This stinks

[Dr. K]

Can you help me understand how this data is compatible with any claim that delaying seasons had "no effect?"

The table presented is from two places. One is from a Master's thesis and it also is in a scientific publication (see links below). I thought that might be important if anyone wants to go to the source.

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=10876&context=utk_gradthes

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://naturalresources.tennessee.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/24/2024/05/Assessing-wild-turkey-productivity-before-and-after-a-14%E2%80%90day-delay-in-the-start-date.pdf).

What is not in that table is the fact that nest success from one year to the next varied a LOT. The before-after setup controls for location to some degree in this case, so in some counties, like mwbenelli1996 said, there are differences from county to county. The two control counties just had lower success rates year to year while the treatment counties had higher rates year to year.

Southern Sportsman is right, there is a big jump from the before to after average nest success rate in the treatment counties. But in reading the paper, it indicates there was so much variation from year to year in nest success rate that it was a wash. They do not present the raw data, but do present the general or summary stats. The paper says the before treatment rate was expected to be between 21%-35% and the after treatment rate was expected to be between 25%-45%. There's a LOT of year to year variation. When there is that much overlap in percentages, its not legitimate to say there is a certain and distinct difference. I hope that helps.

 

[Strict]

I also don't think hunter numbers are down. I would venture to say covid added more hunters then ever before. Don't know that license numbers how are they calculated? Are lifetimes included every year. I know all of the kids in my family have their lifetime.

Great points. Theirs pretty much no way license sales are down. Organizations such as NWTF and twra trying to recruit new hunters has nothing to do with license sales being down and everything to do with them lining their pockets

Hunter numbers have decreased in spite of a population increase. License sales are up because they are tied to federal funding and states are gaming the license system to get more federal funds.

 

[Strict]

The table presented is from two places. One is from a Master's thesis and it also is in a scientific publication (see links below). I thought that might be important if anyone wants to go to the source.

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=10876&context=utk_gradthes

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://naturalresources.tennessee.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/24/2024/05/Assessing-wild-turkey-productivity-before-and-after-a-14%E2%80%90day-delay-in-the-start-date.pdf).

What is not in that table is the fact that nest success from one year to the next varied a LOT. The before-after setup controls for location to some degree in this case, so in some counties, like mwbenelli1996 said, there are differences from county to county. The two control counties just had lower success rates year to year while the treatment counties had higher rates year to year.

Southern Sportsman is right, there is a big jump from the before to after average nest success rate in the treatment counties. But in reading the paper, it indicates there was so much variation from year to year in nest success rate that it was a wash. They do not present the raw data, but do present the general or summary stats. The paper says the before treatment rate was expected to be between 21%-35% and the after treatment rate was expected to be between 25%-45%. There's a LOT of year to year variation. When there is that much overlap in percentages, its not legitimate to say there is a certain and distinct difference. I hope that helps.

Thanks. I'm looking at their data and not getting the same slam dunk conclusion. I'll check out your links. Everyone knows statistics can be manipulated to make any point you want.

 

[mwbenelli1996]

Hunter numbers have decreased in spite of a population increase. License sales are up because they are tied to federal funding and states are gaming the license system to get more federal funds.

Can you link me the data for this. That is fascinating to me

 

[Strict]

Directly from the abstract. Key points. No Biological reason. Hunters reported hearing less gobbles with the later date.

We radio tagged 432 individual hens from 2017 to 2022 (623 hen-years) in a Before-After-Control-Impact study design to assess nesting activity and we documented 446 initial nests.

We documented no effect of the season start date on nest incubation initiation, portion of eggs to hatch from a nest, or nest success. Furthermore, we documented no effect on poult survival during the first 28 days of life or hen survival during the nesting season.

****We documented no biological reason to support a later hunting season in Tennessee.


https://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=10876&context=utk_gradthes

 

[Strict]

Can you link me the data for this. That is fascinating to me

Older article detailing how states get federal money for state hunting licenses. Oklahoma devised a neat scheme where they gave licenses to Indian reservations and increased license "sales" by almost 100,000 to get federal dollars.

https://www.themeateater.com/conser...-numbers-are-down-so-why-are-license-sales-up

 

[Strict]

Directly from the scientific study. They assumed turkeys would benefit from a later opening date but the actual study did not show that.

Our models for all reproductive rates examined did not support the later start date hypothesis and showed no evidence that the later start date for the Tennessee spring hunting season impacted seasonal productivity. We saw no change in productivity in delayed counties, whether the hunting season began just prior to peak nest initiation (before the season delay) or just prior to peak nest incubation initiation (after the season delay). Based on the later- start date hypothesis, the top two reproductive rates that we would have expected to change included the proportion of hens nesting (nesting rate), and hatchability (Table 1), neither of which were impacted by the start date of the spring hunting season.

https://naturalresources.tennessee.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/24/2024/05/Assessing-wild-turkey-productivity-before-and-after-a-14‐day-delay-in-the-start-date.pdf

I miss my early, cold, wide open woods turkey hunting that the geniuses took from us for no biological reason.

Winner, winner!

 

[th88]

Hunter numbers have decreased in spite of a population increase. License sales are up because they are tied to federal funding and states are gaming the license system to get more federal funds.

Definitely not turkey hunter numbers! And this is why states need a way to ACCURATELY calculate the number of turkey hunters.

 

[REN]

Hunter numbers have decreased in spite of a population increase. License sales are up because they are tied to federal funding and states are gaming the license system to get more federal funds.

The last part is not true. I've literally developed the federal aid report for multiple states and their data. That report requires unique customer records and unique license types and it splits hunters from fishers.

Lifetime is the only way to "game" the system but even those you can't count until they are adults and you can't count past a specific age. Granted there are ways to count a lifetime and yiu don't know if they actually went hunting BUT total lifetime customers make up a small % of total unique customer records.

Total hunter numbers are intact decreasing nationwide but that has to do with her largest customer base (boomers) are getting to old and dying off. Each generation since then has lower overall hunter numbers. Newer generations have had less places to hunt and it costs more and more to do each year.

And to add the feds have a pretty specific requirements around what can and can't be used and you are subject to audit your submissions. If found they are "fudged" you can lose the match $

 

[Browning65]

I love TN's delayed opener because it benefits me as a non-resident hunter (resident of MS). I get my birds in MS, start hunting in Bama, then move up to TN and get to hunt a 3rd opening day with birds begging to die.

Yep, I've killed birds in MS when I was at State, Hunt AL occasionally, TN resident since 89 and have harvested hundreds of birds over the years. I'm finally at the point where I can slow down from working and those MS, AL, TN & KY birds are going to be in trouble in the coming years. Heck I'll probably head up north and to the West also. Be eating fried and grilled turkey breast every week of the spring.

 

[Wooden Arrow]

Definitely not turkey hunter numbers!

if turkey hunter numbers have not declined, i'd like to know where they are hunting! i'm alone in the usual parking areas/backroads. talked to several out of state fellows on Holston Mountain last year. they weren't seeing squat & did not sound like they'd be back. given the birds i've seen/heard, i don't much blame them.

 

[Joe2Kool]

Hunter numbers have decreased in spite of a population increase. License sales are up because they are tied to federal funding and states are gaming the license system to get more federal funds.

One way states sell more "licenses" is to require one to apply for preference points. In Arizona specifically, points used to be a nominal fee for each species, such as $40 for elk, $40 for deer, etc. Now, to apply, one must purchase a valid license, such as a small game license for $160. Additional preference points are only $15 per species. They sell the license, get the federal funding based on licenses sold, and get you on the hook for multiple species because once you have the license, makes sense to buy more species points.

Not all states are like this, but many have changed to this method.

Note I'm not complaining, just explaining!

 

[Strict]

The last part is not true. I've literally developed the federal aid report for multiple states and their data.

That last part is not true and then you gave us an exception with lifetime licenses. Did you do the federal aid report for Oklahoma? I posted an article earlier where they devised a plan to get Native Americans on reservations included in their license reports.

 

[REN]

That last part is not true and then you gave us an exception with lifetime licenses. Did you do the federal aid report for Oklahoma? I posted an article earlier where they devised a plan to get Native Americans on reservations included in their license reports.

Haha ok it's not true yet between the 2 of us
I'm the only one that has done the work and actually worked with multiple agencies on the topic at hand.

And the out on lifetime isn't really an out. As stated lifetime licenses in general make up a very low % of total counted customers.

Do all agencies do what they can with the requirements and data they have? Yes but who wouldn't. For example a guy buys a hunting license and goes 1x a year, does that not count or should it not count? Heck TN can't even count landowners cause they are not required to get a license. They COULD require them to purchase a $1 and then count those every year.

Your welcome to believe what you want and no I have not worked on all 50 states so I can only comment on the 15+ I have.