Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New Trophy's
New trophy room comments
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Classifieds
Trophy Room
New items
New comments
Latest content
Latest updates
Latest reviews
Author list
Series list
Search showcase
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Tennessee Hunting Forums
Long Beards & Spurs
today's TFWC Meeting
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Southern Sportsman" data-source="post: 5061498" data-attributes="member: 10399"><p>I tried to explain my position on this. I hope we have consistent kill numbers forever. But it seems really shortsighted to point to harvest numbers as a sign of turkey management success while the production of new poults is simultaneously plummeting. Doesn't seem like a formula that will end wel</p><p></p><p></p><p>No doubt, some areas a good. Some have had consecutive good hatches. Some can sustain the early start date and high limits. And I really am happy for everybody that hunts those places. But many, many areas aren't so lucky. I know of multiple farms that were unreal in the early-mid 2000s where you would count yourself lucky to find a few tracks today.</p><p></p><p>I think we need different management units for turkeys. But unless and until we get them, do you think we should manage turkeys for the areas that are doing great, or manage them to help the many, many places where they're struggling?</p><p></p><p></p><p>Nope. I want them to manage turkeys based on the advice of the most qualified experts and based on available pertinent data. We have 30 years worth of harvest data. We also have 40 years worth of poult recruitment data. It looks like this:</p><p></p><p>[ATTACH=full]69621[/ATTACH]</p><p>We can keep killing the same numbers of turkeys for a while. But if we keep doing it while simultaneously producing fewer turkeys each year (which we are), we will kill the flock down to a point that's hard to recover from without new restocking efforts.</p><p></p><p>I want the commission to make changes based on the fact that our current poult production numbers are not sustainable. I think the changes should be based on the best scientific theory we have available. I'm not a biologist. Maybe Chamberlain and others are wrong. Maybe there's nothing we can do to help reproduction numbers. But their theory is very well supported and has a lot of common-sense logic. Maybe it doesn't work, but I'd much rather we do too much than too little. </p><p></p><p></p><p><span style="font-size: 13px">I had a conversation with one of the commissioners about two weeks ago ,It may not do a bit of good but it made me feel better. He was nice and I expressed my opinions . Again I believe the 3 bird limit will be fine . Ban Gobbler decoys( could care less about hens decoys, they do more harm than good) ,ban fans, kill 0 hens ,no jakes and more liberal trapping of nest predators . These are things that can guarantee more turkey will survive to the next year not a theory but a fact.</span></p><p></p><p>Here, we have common ground. IMO, if we outlawed male turkey decoys, the kill totals would drop by 40-50% — especially the early season totals. Breeding cycles would be far less affected and I'd be all for keeping the early start dates and wouldn't care if they went to a 5 bird limit. This, above all else, is what I<em> wish </em>would happen. I think it's the best possible solution for a number of reasons. But I also think it's the least likely. Serial turkey reapists and tent hunters would storm the capital and lobbyist would get involved.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Southern Sportsman, post: 5061498, member: 10399"] I tried to explain my position on this. I hope we have consistent kill numbers forever. But it seems really shortsighted to point to harvest numbers as a sign of turkey management success while the production of new poults is simultaneously plummeting. Doesn’t seem like a formula that will end wel No doubt, some areas a good. Some have had consecutive good hatches. Some can sustain the early start date and high limits. And I really am happy for everybody that hunts those places. But many, many areas aren’t so lucky. I know of multiple farms that were unreal in the early-mid 2000s where you would count yourself lucky to find a few tracks today. I think we need different management units for turkeys. But unless and until we get them, do you think we should manage turkeys for the areas that are doing great, or manage them to help the many, many places where they’re struggling? Nope. I want them to manage turkeys based on the advice of the most qualified experts and based on available pertinent data. We have 30 years worth of harvest data. We also have 40 years worth of poult recruitment data. It looks like this: [ATTACH type="full" alt="699E2D18-500C-49E0-9604-7F70178D2245.jpeg"]69621[/ATTACH] We can keep killing the same numbers of turkeys for a while. But if we keep doing it while simultaneously producing fewer turkeys each year (which we are), we will kill the flock down to a point that’s hard to recover from without new restocking efforts. I want the commission to make changes based on the fact that our current poult production numbers are not sustainable. I think the changes should be based on the best scientific theory we have available. I’m not a biologist. Maybe Chamberlain and others are wrong. Maybe there’s nothing we can do to help reproduction numbers. But their theory is very well supported and has a lot of common-sense logic. Maybe it doesn’t work, but I’d much rather we do too much than too little. [SIZE=13px]I had a conversation with one of the commissioners about two weeks ago ,It may not do a bit of good but it made me feel better. He was nice and I expressed my opinions . Again I believe the 3 bird limit will be fine . Ban Gobbler decoys( could care less about hens decoys, they do more harm than good) ,ban fans, kill 0 hens ,no jakes and more liberal trapping of nest predators . These are things that can guarantee more turkey will survive to the next year not a theory but a fact.[/SIZE] Here, we have common ground. IMO, if we outlawed male turkey decoys, the kill totals would drop by 40-50% — especially the early season totals. Breeding cycles would be far less affected and I’d be all for keeping the early start dates and wouldn’t care if they went to a 5 bird limit. This, above all else, is what I[I] wish [/I]would happen. I think it’s the best possible solution for a number of reasons. But I also think it’s the least likely. Serial turkey reapists and tent hunters would storm the capital and lobbyist would get involved. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Tennessee Hunting Forums
Long Beards & Spurs
today's TFWC Meeting
Top