South Carolina DNR recommendations for changes to turkey season
-
- Posts: 6
- Joined: March 19th, 2018, 2:58 pm
South Carolina DNR recommendations for changes to turkey season
http://www.dnr.sc.gov/wildlife/turkey/p ... sembly.pdf
The SC DNR has made its recommendations for changes to turkey season. You can read their full report in the link above. For southeastern hunters it’s worth the time. The studies performed will likely be referenced by other state game agencies in address the decline in turkey numbers.
Personally, I like the idea of carrying the season later into May. I’d also like the see our state develop some sort of program to incentivize hunters to trap nest predators leading up to turkey season. Maybe an extra tag to certain WMAs or discounted licenses.
Thoughts?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The SC DNR has made its recommendations for changes to turkey season. You can read their full report in the link above. For southeastern hunters it’s worth the time. The studies performed will likely be referenced by other state game agencies in address the decline in turkey numbers.
Personally, I like the idea of carrying the season later into May. I’d also like the see our state develop some sort of program to incentivize hunters to trap nest predators leading up to turkey season. Maybe an extra tag to certain WMAs or discounted licenses.
Thoughts?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Re: South Carolina DNR recommendations for changes to turkey season
Are you from SC?? The season dates don't matter to me. Give me 3 weeks and 5 tags and I'll be happy.
Ultimate Predator
- Hoobilly
- Gobbler Nation
- Posts: 13399
- Joined: August 15th, 2011, 10:15 pm
- Location: Argos Indiana
- Contact:
Re: South Carolina DNR recommendations for changes to turkey season
man its been a long time since I have hunted SC
loved it. hope to go again someday
loved it. hope to go again someday
- SwampDrummin
- Posts: 564
- Joined: January 5th, 2016, 5:38 pm
Re: South Carolina DNR recommendations for changes to turkey season
Hate reading about long term documented declines. Glad to see states doing some experimenting with different season structures, maybe one of them will prove fruitful. Mathematically i’m sure killing too many gobblers too early in the season is having some sort of an a effect on reproduction. There’s probably some merit to shortening seasons based on that.Still, habitat change has got to be the driver.
Pine plantation has gone from 20 million acres to 45 million acres in the southeast since the 80s. That’s an increase in area the size of South Carolina. That’s a staggering amount of land removed from any meaningful long term turkey use. It almost seems idiotic to point the finger at anything other than this. It’s less detrimental when spread out over the entire southeast but if you consolidated all that land into a state (it’s closer to 2 states) then you would see harvest figures similar to 70 years ago.
I’d gladly pay an extra $200 a year to be paid into a general habitat improvement fund for landowners similar to a CRP program. I.e, you convert pine timber into CRP on a 5 year burn rotation and you get X dollars per acre. Maybe just have it in regular non nesting season prescription burns Something to incentivize broad scale habitat change and awareness.
Maybe that $200 could buy you an extra week of season. A lot of turkey hunters would complain about it but most would get it.
Pine plantation has gone from 20 million acres to 45 million acres in the southeast since the 80s. That’s an increase in area the size of South Carolina. That’s a staggering amount of land removed from any meaningful long term turkey use. It almost seems idiotic to point the finger at anything other than this. It’s less detrimental when spread out over the entire southeast but if you consolidated all that land into a state (it’s closer to 2 states) then you would see harvest figures similar to 70 years ago.
I’d gladly pay an extra $200 a year to be paid into a general habitat improvement fund for landowners similar to a CRP program. I.e, you convert pine timber into CRP on a 5 year burn rotation and you get X dollars per acre. Maybe just have it in regular non nesting season prescription burns Something to incentivize broad scale habitat change and awareness.
Maybe that $200 could buy you an extra week of season. A lot of turkey hunters would complain about it but most would get it.
Re: South Carolina DNR recommendations for changes to turkey season
I read the study. Good stuff my question is, how many turkeys killed are actually checked in or is there not a registration system. Wisconsin changed the way you check in a bird last year. They went away with tagging the bird and went To the honor system, harvest was down 10%. I think some people never called in the turkey and just kept on hunting without reporting the harvest.
-
- Posts: 392
- Joined: March 17th, 2014, 2:07 pm
Re: South Carolina DNR recommendations for changes to turkey season
This is crazy considering they JUST pushed opening from April 1 back into March. So after a very short period they have determined that didn’t work? Lol.
-
- Posts: 175
- Joined: February 14th, 2017, 9:28 pm
Re: South Carolina DNR recommendations for changes to turkey season
I bothered to only skim the report and may have missed something, but it seems their recommendations are based more on hope and a hunch as opposed to good science. Lots of observations that are suggestive at best. Correlation ain’t the same as causation.
When you peel it back, they are concerned about turkey numbers. Rightly so. And they are addressing those concerns through hunting measures, something they can easily control. However, those measures would be more convincing if they had observed and reported higher productivity in that unhunted area at the same time as when they were observing declines in hunted areas. Again...could have missed it in all the fog about gobbling activity.
When you peel it back, they are concerned about turkey numbers. Rightly so. And they are addressing those concerns through hunting measures, something they can easily control. However, those measures would be more convincing if they had observed and reported higher productivity in that unhunted area at the same time as when they were observing declines in hunted areas. Again...could have missed it in all the fog about gobbling activity.
- poorcountrypreacher
- Posts: 678
- Joined: July 10th, 2012, 1:39 pm
Re: South Carolina DNR recommendations for changes to turkey season
Those were my thoughts too, and I read it carefully. They used the words "may" and "should" over and over, and even in their primary conclusions. They really pounded on the data showing more gobbling on the unhunted area, but it appears from the charts that the difference is about 2 gobbles per day more. I am skeptical that is enough to really matter. And I agree with you that one of the most telling things about the study is that they never mentioned how much better poult production was on the unhunted area. I can only guess, but I suspect that there wasn't any difference and they didn't include that information because it doesn't support their conclusions.BumbleFoot wrote: ↑February 2nd, 2019, 1:36 pm I bothered to only skim the report and may have missed something, but it seems their recommendations are based more on hope and a hunch as opposed to good science. Lots of observations that are suggestive at best. Correlation ain’t the same as causation.
When you peel it back, they are concerned about turkey numbers. Rightly so. And they are addressing those concerns through hunting measures, something they can easily control. However, those measures would be more convincing if they had observed and reported higher productivity in that unhunted area at the same time as when they were observing declines in hunted areas. Again...could have missed it in all the fog about gobbling activity.
I also found it interesting that they admitted that reducing the limit from 5 to 3 accomplished nothing, yet they stated that the reduced limit was an "important" component of their recommendations. So why is it important if it had no effect on the harvest? Things like this make me think that someone has an agenda at work here.
The idea that a later opening date will lead to better poult recruitment is presented as truth, yet they really have no data to prove that. It might be the case in places with very few gobblers to begin with, but I'll remain very skeptical that it makes any difference on land with decent populations.
Wildlife biologists are just like those in any other discipline. An idea gets promoted and becomes the conventional wisdom, and everyone comes to understand that they had better support the majority view if they wanna get ahead in their careers. Right now, hunting is very much in the cross hairs of the biological community, and this report is a good example.
We've had seasons and regulations in Alabama that have been about the same for the past 6 decades. I've been blessed to hunt the same land for the past 54 seasons. We have killed more gobblers the past 2 seasons than we ever have before. I hope that a system that has worked so well for 60 years doesn't get trashed because it's the trendy thing to do.
Re: South Carolina DNR recommendations for changes to turkey season
My thoughts on a step in the right direction...
Season dates: April 1-May1
5 tags (only something like 3% killed 5 when we had 5)
No male decoys or fans
That, I think, would help turkey numbers.
Season dates: April 1-May1
5 tags (only something like 3% killed 5 when we had 5)
No male decoys or fans
That, I think, would help turkey numbers.
Ultimate Predator
-
- Posts: 6
- Joined: March 19th, 2018, 2:58 pm
Re: South Carolina DNR recommendations for changes to turkey season
poorcountrypreacher wrote:Those were my thoughts too, and I read it carefully. They used the words "may" and "should" over and over, and even in their primary conclusions. They really pounded on the data showing more gobbling on the unhunted area, but it appears from the charts that the difference is about 2 gobbles per day more. I am skeptical that is enough to really matter. And I agree with you that one of the most telling things about the study is that they never mentioned how much better poult production was on the unhunted area. I can only guess, but I suspect that there wasn't any difference and they didn't include that information because it doesn't support their conclusions.BumbleFoot wrote: ↑February 2nd, 2019, 1:36 pm I bothered to only skim the report and may have missed something, but it seems their recommendations are based more on hope and a hunch as opposed to good science. Lots of observations that are suggestive at best. Correlation ain’t the same as causation.
When you peel it back, they are concerned about turkey numbers. Rightly so. And they are addressing those concerns through hunting measures, something they can easily control. However, those measures would be more convincing if they had observed and reported higher productivity in that unhunted area at the same time as when they were observing declines in hunted areas. Again...could have missed it in all the fog about gobbling activity.
I also found it interesting that they admitted that reducing the limit from 5 to 3 accomplished nothing, yet they stated that the reduced limit was an "important" component of their recommendations. So why is it important if it had no effect on the harvest? Things like this make me think that someone has an agenda at work here.
The idea that a later opening date will lead to better poult recruitment is presented as truth, yet they really have no data to prove that. It might be the case in places with very few gobblers to begin with, but I'll remain very skeptical that it makes any difference on land with decent populations.
Wildlife biologists are just like those in any other discipline. An idea gets promoted and becomes the conventional wisdom, and everyone comes to understand that they had better support the majority view if they wanna get ahead in their careers. Right now, hunting is very much in the cross hairs of the biological community, and this report is a good example.
We've had seasons and regulations in Alabama that have been about the same for the past 6 decades. I've been blessed to hunt the same land for the past 54 seasons. We have killed more gobblers the past 2 seasons than we ever have before. I hope that a system that has worked so well for 60 years doesn't get trashed because it's the trendy thing to do.
Few things:
Increasing the season length while decreasing bag limits proved that a longer season increases hunter success rates. So in the old season dates (April 1-May 1) with the 5 bird limit you had some hunters bagging maybe 1-2 birds (me in high school for example, only had weekends, and back then no Sunday hunting). Now they’ve increased the season length by 50%, increasing Hunter’s chances of success. I think that’s there argument.
Also with delaying the Opening day in regards to increasing Poult production: there was a chart that showed the majority of birds were harvested in the first 10 days of the season. I think the hope in the delay would be to give hens a chance to be bred before the gobblers start getting killed.
You may have gathered all that without my explanation, and if so, disregard.
I will say I’ve spoken and emailed Charles Ruth (lead SCDNR turkey biologist) several times and I feel like he’s got his mind in the right place. Seems like he’s really trying to solve the problem.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
- Posts: 6
- Joined: March 19th, 2018, 2:58 pm
Re: South Carolina DNR recommendations for changes to turkey season
I never had a problem checking in my birds. I think Missouri does a mobile tag system. I wonder how effective it is for them.pedro wrote:I read the study. Good stuff my question is, how many turkeys killed are actually checked in or is there not a registration system. Wisconsin changed the way you check in a bird last year. They went away with tagging the bird and went To the honor system, harvest was down 10%. I think some people never called in the turkey and just kept on hunting without reporting the harvest.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
- Posts: 175
- Joined: February 14th, 2017, 9:28 pm
Re: South Carolina DNR recommendations for changes to turkey season
Where you’ve got to get to support this is faith or belief that there would be more turkeys—not just gobblers—in S.C. if hunters there killed fewer gobblers and/or killed them later in the season. Could be. Could be not. Their data—at least what they reported—doesn’t really speak to that one way or another.
- SwampDrummin
- Posts: 564
- Joined: January 5th, 2016, 5:38 pm
Re: South Carolina DNR recommendations for changes to turkey season
Short season, only the killers kill lots of turkeys. Long season, more hunters to become killers, lots less turkeys in the long run.
I follow that.
Re: South Carolina DNR recommendations for changes to turkey season
Wait until this year when they load there benelli 3.5 inch magnums with some tss. The problem is over harvest. It is happening all over the country. The hunting techniques, decoys, camouflage, calls, guns and ammunition are much better than ever. Couple that with habit loss and extreme weather. It is a disaster that is unfolding.
Re: South Carolina DNR recommendations for changes to turkey season
Never heard that. Watched a show on a dove hunt on a hemp field the other day. I wonder how much that is currently in pine plantation could go to hemp in the future. Gotta be more food in ag fields than tall pines.SwampDrummin wrote: ↑February 2nd, 2019, 1:37 am...Pine plantation has gone from 20 million acres to 45 million acres in the southeast since the 80s. ...
-
- Posts: 378
- Joined: February 26th, 2013, 6:52 pm
Re: South Carolina DNR recommendations for changes to turkey season
Does SC allow afternoon hunting? I think that is our biggest problem in Mississippi
- SwampDrummin
- Posts: 564
- Joined: January 5th, 2016, 5:38 pm
Re: South Carolina DNR recommendations for changes to turkey season
What about the feeders?Gar Commander wrote: ↑February 3rd, 2019, 10:31 pm Does SC allow afternoon hunting? I think that is our biggest problem in Mississippi
Re: South Carolina DNR recommendations for changes to turkey season
Yes on afternoon hunting...no feeders or bait (besides decoys, LOL)
Ultimate Predator
Re: South Carolina DNR recommendations for changes to turkey season
The decline in wild turkey populations has been well documented and South Carolina as well as other Southeastern states have initiated research trying to determine causes of the decline. Hopefully all the data from all the states will be consolidated and published in one paper.
Habitat is obviously the key to maintaining a good turkey population and land practices in many areas have negatively affected populations. But the decline in the turkey population is also occurring in areas that have not changed in years. Other factors have to be involved in these declines, nest predation and disease are often cited as possible causes and I think all the agencies involved in turkey management realize this and are working toward a solution. The South Carolina study includes a wealth of information but is focused on season dates and lengths, which is the easiest management tool available to state agencies.
As turkey hunters we are all concerned with gobbling activity or lack of. Hopefully similar studies will be undertaken in others states and habitats including piedmont and mountain areas. But we should not lose sight of the fact that season structure is not the overall problem. A Mississippi study found no link to gobbling activity and hunting pressure. These results could be compared to those in the South Carolina study and may yield information on the amount of pressure that results in decreased gobbling.
The suggestion that removing dominant gobblers may result in less genetically robust populations is a theory that is most likely affected by the number of available gobblers. A subdominant gobbler may have better genes but is suppressed due to age. Females store sperm for up to 50 days so a early mating with a now dead dominant gobbler could still result in a successful nest.
I've rambled enough but just want to emphasize that the answer to improving turkey populations is increasing recruitment and is affected by many factors. Much more research is needed to determine the cause of the population decline and more importantly how to reverse the decline.
Habitat is obviously the key to maintaining a good turkey population and land practices in many areas have negatively affected populations. But the decline in the turkey population is also occurring in areas that have not changed in years. Other factors have to be involved in these declines, nest predation and disease are often cited as possible causes and I think all the agencies involved in turkey management realize this and are working toward a solution. The South Carolina study includes a wealth of information but is focused on season dates and lengths, which is the easiest management tool available to state agencies.
As turkey hunters we are all concerned with gobbling activity or lack of. Hopefully similar studies will be undertaken in others states and habitats including piedmont and mountain areas. But we should not lose sight of the fact that season structure is not the overall problem. A Mississippi study found no link to gobbling activity and hunting pressure. These results could be compared to those in the South Carolina study and may yield information on the amount of pressure that results in decreased gobbling.
The suggestion that removing dominant gobblers may result in less genetically robust populations is a theory that is most likely affected by the number of available gobblers. A subdominant gobbler may have better genes but is suppressed due to age. Females store sperm for up to 50 days so a early mating with a now dead dominant gobbler could still result in a successful nest.
I've rambled enough but just want to emphasize that the answer to improving turkey populations is increasing recruitment and is affected by many factors. Much more research is needed to determine the cause of the population decline and more importantly how to reverse the decline.
Re: South Carolina DNR recommendations for changes to turkey season
Well put, huntin. Personally, in terms of HUNTING in the spring, I believe the most important factor is the timing of the start of the season,...which happens to be one of the main points made in the study. Before you start taking gobblers out of the population, you have got to let them have enough time to breed such that those hens that are going to breed will do so. As huntin states, hens that have been bred have the ability (according to past studies) to store viable semen for a couple of months.
Again, personally, I think the overall population decline is almost entirely a function of nesting success and poult survival. As others have already stated, quality habitat and suppression of nest and poult predation are paramount. However, we as hunters should be basing our support for spring hunting on the best scientific information available,...and that information in SC's case pretty much clearly indicates that your season should start a couple of weeks later than it does.
On another front, if I am not mistaken, much of SC's turkey hunting is on private land,...i.e. controlled by those that own it or lease it. Those that hunt those lands have complete control over what happens there. If you are on one of those properties and your turkey population is going downhill, it is nobody's fault but your own. YOU have the control over the habitat, predator control, and to some degree hunting dates and bag limits. Do your part to support proper habitat and wildlife management practices, and you will have quality turkey hunting.
Again, personally, I think the overall population decline is almost entirely a function of nesting success and poult survival. As others have already stated, quality habitat and suppression of nest and poult predation are paramount. However, we as hunters should be basing our support for spring hunting on the best scientific information available,...and that information in SC's case pretty much clearly indicates that your season should start a couple of weeks later than it does.
On another front, if I am not mistaken, much of SC's turkey hunting is on private land,...i.e. controlled by those that own it or lease it. Those that hunt those lands have complete control over what happens there. If you are on one of those properties and your turkey population is going downhill, it is nobody's fault but your own. YOU have the control over the habitat, predator control, and to some degree hunting dates and bag limits. Do your part to support proper habitat and wildlife management practices, and you will have quality turkey hunting.
Re: South Carolina DNR recommendations for changes to turkey season
If no gobblers were harvested would the number of gobblers increase over time?
-
- Posts: 378
- Joined: February 26th, 2013, 6:52 pm
Re: South Carolina DNR recommendations for changes to turkey season
I don't think that question will ever be answered, but it doesn't matter because having turkeys you cant hunt is just like not having turkeys
Re: South Carolina DNR recommendations for changes to turkey season
If you don’t have any turkeys left to hunt but you are allowed to harvest 5 per year- that’s no good either. Things will be like wild quail
- soiltester
- Gobbler Nation
- Posts: 3722
- Joined: March 31st, 2015, 8:04 am
- Location: Gaffney SC
Re: South Carolina DNR recommendations for changes to turkey season
And add in the "fire ant" question of problems for setting spring birds??
Never seen a study to qualify all the talk??
Never seen a study to qualify all the talk??
ever wonder where the white goes when the snow melts??
-
- Posts: 169
- Joined: July 15th, 2012, 10:00 am
Re: South Carolina DNR recommendations for changes to turkey season
We have a winner. Add the red ants to the list of predators. So for years I've always heard that they set the season for peak gobbling which was after most of the hens have been bred and the gobblers are looking for hens. So from this that means they've had it set wrong all these year's? They other question would be then the breeding season has changed? I would doubt that but I'm sure you're could find a scientist out there someplace that would claim that. Bubbasoiltester wrote: ↑February 4th, 2019, 5:20 pm And add in the "fire ant" question of problems for setting spring birds??
Never seen a study to qualify all the talk??