I'd be fine with TN pushing back the start date a few weeks. The overall season limit won't be as important if those birds are protected during that critical early time frame.

Something has to be done. I can guarantee our population issue isn't going to fix itself.

Wildlife agences in a dozen or so Southeast states have said for the last 8-10 years the populations are in trouble. They haven't ignored it or said otherwise.

My limited experience in TN says you might as well make turkeys a protected species if you push the season back "a few weeks." I tried for 3 years to find a place in TN where turkeys were still gobbling good in early May, and failed. The gobbling was mostly over by then, though there were still plenty of gobblers around. I didn't want to drive to another state to deer hunt them, so I gave up on TN.

It seems you are buying the theory that is being put out by various states - that so many gobblers are being killed early in the season that there aren't enough to breed the hens. I have often said that might actually happen in some places with low populations, but I have never hunted in a place like that. When turkeys are gobbling throughout the season, common sense says that hens can find a gobbler to breed, and over 60 years of our experience in AL also says that it's true. It only takes one gobbler to breed a bunch of hens.

Since it's hard to convince hunters that there aren't enough gobblers to breed hens when we know that they are there, the latest variation of the theory is that hens are only willing to breed with the dominant gobbler and they don't breed at all if he gets killed. I can't imagine how anyone could set up a scientific study to prove such an idea, but if they have, it hasn't been shared with the public. One young biologist even said that hens were making a conscious decision not to breed. How could he possibly know what a hen is thinking? When such anthromorphic ideas appear among the scientific community, it causes many of us to lose confidence in the validity of the research, and that is sad.

I don't doubt that some hens don't breed and nest, but it's always been normal for that to happen. I could be wrong, but I think whatever declines in population might be happening are almost entirely habitat related. Habitat never stays the same. It changes with the weather, and what is good habitat one year can produce nothing the next year. I wish they would focus the research on habitat instead of hunting. Hunters are funding most of the research, and the research dollars are then being used to discredit hunting, when it really has very little to do with overall populations.

There is a very strong anti-hunting movement in the US, and it's been with us a long time. It isn't surprising that it has invaded the state game and fish divisions. Expect it to get worse.

Well said, PCP.

This is very, very true. This, and that decoys are increasing harvest rates significantly. In response, managers have to do something. The most logical thing is to make sure that turkeys have plenty of nesting/egg laying opportunities at the right time of year. It's been proven that peak nesting doesn't occur until April in lower Alabama, so arguably our season should open later from a biological standpoint but doesn't because of tradition and pressure from hunters. There's a guy at UGA named Michael Chamberlain who has done all kinds of research on this. His research supports a lot of these decisions and shows how some of them are not that smart but are done because of pressure or tradition. Look him up on Facebook and read his Turkey Tuesday this week on turkey seasons.

There’s no data to support this that I’m aware of. Where are harvest rates increasing?

To clarify in ALFisher's post above, Wambaw made that comment about "the bottom line." Not me.

Please provide the statistical data proving that decoys have increased "harvest" rates.

Any state. Would love to see any before-after data from legitimate source(s) showing this.

Where is there any proof that Spring gobbler harvest fluctuations have a direct impact on poult production? Show us the proof! Tie the studies with some proof, not speculation. Show us a state that’s proven it.

How about figure out what happened in areas where’s there’s decline. Figure that out, and act accordingly.

TN didn’t experience quick declines because of Spring gobbler harvest. Did the Spring harvest even change drastically during those times? I doubt it. But the only thing we can think to do is alter hunting season. If it wasn’t the problem, how can changing it be the solution?

Your first question is the one I have wondered about many times. If there is research showing higher poult recruitment rates on land that isn't hunted, I would have to rethink my position. The SC study had access to land that was unhunted, and they reported hearing slightly more gobbling on that land. Common sense says that should be expected. The big question is does more gobbling result in more poults?

They had poult recruitment rates for places they studied, but I didn't see any mention of those rates being higher on the unhunted land. Were they? I suspect that they must not have been or they would have used it as exhibit A in their report.

If poult recruitment is the same on unhunted land as it is on hunted land, then it proves what biologists were saying 50 years ago - that spring gobbler hunting has no effect on the overall turkey population. And if that is true, then further restrictions on spring hunting will do nothing to increase overall numbers. What further restrictions will accomplish is an illusion that things are now "fairer." And it seems our society values fairness more than anything, so expect us to continue down the path of restricting hunting. What amazes me is the number of hunters who cheer for it to happen.

Not only cheer for it, but fight tooth and nail for more "fairness" when in reality it's often just restrictions that never will be reversed.

Missouri used to have a two week season M-F, closed weekend, M-F with a tag good in each week.

I'd be willing to bet a large sum of money that without decoys/reaping, our TN harvest totals would plummet. I wouldn't be surprised if 50% of our total kills were with the aid of decoys. Of course I have no way of ever proving this.

Dead is dead. There’s no degree of dead. Only dead. Active gobblers will figure out a way to die at some point during the season. I’ve never seen any state data showing 50% increase harvest the first year decoys were legal. Matter of fact, please produce an article or data where any increased harvest was related to the use of decoys. Close to the same number of gobblers die in the Spring with or without IMO. Why does it matter how they died? For this particular discussion, it’s irrelevant anyway.

It's not irrelevant in this discussion. A large percentage of those toms that are killed in the first two weeks of season are killed over decoys/reaped. Those first two weeks are usually when the male turkey decoys are the most productive. Also those almost really tough dominant birds march to those decoys and die.

Which is it? What opinion or spoonfed agenda from the “study” crowd you gonna go with? For a minute, you said decoys caused twice as many kills. Get corrected on that, and now it just causes more gobblers to be killed too early in the season. Bad opinion followed by spewing the research verbiage.

And you still haven’t answered why it’s relevant to poult production. Maybe cause the connection hasn’t actually been proved.

What else you got? Other than being a sheeple and wanting some dumb restriction.

When was I corrected?

I want the season pushed back to allow the hens to be bred.

Season pushed back won't happen, so I said I'd be fine with only 1 bird the first 10 days.

This allows more toms to live and breed hens. This will help accomplish the same thing a later start date does.

I stand by MY theory that 50% of the birds killed in TN are over decoys/reaped.

Those decoys are USUALLY most effective the first two weeks of season.

Hence the reason I said in my first post that the decoy guys/reapers wouldn't be happy with 1 bird in the first 10 days of season

All those birds that would otherwise be safe if it wasn't for a decoy, are being killed in that early part of the season.

I could provide 100% factual evidence to you and it still wouldn't be good enough.

I'm guessing you're a decoy guy

I'll just bury my head in the sand and hope our turkey population fixes itself.

I can flat guarantee that a lot of hunters are gonna be real quiet the first 10 days of the season when they implement this new "10 day rule".

My take on population decline reasons in no particular order. More "turkey hunters" than I've ever seen in my lifetime, loss or change in habitat, weather to wet cold or dry during brooding, nest predations worse from lack of coon hunters and trappers or less suitable nesting ground making it easier for predation to occur. I primary hunt public land so some might see the amount of hunters I see but its getting ridiculous to point Alabama is way over due quota hunts on most WMA's.

I find it hard to believe that the kill skyrockets with the use of decoys, not been my experience while bowhunting. A heck of a lot of gobblers run AWAY from decoys.

Decline causes, IMHO, are habitat destruction, huge increases in egg predators, and coyotes, and increase in hunters last.