reducing harvest

IF and I emphasize IF, the Department wants to reduce the harvest of gobblers and IF not killing dominant gobblers is high priority I would think that this would make more sense than a shortened season and lower limit. The removal of the 5th bird from the limit saves 1,000 to 1,300 birds across the state and those birds would certainly be harvested late in the season totally going against what they say the problem is. Regardless, it is an insignificant number. Outlawing decoys and the possession of a fan, along with making the use of corn in turkey season a SERIOUS fine would severely discourage "deer hunting" turkeys and field/blind hunting. It would make it simply harder for those not interested in turkey hunting to kill a turkey. It would take the number of people killing one down significantly. Depending on how you count, over half of the turkeys killed are killed by those killing one, some 13-14,000 dead turkeys. Even if this harvest was reduced by 25% it would still save over 3,000 gobblers - far more than reducing a limit.

Killing gobblers in the Spring doesn’t do anything to the population of turkeys, so allowing all that stuff shouldn’t matter.

Getting a baiting ticket will slow some down. Said person killed 5 last year and 1 this year after getting popped for Corning.

Brad, it’s hard to tell when you’re being sarcastic or not, but that’s what we’ve heard over the years. I’m not so sure the population as a whole is down, but gobbling turkeys sure are and has been for several years. I’m guessing you’ve experienced it also to some degree if you hunted in the early 2000’s and before. It sure does line up with decoys, fanning, and the craze of posting turkey pics and videos. I’ll admit, I’m taking a stab at it being that (I know there are many other things to go along with it), but that’s the simplest thing to control. Not everybody has time to trap. Nobody can convince the timber companies to manage more for quail/turkey habitat than growing those golden pine trees. People that can kill in the double digits every year will still do it, even if they drop to one a year. The only way I see to take a large number of turkeys out of the “dead population” is to do away with fanning and decoys. It’ll create a better experience for the people that truly care about turkeys. Maybe that’s selfish. I don’t know. But when people like gobbler who spend their life managing, studying, and hunting turkeys speaks, I think we should all consider what they’re saying as something to listen to. It’s not the state trying to fulfill an agenda. It’s somebody that gives a crap about the resource.

Gobbler,,, I rather they do that than reduce the limit .

I don't use or do those things any way . Lol

I go hunting I take a couple calls and gun ,,,, hand full of shells.

Course the 357 is standard wear.

I’m been saying this for years and everybody thought it was funny. Now THEY think it’s a problem, so we need to dictate how others should hunt. Folks can miss me with their crap now.

Damn ,,,, I been waiting on them to lower the limit and making center fire rifles legal .

Note the use of the word IF and the emphasis on the word IF to go along with "the department wants to reduce gobbler harvest and especially "dominant" gobbler harvest." I don't think shortening the season or lowering the limit will help anything. But the Department does and they make the rules.

You’ve also been saying for years that the state should allow a person to kill their season quota of 5 gobblers all in the same day.

Decoys and fans—take it or leave it as far as I’m concerned. I don’t use either. Personal preference. I was taught how to hunt without them and have been doing fine for a few decades that way. I can understand someone with a physical handicap wanting to use decoys because they can’t walk and are not able to have numerous setups on a gobbler if that’s what it takes. On the flip side for someone that is physically able then I don’t think decoys or fans should be used. Once again—personal preference. If you’re really serious about turkey population in Alabama then why not stop turkey hunting at 12 or 1 o’clock everyday? Odds are if you find a gobbling bird at 3 or 4 o’clock in the afternoon you have a dang good chance of shooting him in the face. No it doesn’t always work like that and I don’t know if there’s enough gobblers killed in the afternoon to make a difference here. A lot better odds than earlier in the morning anyway. I can’t count how many times I’ve got on a gobbler first thing in the morning and things not work out but go back later in the day and end up carrying him home with me. If you end turkey hunting at such and such time everyday your chances of bumping a hen off her nest decrease as well. Maybe that would help here, maybe it wouldn’t. Just another suggestion. I do know several states I’ve hunted turkeys in that you can’t hunt them all day has some pretty good turkey numbers. And yes I totally agree ants, predators, and timber management are huge problems too. There are numerous ways to help the turkey population here, but until there’s someone that has the authority to do so and actually cares about the turkey population here it doesn’t mean anything.

What a great idea Gobbler. Go back to the way Alabama always did it in the past when we had long seasons and liberal limits and plenty of turkeys. I think that idea is just crazy enough to work

I've been blessed to hunt the same tract of land every year for over 50 years and all of my experience says this is true. And it used to be what the state dcnr said was true, and I've never seen any evidence that proves that it isn't true. As I have said many times - forget about proving that hunting too early in the year reduces poult production. How about first of all finding evidence that spring gobbler hunting reduces poult production, period. I've never seen that evidence, and I don't believe that any exists. If they had it, we would be bombarded with it.

If spring gobbler hunting reduces poult production, it should be easy to prove that that areas with no hunting have much higher poult production rates. There are lots of such places. I asked Dr. Chamberlain on Twitter a couple of years ago how much higher the recruitment rate was on unhunted land, and he had no answer. He said he was starting a study on a military base, but I haven't heard any more about those results than I have of the years of study that he already has on the WMAs in GA that have a later start.

If you don't have as many turkeys as you used to have, it's not due to decoys, TSS, poachers, or any of the other things regarding hunting that we constantly hear about. It is entirely due to changes in the habitat. And the habitat is changed daily by a whole lot of factors - timber practices, farming practices, chicken litter, weather, and predator populations cover most of it, but there are probably others. I think y'all are starting to think exactly the way the state wants you to think when you talk about hunting methods ruining turkey flocks. If your neighbor kills a turkey using a decoy, that takes away the opportunity you might have had to call him up later, but I think it's very unlikely that is going to result in fewer poults in June.

Gobbler started this thread with an "If" the department wants to reduce the harvest. I understand that, but I don't think that should be the goal. I suppose their rationale is that they want to spread the harvest out among more hunters, thus keeping more people interested and selling more hunting licenses. There is no money for them in letting one man kill 5 turkeys. This is the force that is driving everything.

My observation is that turkey populations are as high, or maybe even higher, in areas with good habitat than they have ever been. One area that I hunt was devoid of turkeys this spring, and I think that was entirely due to the timber practices.

Thank you.
I hunt the same places my grandparents hunted and we have almost zero impact on the turkey population. Weather, habitat, and natural mortality causes are the drivers.

Question PCP.......If there weren't any predators then would prime habitat matter??

That's an impossibility, and I don't know the answer. There have always been predators. Even back in the Indian days there were plenty of predators, probably a lot more than now. But those burned woods produced that native grass that you like and gave the hens and poults a place to hide. Still, I don't doubt that most of the eggs and most of the poults were eaten by predators. That's the way it's always been and always will be.

I don't know how the eggheads classify it, but I count predators as part of the habitat. And I think it's great to remove as many as you can. I still think providing the hens and poults a place to hide is more important than the number of predators, but I could be wrong. No reason to not do both.

I’m using an extreme here just to describe the concept so we can then back it off to our more realistic situation…..

But lets say hypothetically that we removed all turkey predators from Alabama…..In this case I think you would agree that turkey populations would spread out and exist in all types of marginal habitats….If there’s nothing to catch them and eat their eggs then cover doesn’t really matter…..they have nothing to hide from......Now lets take our scenario and start adding predators into the mix like we’re slowly turning up the dial on a radio…..The higher and higher we turn that dial the more and more our turkey population will shrink down to only the areas with PRIME habitat……The higher the predator count the more important prime cover becomes…..So in our real world scenario now of where we sit today…..Which would be easier and more feasible to adjust???…..Converting 1000’s of acres of land back into prime habitat or creating a trapping incentive for turning back the predator dial??......

If killing gobblers in the Spring doesn’t effect the population, then why not? It either does or it doesn’t. You can’t have it both ways.

Killed 3 this year. Decoys we’re not used on any of them.

why don't we outlaw calls too ?

Works for me

First three I killed I had no calls

So here is another consideration. In the late 90's when turkeys were everywhere and probably still expanding from restocking, I hunted hurtsboro/union springs area quail places a lot. There were a TON of turkeys. IMO, they were using excellent wildlife habitat but NOT optimal turkey habitat. The population was so high that they were almost forced to use habitat that they may not have used if there weren't turkeys everywhere already, even in the intensive pine plantations in the area. Fast forward to now. The habitat is pretty much the same, same burning, same predator control, same vast expanses of grasslands, same hardwood component, same vast acreage of large landowners......However FAR less turkeys. My theory is they never really liked managed quail plantations but did fine there and used them when all other quality habitat was already occupied. Not sure what this means but I think it is true - overall turkeys are down from a variety of factors and timber management on vast acreage of timberland is a big component. Are there more predators? Undoubtedly yes but I can't say I see more dead coons on the road than I did in the 90's. I KNOW I do see FAR more avian predators and I am SURE these are killing far more poults than they were in the 90's. Anyone got an answer for that one? Are our poult success and nesting success numbers down? according to the current research there is a lower nest success and brood survival than before BUT they are using more advanced telemetry devices that may be better at detecting early nests making it look like they are less successful.

I am convinced part of the decline is "natural" and that the post-restocking numbers we saw in the 90's were unsustainable. We may ne more in the "norm" now but there is other factors driving lowered recruitment. We are NOT replacing the birds like we used to and need to. If it isn't harvest (and I don't think it is) and we don't seem to be getting nest hatched and poults raised into the adult population how do we do it? Is chicken litter killing poults? maybe. Is aflatoxin killing poults in fall then they are small and every deer hunter is pouring corn on the ground? Probably. Is nest success down due to more predators eating eggs, probably. Is vast acreage of pine plantation and the management associated with it making huge acreages unsuitable for turkeys, probably. I still wonder why, when I could regularly hear 10-12 birds gobble from one spot in an open pineywoods quail plantation in the 90's and now, if I am near a hardwood drain on the edge of pineywoods, maybe hear 3-5??? Just musings

Never killed one with calls - they don't have hands nor pockets

First three I killed. I had no calls

How much has the cattle industry grown since the 80’s and 90’s???......Hayfields are prime food sources for avian predators…..Do we have a lot more hayfields than back then?

You make good habit for any animal you make good habit for the predators that feed on them .
It's just that simple .


I look at it thru predators eyes . If I kill all other predators I'll have more to kill . Even on poor habit I'll have more to kill.

You either limit them or yourself

Nest predators are pretty few and far between around my area now as in coons and possums. We haven’t had a huge serge in new poults though. Still yotes foxes and bobcats I need to work on which is my next target. Definitely a lot more hawks around which makes me wonder if that’s the issue.

In a perfect scenario where we humans hadn’t manipulated the landscape so heavily, you would have a nice balance of habitat structure across the land that was comprised of a nice balance of grasses, broadleafs, and legumes……and that structure would be the driver for producing a nice balanced mix of cover and food where predator and prey populations also nicely balanced each other out…..They would go through ups and downs with the rainfall and vegetation but the end product that came out the back end would be in line with what the natural balance of vegetation was producing.

That’s NOT what we have happening now though…….We’re not even close to operating on that type of game board…..We humans have heavily influenced and manipulated not only the structure of the understory but we have also subsidized food sources that push these predator populations beyond natural levels……

For example with the structural difference……Instead of that natural mix of grass, broadleaf, legume…..we’ve converted HUUUUGE amounts of land to grass monocultures……doing this swings the balance in favor of some animals over others……One of the most important things is that it heavily increases rodent populations…….Lets add 5 or 6 chicken houses to the grass monocultured hay fields and you have a major rat producer that provides lots of quality resources for our predators but few for our desired species like turkey/deer…..That’s why areas like Sand Mt where I grew up have few turkey and deer but still have thriving coyote populations…..Another example of how we skew the predator balance is through our corn baiting…..That is directly introducing additional resources for nest raiders like coons to push their populations above what the land produces…..Even things like the chicken litter that’s being discussed….That’s a subsidized input being injected into the system to produce more grass that comes out the back end of our chain favoring the predators.

My point here is that when we get to this point we’re not really operating on an even playing field anymore with the predators….We’re not just gonna come out on the back end with a nice natural predator/prey relationship with turkey/deer/quail…We’ve done things to the landscape to tilt the benefit in the favor of predators and those things arent going away…. You’re not about to convert thousands of acres of chicken farms back to turkey habitat or anything like that. Even if you did convert one, habitat needs scale to truly be effective.

If we want to do something realistic to help then one of the biggest holes in the bucket is to try and moderate the predator load due to all of these imbalances so that the prey is able to exist in less than ideal habitat conditions…..Because even our “prime” habitat still has its issues.

Would it be possible to control the problem in some capacity at the rodent level??

My goodness. Not more of all this balance and "moderate" crap again.

You are like the noble savage theorist of modern day ecology.

...... That's pretty funny, I'll give you that

I enjoy most of your posts (sometimes they can be a bit long) and think many of your ideas have merit. However, the quality of habitat and exological conditions (think 1000s of years) werent always more selective for what we consider modern day game species. Namely, deer and turkey which are generalists.

Would you like for me to maybe start condensing them down into a Tic-Toc video for you???

CNC, ,,,, nature is a boom and bust system not a balance if left alone.

Yes it is. I just tried to convince him of that very thing, using his own graph/chart that he posted in the general forum.

I think y’all may take where I’m coming from wrong sometimes……In a lot of ways I’m looking at it from more of an engineering and physics perspective in simply understanding how its built and how it functions from a foundational level…..what are the principles that hold constant…..When we use words like balance what I’m really referring to is something more like a chemistry or math equation where no matter how you slice it up…..when you do something to this side of the equation it has an effect on the other side…..For every action there is a reaction…..You add this then it subtracts that….If we understand how all of those equations work with each of the variables then we know what will happen if we adjust this variable this way and that one that way……. And if game species like deer, turkey, and quail are what we want and the game board looks like “X”….or “Y” and we’re constrained at how we can go about effecting change…..then understanding these principles help us to know what can still be tweaked to help get the desired effect……



Right now we are the point in our state level game management where we have the duct tape and baling wire out trying to fix it…..but hey, I’ve been there too.

here's your solution then. The state is managing the wildlife resources based solely on maximizing revenue, backroom deals, and recommendations from the CAB (very few if any of the members know much about wildlife management). I think that Chuckie likes to be seen as being "woke" among the outdoor crowd, dominant gobbler theory etc. Solve this problem and replace everyone currently involved, with a group of knowledgeable professionals that want to manage the state's wildlife resources for the health and sustainability of the wildlife,

It's not always a bottom up approach. Sometimes the problem is at the top and once you take the top off, the rest of the issues fix themselves.

You'll have to talk to Mee-Maw about that one chief......That's not my department.

I think you are right again, and I have thought for a long time that the "good ole days" that so many remember were due to restocking and those numbers were not sustainable. We saw an explosion of turkeys in the 60s where I grew up, but it leveled off in about 10 years and hasn't varied a lot since. There have been up and down cycles, and habitat change has affected smaller areas, but we have never returned to what we had in the 60s. I don't think it's reasonable to expect it to ever do so.

Until our Democratic DCNR has some major changes and fast then I see 0 changes.

There's a lot things hunters can do no need to wait on government.

Exactly. The bunch we have rarely gets out from under the desk. Most are on their knees anyways.

Lets just think about Moundville area - similar to tallassee and other native high population centers. Moundville had, estimated in it's heyday, 10,000+ natives living there associated with the complex. Walking..... Imagine the impact they had on the local landscape. They couldn't travel terribly far in a day and reports indicate they went "off hunting" to '"hunting grounds". They HAD to because they devastated the local game populations around their population centers. Just like the plains indians using buffalo jumps to kill thousands of buffalo, most of which were wasted, to provide meat for the population. There are vast areas I have seen on maps of early settlers where very few indians lived and were used only for hunting to provide food. So much for "balance". These humans heavily manipulated the habitat and the game populations. The balance was more accidental due to low populations FAR away from population centers. Balance in predator/prey sounds good in a pretty poem.

Gobbler you're forgetting we are predators. Predator control will have to control use too. Makes for a better poem when we are included

I can only speak of what I’ve seen up this way. I bowhunted Lauderdale a NW corner WMA and club back in the late 80s and 90s. No turkey season until mid 90s. Nothing to see 40-50 jake-hen flocks on every hunt. Groups of 10-15 gobblers most of the time. Still a decent population there but not like it was. The season had been closed for close to 25 years before reopening. Colbert had been closed too but opened in the 80s. Would see similar flicks and some much bigger flocks on the western side next to MS. That area is nothing like it was during the 90s.

The biggest changes was timber harvest and flying raptors (cats) as 257 called them. Very efficient hunters they are. Rarely saw a Coopers, now see them all the time along with other hawks.

I’ve been saying I see similar numbers of gobblers but it’s the hen population that has really crashed. Had several landowners say the same thing about the hens. They probably own over 10k and have more than that with land leases. They’re retired and know their land running cameras etc….

I can say I’ve seen more hens this year than in the past. Not huge by any means but an increase. Actually have birds around the farm last year and this year. They’ve been missing for a few years and during the 90s nothing to see almost 200 birds in that area.

Thanks .

If the timber industry and "newly" adopted management practices across the board aren't at the top of your list as the reason for population decline from east Texas to Georgia... You're a damn fool, it's that simple.

I can delve more into this if needed.

Say what you want but CNC is on the right track.

Patiently waiting. Is this class gonna be approved for CE hours?

I don’t know if this is true or not but a buddy sent this to me about timber practices impacting turkey numbers. It’s pretty convincing.

Mash here

Cutting timber as I said before is the worst thing for turkeys IMO

Long as you select cut it you ok , clear cut it turkeys are done

You know I’ve been trying to think of other ways to word this because I’m really not just trying to be a dikhead by saying it but I cant….. Your response is so far out of the realm of anything I said though that I have to assume that your either bullchitting me or you didn’t take the time to comprehend what I said…..I really don’t know of another way to respond than that......For what its worth, here it is again.

CNC, why did you quote the part of your post that gobbler didn’t quote?

I’m confused

Exactly........

The number 1 goal he had in that video (and everybody who likes to blame logging), is to blame “new” timber harvesting practices. While doing so, he openly admitted two things that have been true for years. Turkey are extremely adaptable and can live in many various habitats. And predator control is the number one thing to help turkey. Plus - nobody complained about turkey numbers in the 90’s and 2000’s - and most clearcut conversions had already taken place by that “new” strategy.

It is fun to watch guys talk in a circle, though.

That is his MO



This is what you said



My reply was addressing your "balance" theory. That seems to be in the "realm of what you said" and I think I comprehended and replied just fine. Unless, of course, your were referring to pre 10K years ago before "humans had manipulated the landscape". If so, you should have stated that so I could comprehend.

😂😂😂

Time and money is all it takes

Logging isnt the problem. Clear-cuts aren't the problem. Timber Management Practices are the problem. It's the spraying after the clear cutting has taken place that causes the initial problems. You can defend it til you're blue in the face. We get it. It's your industry. But the fact that you mention circles is funny, because the problem is indeed cyclical. And yes, these practices started being implemented in the late 90s, and early 2000s, but it wasn't until the mid to late 2000s that I would consider them widely adopted. With the percentage of landowners and timber management companies increasing yearly until we were at a point in the mid 2010s when it reached a high adoption rate (probably 85% or higher now with the exception of a few private land owners who manage for wildlife or are too old school to change their ways). It takes time to see a decline. As this new strategy wasn't implemented over night, neither is the decline of the wild turkey. You act like 20 years in the big scheme of things is a long time, when it just simply isn't. Turkeys are adaptive, and your correct, they can live in many different forms of terra. BUT, they cannot live where there isn't any food.

Lets use a 300 acre clear cut as an example:

Timber is cut. New growth sprouts. You have good browse and cover for all animals. From mice to rabbits to turkeys to deer. The clear cut is then sprayed. Everything dies with the exception of some nuisance unwanted grasses and vegetation (i.e. yaupon and broom sage). All of a sudden there is no growth for the animals to forage on. ALL animals, even bugs need plant variety to flourish. Because of the lack of growth, there aren't even any bugs for the birds to eat. So they move. The rodent numbers decline, which equals less food and eliminates easy meals for predators. Predators are then forced to shift food source focus to larger animals that were previously farther down the list simply because they are harder to obtain. Now you have a 300 acre block of barren land in which nothing inhabits and will not inhabit anything for years to come. The larger animals with bigger ranges are forced to move to a new area where their basic needs to survive are met. Subsequently surrounding areas are hit with an influx of more mouths to feed. This puts more pressure on those areas resources. All of a sudden there is a higher food demand. The rodents in that area see an huge increase in predation and predator numbers. It doesn't take long and those predators (i.e foxes, cats and coyotes) have wiped out the easy pray once again (including ALL nesting animals eggs), causing predator food sources to shift once again to larger prey. The vegetation is now being consumed faster than it can grow and the created environment isn't sustainable.

At this point, one of the following two things is guaranteed to happen, and both happen eventually... 1) Animal numbers start to decrease over time (cant live without food, Darwin's law here). OR 2) This new area is clear cut and sprayed, and we start all over at the beginning. Which ends in the same type cycle. As years of this have gone on, it has eventually gotten to a tipping point, so we are actually widely seeing the effects of it now.

You don't have to buy into what I'm saying. But I watched it happen over a 15 year period on 15,000 acres of the most turkey infested ground you could ever hope to set foot on. When the implementation of spraying first started, I could see the writing on the wall. You walk out into a clear cut that they had cut and sprayed and you'd be lucky to see ants on the ground. No bugs, no rodents, no birds even coming into that area because there was nothing to eat. Sure you may see a stray deer track or turkey track travelling through.. but that's it.. You go 500 yards down the road to a clear cut of similar age, that had not been sprayed or tampered with, and the natural forage that was there would hold ALL of the wildlife. Gobs of bugs, birds, rabbits, deer, turkeys and even coyotes. The difference is astonishing and if your honest with yourself you know exactly what I'm talking about.

As a side not: Spraying also completely eliminated the need for burning, which we all know was and is beneficial to wildlife in too many ways to list right now. We also wont get into SMZ reduction.

Yes obviously trapping predators will help. Any mouth you can remove from the landscape will help. BUT, it is my honest opinion that there are NOT MORE predators now than there were 20 years ago. There is simply less food for them, as described above. So they are forced into more travel, more daylight movement which leads to more tracks, sightings and evidence that they are around. Giving the perception that there are more of them. If anything, there are likely less. But, predatory animals are more resilient than prey animals. They dont have anything trying to eat their young or rob their eggs. So yes, in ratio form, there are more predators to prey. And that number is most likely up. But it stems from the issues listed above.

From Atlanta, down to central Florida and to east Texas (with the exception of extreme North AL and North Mississippi), this area is majorly managed for timber harvest. Yes there are some areas of ag mixed in, but it is minute on the large scale of things.

I think most agree that numbers are down overall, across the board, but they are down for different reasons in different areas. While the south's numbers have been on a slow decline. Areas in the Midwest and West have plummeted in a period of 5 years. Why? Well look at the patterns of weather during brooding season in areas like Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma and North Texas from about 2014 to 2020... either EXTREME drought or extreme flooding in those areas at least every other year in that period, led to poor poult viability.


Everyone wants to blame hunters, over harvest, and the BS about "killing the dominant gobbler too early". But in reality...in the past 50 years very little of that has actually changed to a degree that could make the kind of effect we are currently seeing.

Teamduckdown what about areas in the mtns where spraying after cutting never occurs? Like many have stated counties such as Jackson the habitat hasn’t changed at all.

I don't live there. It's hard to speak on that. If you notice i intentionally excluded north GA, AL and MS from the post because i have no knowledge of it.
Are we talking Pine or hardwood on these mountains? I'm addressing Pine timber management. Jackson boasts one of the highest numbers for harvest success on game check (not that i buy much into that), are the numbers down significantly?

Hardwoods but our decline is just as bad and in the same time frame. The main reason Jackson is so high we are a big county with around 100,000 acres of public land.

Question about the spraying in pine stands, my buddy said they sprayed at there club first of turkey season and put out signs that said stay out for 2 weeks, is that a safety issue that what they spray isn’t good for humans? If so then how does it affect wildlife?

Extreme safety precaution due to our society today. Most REI’s are only 48 hours, not two weeks. The LD50 of forestry herbicides are less than the LD50 of baking soda. I’m not saying bake cookies with it, though, but that’s a good comparison.

Kill some predators and do away with the baiting. The state DCNR loves money not wildlife so good luck.

Gotcha

I would agree this is a significant contribution to the problem. Also "mid rotation" herbicide with a helicopter and arsenal. And while the intense application of herbicide mixes can be damaging both short and long term, it is just as bad to have these clearcuts in the multi hundreds of acres. Not only timber companies, timber REITS, trusts but also landowners that manage specifically for timber income. We are blessed to work with the "few private land owners who manage for wildlife or are too old school to change their ways". While we use many of the same herbicides to site prep and plant, we also tend to use less intensive rates and manage on smaller stand size specifically because of wildlife considerations. We do "mid rotation" woody control in pine stands but we also use targeted application with hand crews and lower rates of herbicide - protecting mast producing hardwoods in the mid story and throughout pine stands. We don't use herbicides in the place of fire, etc... Ive always said stand size is a massive factor in wildlife management. Partridge pea is an excellent quail plant but 300 acres is a biological desert, soybeans or clover is excellent for deer but 300 acres is unusable for deer, Bottomland hardwood is great habitat for turkeys but 300 aces is usually devoid of turkeys for part of the year, pine plantations in various ages and management classes can be excellent wildlife habitat but 300 acres in one block is not ideal either, I love burning but a 300 ace burn is not used effectively for deer and turkeys until well greened up and only a small portion would be used for quail -in fact it is a death trap for quail to burn that much in one block..

Our average CC size is 90 acres.

The average CC size statewide is less than that.

MRWR is done on select thinned stands, probably 1/3 or less of thinned stands per year. Some companies never do it. That’s a tiny fraction of acres.

There’s been a huge awareness of rates of herbicide at the industry level. The industry is good at opex.

Banded herbaceous control in the Spring is very popular today. That means about 20% of a CC area is actually sprayed. Inbetween the rows are not sprayed. The wildlife guys approve.

Yeah, that may be the average but when that 90 acres butts up to 110 acres on the north side, 2 80 acre tracts on the east and west side and a 120 acre tract on the south that have all been cut within the last 5 years, and managed the same way, the void left is huge.

I'll say this, whatever Scotch is doing... works. It may not be the absolute best way to be the most profitable, or the absolute best way to manage for the game. But all of their properties seem to have decent to good turkey numbers. Even when in areas that surrounding properties dont have the same result.

One thing this thread shows is when you work in a particular field the koolaid is strong. Whether it is DNR, timber, Ag, or academia it doesnt seem to matter. Just human nature I suppose.

And you cant convince me otherwise!

The timber industry is the #1 job producer in the state (unless auto has edged it out recently). You got to live with it. Turkey figured out how. It’s time for hunters to do the same. Some of the best (most of the best) turkey producing counties are heavy timber producing counties - top of the list counties. Landowners who are committed to keeping land “wild”, whether they grow and produce timber or not - are turkeys best friends. I don’t like kool-aid. And facts don’t care about your feelings, or mine

If three bucks is plenty for the deer hunters , then surely three birds is enough. There is no where near as many gobblers as bucks. Hmmm

Heck, I just mix up my own flavor.