relative to their time afield trying.

Whereas many of us will give a pass to an old Tom if we cannot call him up,
a growing number today will simply kill him at 70 yards distance as he feeds rather than responds to a call.

Now, I'm going to refrain from much condemnation against the hunters' tactics,
but I have plenty for those supposedly managing the resource who seem oblivious
as to how these evolving tactics are adversely effecting the ongoing population,
as they continue to "fiddle" with conducting "studies",
and falsely interpreting harvest data as a reflection of population density.

 

[woodsman04]

^^^^That graphic pretty much aligns with A LOT of the comments/opinions on this page about sightings, opportunity and bag limits, based on one's geographic location. A lot of the hunters that hunt the dark blue counties cannot understand, or fathom, other hunter's viewpoints that hunt the light blue counties. Thanks for sharing.

Giles County is dark blue and that's my primary hunting county. North of Highway 64 is totally different than south of it. Same way with Lawrence county to the west. Said it for 10
Years that it is totally different. I have no way of knowing this, but I'd guess 90 percent of Giles and Lawrence county harvest is in the north portion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ZachMarkus]

^^^^That graphic pretty much aligns with A LOT of the comments/opinions on this page about sightings, opportunity and bag limits, based on one's geographic location. A lot of the hunters that hunt the dark blue counties cannot understand, or fathom, other hunter's viewpoints that hunt the light blue counties. Thanks for sharing.

Giles County is dark blue and that's my primary hunting county. North of Highway 64 is totally different than south of it. Same way with Lawrence county to the west. Said it for 10
Years that it is totally different. I have no way of knowing this, but I'd guess 90 percent of Giles and Lawrence county harvest is in the north portion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No doubt about that Woodsman, I have places in both of those counties north and south. Night and day difference in my places north of Hwy 64 than the places south.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Buzzard Breath]

1) Greatly increased the effective range of his turkey killing weapon, and the average distance at which turkeys are being killed.
. . . . . . . this in turn increases unreported, little realized, wounding mortality both at the targeted bird as well as the collateral damage to other nearby birds, more of which tend to be hens.

Just take this one item alone, provided the shooter really doesn't care exactly HOW he kills the turkey, it is likely that by increasing one's effective range by 20%, then that same individual has increased his kill rate per hour afield by also about 20%?

To add to this. When you take a gun that is effective out to 40 yards and make it effective out to 50 yards, you may be increasing its range by 20%, but you are increasing it's coverage area by over 50%. The area of half a circle with a 40 yard radius is 2,513 square yards. Increase that to 50 yards and you have a coverage area of 3,927 square yards. 60 yards = 5,655 square yards (more than double the coverage area of a 40 yard gun.

Someone check my math before accepting this as gospel.

 

[Levee Jumper]

1) Greatly increased the effective range of his turkey killing weapon, and the average distance at which turkeys are being killed.
. . . . . . . this in turn increases unreported, little realized, wounding mortality both at the targeted bird as well as the collateral damage to other nearby birds, more of which tend to be hens.

Just take this one item alone, provided the shooter really doesn't care exactly HOW he kills the turkey, it is likely that by increasing one's effective range by 20%, then that same individual has increased his kill rate per hour afield by also about 20%?

To add to this. When you take a gun that is effective out to 40 yards and make it effective out to 50 yards, you may be increasing its range by 20%, but you are increasing it's coverage area by over 50%. The area of half a circle with a 40 yard radius is 2,513 square yards. Increase that to 50 yards and you have a coverage area of 3,927 square yards. 60 yards = 5,655 square yards (more than double the coverage area of a 40 yard gun.

Someone check my math before accepting this as gospel.

I think you have a hole in your math but I get your point.

 

[Levee Jumper]

After a second glance, I think I like your math! lol

 

[TheLBLman]

Buzzard Breath's math is mostly correct.

The assumption that a range increase of 30% equates to a harvest increase of 30% is faulty.
In part because many the turkeys killed at greater ranges could have or would have been killed anyway at shorter ranges;
and because many hunters utilizing longer-range weapons, are not always taking longer range shots.

However, by leaving out the much greater coverage area of, say, a 50 to 60-yd circle (around the hunter)
compared to say a 30 to 40-yd circle,
I had left out a significant variable
regarding the additional opportunities of additional range.

 

[TheLBLman]

Here's another way of illustrating the point Buzzard Breath was trying to bring attention:

Walk a 30-yard circle (it's 60 yds across the circle) around your position,
then note the "coverage" area within this 30-yd radius circle.
Next, walk a 60-yard circle around your position (120 yards across the circle),
and note the "coverage" area with this 60-yd radius is not twice as much, but more in the neighborhood of 4x as much.
Do the math if you want the exact amount.

IMO, when I started turkey hunting, the average hunter afield had an effective high-probability kill range of around 35 yards.
Remember, I said "afield". We did have 40 to 45-yd effective weapons, but most "afield" were not carrying them.
Today, imo, the average turkey hunter "afield" is carrying a weapon with a high-probability kill range of around 45 - 50 yds.
The more avid turkey hunters' weapons become more around the 50-60-yd range.

Remember, this increase killing range is only one factor that has evolved to make killing turkeys "easier".

Some use the extra range more for extra margin of error than extra range, which I think is good.
Others use it mainly to justify taking longer, lower-probability shots.

Some, perhaps too many, have fallen to the ridiculous marketing claims that a particular shell alone suddenly makes their shotgun an 80-yd killing weapon.
And unfortunately, many "shooters" afield (not going to call them "hunters") are routinely taking long, low-probability "pot" shots which result in increased collateral damage to other turkeys to the side & behind the targeted bird.

Remember, collaterally killed hens rarely get talked about, much less "recorded" in the "harvest".
But they're killed and dead nonetheless.
And never mind it only takes a single pellet to the soft gut, even at extreme ranges,
to cause a turkey to die a few days after that hit.

Meanwhile, Nero continues to fiddle.

 

[Andy S.]

^^^^That graphic pretty much aligns with A LOT of the comments/opinions on this page about sightings, opportunity and bag limits, based on one's geographic location. A lot of the hunters that hunt the dark blue counties cannot understand, or fathom, other hunter's viewpoints that hunt the light blue counties. Thanks for sharing.

Giles County is dark blue and that's my primary hunting county. North of Highway 64 is totally different than south of it. Same way with Lawrence county to the west. Said it for 10
Years that it is totally different. I have no way of knowing this, but I'd guess 90 percent of Giles and Lawrence county harvest is in the north portion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No doubt about that Woodsman, I have places in both of those counties north and south. Night and day difference in my places north of Hwy 64 than the places south.

No doubt about that Woodsman, I have places in both of those counties north and south. Night and day difference in my places north of Hwy 64 than the places south.

Great points that both of you make. If you were in charge, would you manage (think poult recruitment, brood surveys, weekly/season bag limit, season structure, etc) for sustainability of the northernmost, or southernmost portions of those counties?

 

[Andy S.]

Just saying, I believe we're killing a progressively higher percentage each year of whatever's available,
and it's taking a toll on the ONGOING turkey population.
That ONGOING population appears to be slowly dwindling, year by year,
CAMOUFLAGED by a number of turkeys being shot, that number more reflective of longer-range weapons and "easier" accomplished killing tactics,
than the actual turkey population.

Further "camouflaging" the dwindling population are they youthful hunters finding it so "easy" so simply go out and "kill" a turkey by the widely used tactics of today compared to yesteryear.

I could not agree more, talking statewide that is. Killing 30k today with the advancement of TSS, lifelike turkey decoys that move, spin, etc, fanning/reaping, incredible high use of blinds, etc is no comparison to killing 30k back in 2000 when 45 yards or so was the max and the use of a fan to attract and kill dominant birds, or TSS to shoot one at 70 yards, was not an option. It is sort of like hitting 50 home runs in 2000 with a wooden bat, and hitting 50 today with a loaded metal bat and think you are comparing apples to apples. That concept/comparison/math is flawed considerably. Harvest data used as a measuring stick to manage wild turkeys is a joke, just ask our neighbor Arkansas.

AR Spring Turkey Harvest

 

[Setterman]

Just saying, I believe we're killing a progressively higher percentage each year of whatever's available,
and it's taking a toll on the ONGOING turkey population.
That ONGOING population appears to be slowly dwindling, year by year,
CAMOUFLAGED by a number of turkeys being shot, that number more reflective of longer-range weapons and "easier" accomplished killing tactics,
than the actual turkey population.

Further "camouflaging" the dwindling population are they youthful hunters finding it so "easy" so simply go out and "kill" a turkey by the widely used tactics of today compared to yesteryear.

I could not agree more, talking statewide that is. Killing 30k today with the advancement of TSS, lifelike turkey decoys that move, spin, etc, fanning/reaping, incredible high use of blinds, etc is no comparison to killing 30k back in 2000 when 45 yards or so was the max and the use of a fan to attract and kill dominant birds, or TSS to shoot one at 70 yards, was not an option. It is sort of like hitting 50 home runs in 2000 with a wooden bat, and hitting 50 today with a loaded metal bat and think you are comparing apples to apples. That concept/comparison/math is flawed considerably. Harvest data used as a measuring stick to manage wild turkeys is a joke, just ask our neighbor Arkansas.

AR Spring Turkey Harvest

Great post and so true. Wes also makes a ton of great points.

Our harvest is declining or staying flat with the aid of so many crutches and people killing birds that stood no chance years prior.

This season has been abysmal for me and the areas I hunt, I'm in light blue. There's just nothing happening most places and most days are silent

 

[woodsman04]

^^^^That graphic pretty much aligns with A LOT of the comments/opinions on this page about sightings, opportunity and bag limits, based on one's geographic location. A lot of the hunters that hunt the dark blue counties cannot understand, or fathom, other hunter's viewpoints that hunt the light blue counties. Thanks for sharing.

Giles County is dark blue and that's my primary hunting county. North of Highway 64 is totally different than south of it. Same way with Lawrence county to the west. Said it for 10
Years that it is totally different. I have no way of knowing this, but I'd guess 90 percent of Giles and Lawrence county harvest is in the north portion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No doubt about that Woodsman, I have places in both of those counties north and south. Night and day difference in my places north of Hwy 64 than the places south.

No doubt about that Woodsman, I have places in both of those counties north and south. Night and day difference in my places north of Hwy 64 than the places south.

Great points that both of you make. If you were in charge, would you manage (think poult recruitment, brood surveys, weekly/season bag limit, season structure, etc) for sustainability of the northernmost, or southernmost portions of those counties?

If I was in charge, the state would be divided into zones not just counties. Highways and rivers could be boundary lines not just county lines. I'd say no season south of highway 64 in Lawrence and Giles county Tennessee. If I were forced to have a season I'd open it about April 20 with a 1-2 bird limit. As loaded as northern Giles county and Maury county are id leave it as is and could probably increase the bag limit.

Habitat between the two is a little different. I think the northern portion of Giles county is more rolling cow pasture and very small blocks of hardwoods. Southern Giles is a little less hilly, with more woods. I don't consider either half of Giles county a big row cropping place. Lawrence county is very similar in habitat, except the southern central portion and all the way up to North of Lawrenceburg (which is northern Lawrence) is way too big ag to sustain any normal turkey populations.

Just because you used to see a bunch of turkeys in a corn field don't mean it's sustainable suitable habitat.

The more I read and research, and the more habitat work I do on my own place, and the more wise and experienced I get, I just keep coming back to the same thing. It's carrying capacity, with fluctuations either way. The sheer amount of turkeys we had in the 90s - 2007 was just a population boom and now it's back to the new normal.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk