Dr. Lemme made a motion yesterday at the CAB meeting to move the dates of turkey season to April 1 to May 1 and reduce to 3 bird limit. Chuck Sykes was not in attendance (isn't that his job?). Motion was tabled until the Feb meeting. I would expect a vote then to put this in play.

can we email him our opinions?

Can't do that. 4/1/21 is on a Thursday. That isn't fair to the folks who can only hunt the weekends. Or at least that is the reasoning they used to screw us out of starting on the 15th and tried to pacify us with 3 day on the back end when it's hot as hell.

Maybe it's ironic they want to open it on April Fool's Day.

Fk em

Lease prices and pressure are already out of control in Mississippi. These type of changes not only hurt the hunting in Alabama, but the neighboring states too.

Ain't gonna push me into neighboring states. Just gonna make me an outlaw.
Well.... More of an outlaw

If u cut the bird limit - at least move it back to March 15 start - 4/1 is at the heart of henned up part of season

what were his reasons for doing this?

Who can remember when we just looked when the season started and hunted accordingly without pissing and moaning about everything.

Cause chucky can and wants to

Who can remember pre chuckie????

I used to do that before they put an arrogant asswipe loudmouth in charge.
Now I do whatever the hell I please I wish Chuck would come catch me in person.

Chuck Sykes was not in attendance (isn't that his job?).


Are you sure?

Taking away March hunting for anything below Hwy 80 would be about the most asinine regulation in AL hunting history. Not sure I’d want to be associated with a move that dumb.

It should start March 10th around here.

Me. Loved them Wednesday openers!

Dr. B

**Who is Dr. Lemme?
I’ll say this and “Lemme” make one thing clear. I do not want anymore changes!!

Unless something changed, and it may have, for several years the Board typically would not take voting action at the first meeting of the year on something carried over from the prior year.

Part of this was to prevent someone mentioning something at one of the meetings, including the third or final meeting, and then five, six, seven months later when no one is thinking about it have a vote and pass it. Doing so would catch everyone off guard and not give the public much (or any) chance to learn what was being proposed or discussed so they could attend the second meeting (usually in April) and/or third meeting. It can be argued that "we discussed it in (whatever month) and it was made public, and anyone could've contacted us since then."

Maybe so, but memories are short. Any of y'all remember something discussed in their February meeting? Or the last meeting in 2019? I'll bet not. The first meeting for years was and probably should be little more than administrative, procedural and a table-setting of sorts for the next meetings unless a vote is legitimately needed. And if something is drastic enough to have a "we MUST HAVE a vote now!" consideration, the Commissioner could do it by order. The CAB supposed to be a conduit between the public and DCNR.

What should happen IMO is a change in the law to have at least quarterly meetings of the Board, if not five or six a year. The Board had two meetings for years before a third was added in the mid-2000s. If my memory serves correctly, 49er used to say that by wording of the legal statue they are to have only two meetings a year.

I'm all for more public meetings of the Board as long as they're done legally. If that means changing the statute by Legislative action, so be it. Moving them around the state and having them more frequently would provide more transparency (maybe) for the public.


As for the turkey proposal, if it's being made now it's already being discussed and something that someone wants. The Board's proposals don't just come out of left field.

Dr. Lemme is Director of the Alabama Cooperative Extension System and an Ex-Officio member of the board, along with Gov. MeeMawa and Rick Pate, Commissioner, Department of Agriculture and Industries


They don't list emails on this list of the Board members and other Board info:

https://www.outdooralabama.com/about-us/conservation-advisory-board

Lemme's info on the ACES site is here:

https://ssl.acesag.auburn.edu/directory-new/u/Gary-Lemme-mgaRFFOz/

Are ex-officio members even supposed to be making motions?

Oh, and Lemme is a Yank too.
A 4-week season is some of them Yank rules. They’ll make it two 10-day splits or some such we start down that road.

I don't ever recall an Ex-Officio member making a formal proposal in the 15ish years I attended the meetings. They're official members of the board, though, and according to the accepted parlimentary Robert's Rules of Order they have full discussion, proposal and voting powers.

See Q2: https://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#2

Speaking of parlimentary procedure, the Board would do good to return to Dan Moultrie's addition many years ago of a legitimate parlimentarian on hand at each meeting to exercise the Robert's Rules of Order, answer questions about procedure, and prevent any mistaken discussion, out-of-order procedures, votes, etc. I think they had one on hand for a couple of meetings but it didn't last.

It's good to have one, IMO, to suss questions about proper procedure. Would be a positive step.

Was he? Y’all are friends right?

I wasn’t there either, but that’s a bold statement. I would put a little money behind saying he was.

98.% of the members on here I would call friends.

I was there, Chuck was in attendance and spoke about the regulation. Motion was tabled until the next meeting, primarily because the regulation book has already been published for this season. It will come up again at the first 2021 meeting

Said it before and here it is again - any new proposed regulation that treats Jackson County and Clarke County as needing the same season dates is pathetic. When is somebody with half a brain gonna realize that doesn’t fit?

We should be able to be a little more creative with such a diverse state in terms of weather and seasonality. It really proves there’s not much thought process behind these latest changes and any proposed change like this.

So 2021 will be the final Alabama style turkey season. I picked a good time to get old. Eliminating all March hunting will do more damage than the limit reduction. How many landowners will go all in on managing their land for turkeys with such a limited hunting opportunity? It will take some time, but the end result will be a lot fewer turkeys.

That's a great point.

Don't forget, landowners in Alabama are committing welfare fraud. You have the audacity to hunt your own land without paying for the license.
How arrogant!!

LEECHY TEAT-SUCKING LANDOWNER!

I agree with this

So True. In April you're gonna lose a weekend or two to bad weather.
So as someone that works a full-time job mon-fri, would I want to spend all that prep time just to hunt 2, maybe 3 weekends?

That makes zero sense, if I lived in south Alabama and they make this change I’d just have to take my chances on getting caught because they will suffer worse than anybody else with that late of a start date!

Lemme voted against the motion to reduce from 5 to 4 last time this issue came up. What's changed? What new data do they have out there? In fact, last time, the motion had a only 3 or 4 supporters, I think.

One of the problems in Alabama is lack of solid scientific data regarding population and harvest rate. Most of the people who read this board won't use Game Check to report turkeys, but then complain that the government doesn't know how many turkeys are out there. Well, if folks reported their kill, we would have a better idea. Far more people use Snapper Check than Game Check. I don't know why. Almost 50 percent of fishermen/women use Snapper Check. Last time I looked, around 10 percent used Game Check to report turkey harvest. It may be better this year. I don't know.

My point is that if we don't want what we perceive to be arbitrary decisions, then (1) we must get more involved, and (2) we must give the CAB and the good, hard-working folks at DCNR the tools and data they need to make decisions. My experience with people at DCNR is that they want to make good decisions based on science, and they want to give hunters the most opportunities they can while ensuring that we have a solid population. We need to do our part to give them the data they need and then participate in the process.

How do you know what percentage use game check or snapper check?

The biggest problem with game check is Chuck Sykes. Everytime he opens his mouth, he's either condescending or arrogant.
He comes off like, "I'm gonna punish all hunters if y'all don't play my game, my way".
That schit don't fly with country boys

Hunting used to be fun.

I agree with you on most of what you said, but I don't know how you got the 10% number. If it's right, that would put the actual harvest numbers in the 100,000 to 160,000 range, and that would mean that AL sure doesn't have a problem with turkey numbers. I think that the number is more like 30 or 40%, but all anyone can do is guess. We had way better numbers in the days of the hunter survey. It seems like some folks here might have predicted this would happen.

I have reported every turkey I've killed since GC started, and I think most of the posters here do the same. I don't think harvest numbers in AL, or lack thereof, have anything to do with it. It started with a couple of biologists from other states who came up with the theory that gobblers being killed too early in the season was affecting reproduction. They post on FB and have gained a lot of followers. I've seen nothing to convince me that the theory is true, but it doesn't have to be true. It's PC to believe it, and no biologist who works for a state can afford to question it if he values his career.

Not only have they been unable to prove that an early season affects poult production, but they haven't proved that legal hunting of spring gobblers affects poult production period. I'm convinced that it doesn't, with the possible exception of areas with very few turkeys. Those places don't need a season at all, and that was exactly the way the previous state administration handled it. If hunting was hurting poult production, then areas that aren't hunted should have way more poults per hen. That would be easy to prove if it were a real effect of hunting, but find a study that shows this. I don't believe that one exists.

It appears that I'm wrong about that. The most recent report says: "reporting compliance with the mandatory Game Check program is only at 42.5%." This is in the annual turkey report (https://www.outdooralabama.com/site...%20Annual%20Turkey%20Report_FinalWEB.pdf). I was relying off what I remember one of the DCNR telling the board years ago as to compliance. Glad to see compliance is up. Of course, the flip side of that is there are apparently a bunch of turkeys being harvested. Better data is still good.

I was thinking the same thing.

Now, now, don't be mentioning the statistically valid, accepted survey that worked for more than 50 years.

We can't have any thoughts about The Before Times. Only what is The Now Times, with mandatory data checking systems and compliance. You shall submit.

GC compliance is reported in the Annual Turkey report. See above. Snapper check numbers were reported to the CAB a year or so ago, and I was there in person. I will try to find the most recent numbers.

CAB meeting minutes state that SC compliance is at 51%. (https://www.outdooralabama.com/sites/default/files/02-29-2020%20CAB%20Minutes%20-%20Condensed_0.pdf)

So, as of now, GC vs. SC are not too far off. Feel bad about my first post now. I should have looked up the numbers rather than use my recollection.

Take out spring break and most kids will get little opportunity to hunt. It's important to get our kids involved. I don't care how much they limit the adults, but don't take what little time kids have to turkey hunt away from them. I have 2 boys at home and I assure you if they can only go a few times a season, they aren't going to give a rats ass about turkey hunting or the turkeys.

Maybe these data have something to do with the changes proposed:

2020 Season Totals

16,651 gobblers total harvest reported to Game Check

Private land: 15,228

Public land total: 1,423

WMA: 631

Federal: 401



2019 Season Totals

10,854 gobblers total harvest reported to Game Check

Private land: 9,875

Public land: 979

that's a big swing.

Population of species = who knows?
Number killed = 100% reported
Population remaining = who knows?

Killing more birds is a good thing. I’m not even sure how to spin that negative. They were gobblers, not hens.

So where’s the number for how many we had before those were killed? What is the magic number they are looking for to justify dropping the limit? I’m sure there are folks that don’t use game check but I also know several people that buy license every year and sometimes never kill a thing, are they just assuming that everyone that buys a license is killing stuff and not reporting it? I haven’t been turkey hunting near as long as several on here but in my experience the numbers are about the same in the 3-4 counties I hunt, some years are better than others but I haven’t seen a drastic decline. I will never understand how counting dead turkeys is a way of determining what shape the population is in

I lease just to turkey hunt. The food plots are planted with turkeys in mind as much as deer. Varmint trapping is geared at least as much toward getting nest robbers as fawn killers. I do report all harvests. My turkey numbers were strong when I got the place and are getting better. And now in just a couple of years, your gonna cut the season from 47 days to 30 days. Guys will either say screw it or will become outlaws. With boating and fishing ramping up, its going to make for a busy spring for the wardens.

My response will be more of a combination of the two

I have read those estimates they put out on GC compliance, but I've never seen them discuss their methodology for arriving at those numbers; do you know?

The only way I can think of would be to compare GC numbers to some other system that measures the harvest. I've seen nothing to indicate they still do the hunter survey; does anyone know? I have heard rumors of a telephone survey, but never seen that confirmed by the department. If they can confidently state the % of compliance with GC, then they have to have some other system for measuring the harvest, and if they have that, then why do they need GC? Many of us have believed from the start that GC was mainly just an enforcement tool.

Harvest numbers are not perfect for estimating populations, but it's always been one of the best tools we have, especially when you use the same methodology over many years. Things like weather can skew the results of a single season, but population trends should show up in harvest numbers. Of course, since Chuck publicly said that the hunter survey was "worthless", it's hard to see how they could use it now to determine GC compliance.

Reducing the season days and the limit because the GC harvest was up 50% this past season kind of proves that this has nothing to do with the science.

It makes no sense to start season later than March 15 in Baldwin County.

I would consider the 2020 season an anomaly due to higher hunter effort days. COVID meant many folks were off work and had more time to hunt turkeys. More hunters in the woods for more days resulted in a higher harvest for the 2020 season. Comparing 2019 results and 2020 results is apples to oranges.

I didn't real all this thread but I think most seasons, at least recently, my birds are pretty much done but the middle of April. If they want to do 4 weeks I don't know about that but I would at least keep the start date in March.

There are multiple ways to estimate a turkey, fish, deer's, etc. population. Obviously every bird, fish, deer etc. can't be counted in the wild. These stock assessments are done through multiple different models and sampling types, with each model being tweaked, improved, as science gets better and science/technology allows sampling techniques to improve. There are generally accepted two different ways to gather data. One is based on what I would call harvest rates - examine how many turkeys, deer, fish were taken, their size (if fish), vs. how many hours, days, etc. it took to catch/kill. Then estimate the number or stock of game/fish. Another is non-harvest data - gathered by actually counting fish/game in the wild over a certain area or areas and estimating the population. In fisheries mgt, it's called fisheries-dependent data vs. non-fisheries dependent data. Google it.

In my opinion, fishery/game managers often depend too much on harvest rates vs. effort (time). In fisheries management, it's called fishery-dependent data. More non-harvest dependent data is needed. The reason non-harvest data is not used as often is because it's more expensive, it's more labor-intensive, and it takes a concerted effort over many years to gather. Arguably, it's more accurate, however, or at least allows a manager to provide more accurate assessments - especially when it comes to fish.

In an ideal world, for harvest data, they would like to look for trends - is the harvest going up with the same or fewer hours being spent to harvest more (probably an indicator that the stock is doing well), or is the harvest going down with more hours spent trying to find the turkey, deer, fish (probably an indicator of stock decline).

I don't know exactly how they do the estimates in Alabama. The "Full Fans and Sharp Spurs - Wild Turkey Report" has some information in it. Apparently, they use both types of data - harvest, and non-harvest data. The last in-depth analysis I've seen on what data they gather and the estimated turkey population was in 2015 in a wild turkey report. Said we had 500,000 turkeys. I've seen quotes from DCNR folks saying that's slipped to 400,000, but no actual figures. I suppose we could just ask them, and they would tell us. If you want to know, send the Commissioner a polite email, and I bet someone will respond.

Troy can tell you about that population estimate on turkeys back when he was working. I think the acronym for it is WAG, but I'm not sure what that means.

damnitt Al, get a grip

I'll tell you how the DCNR did it in 1980...they called me and asked me how many deer/turkey/rabbits/skwerls were in Hale Co. True. Asked every other LEO GW in the state the same damn thing, then juggled the numbers and came up with the official numbers. Pretty damn scientific if ya ask me.

I watched a show, some time ago, but I can't remember what it was
Anyway, the narrator says, "there's 1.2 million rabbits in Kansas". Said it as if it was a proven fact.
I'm like, who the hell is counting rabbits in Kansas??? And how???

same way I did Mark, snatched a number out of my ass.

More than likely it is purely a function of Covid 19 and people being home and not at work.

Let’s say we know exactly how many turkeys there are in the state and the number of gobblers killed every year, to the very last one. At what point would reducing the per person limit of gobblers from 5 to 3 be needed? What’s that expected to accomplish?

That could have had some effect, but there were a lot of us saying before the season that we had a record number of turkeys and I thought the season proved that. I can tell you Covid didn't have any impact on my hunting, nor that of anyone who I talk with about turkey hunting. It probably got more beginner types into the woods, but those folks usually save more than they kill. Chuck had the nerve to say that we killed more because the season started later. Does that make any sense?

Liberalism/brainwashed HORSECHIT.

So you're in the government ? Who'd a thunk it?

Government don't need to know how many turkeys we have.
All they need to do is stay out of the way, and let the landowners and hunters manage the turkey population like we been doing for decades.

I'm not in the government. Never have been. Someone will have to explain to me how science is liberalism/brainwashed horsechit and then come up with a better way to manage our wildlife. last time we just left people to their own devices with no rules, we overhunted deer and turkeys and ducks till they weren't worth hunting anymore. I don't want to go back to those days.

You Shall Bend The Knee!!

Landowners are better stewards of the resources than government.
Of course chucky doesn't believe that because landowners don't have to purchase the king's license.

If you don’t have scientific knowledge enough to understand how statistically-valid sample sizes, as utilized in the hunter surveys the state successfully used for decades, and then subsequently advocate for requiring 100% reporting of harvest data via this current gestapo game-check government waste of unnecessary dollars bullchit, then you need to just shut up. Because you sound like a good-idea fairy, decisions based on feelings instead of facts, bleeding-heart liberal idiot. It aint required to determine accurate harvest estimations and corresponding trends accordingly. Period.

Let's see - count every turkey killed (game check), or "assume" you have a valid sample size and method (hunter survey). Which one would give you a more accurate description of how many turkeys are killed? Obviously the first one. But then again, calling people idiots and game check gestapo-style is just easier. I love how people just immediately go to name calling rather than have a rational discussion. And no, I do not favor making decisions based on feelings and ignoring facts. that would not be smart. Nor am I some bleeding-heart liberal. Discussing it here is probably pointless. Just show up at the next CAB meeting and let them know. That's the only discussion that matters.

I assume this means you are against seasons or bag limits of any kind whatsoever. Let the landowner set his/her/its (in the case of a corporation) own season, bag limit, etc?

Again....zero understanding of the science and mathematics associated with statistically-valid sampling, confidence intervals, etc. If you did understand it, you would logically advocate differently (especially if you claim to be conservative whatsoever). Don’t feel alone though, Chuck Syke’s stupid arse doesn’t understand it either and he is in charge of all of it.

I think these pointy headed jackasses that want to arbitrarily change rules, limits, seasons, etc. need to get their butts out of their offices and hit the woods.
Apparently, we had a excellent hatch year in my neck of the woods. I was mowing roads and food plots yesterday and saw more turkeys than I've seen in a good while.
Making changes just for the sake of change never works out well

We have had great hatches two years in a row in the northern part of the state.
The one two years ago was amazing. More hens and 2 year old gobblers than you could shake a stick at last year. I’m really looking forward to next spring. If they open it up on April 1st, I will really enjoy hunting em by myself about the last 10 days of March.

I’ll go with ya! I hate for you to be out there alone and something bad happen

Come on my friend! Should be plenty of room!!! 🤣👍🏻

It never ceases to amaze me how few grasp this. What’s more, I’m pretty sure that Chuckie and company still have to sample to correct for noncompliance bias. Either that or they pull it out their rear when estimating reporting compliance rates.

This smells of follow the money

If you a question about today's DCNR, the answer is MONEY.
Whatever the question, the answer is MONEY.

No name calling from me - I've been trying to explain to folks for the past 20 years that the hunter survey was scientifically valid within the margin of error. It didn't give you the exact number, but it was close enough to make good decisions on setting seasons and limits. Every branch of science uses random sampling, and I never saw any reason to believe that we weren't getting good numbers.

But for a system like GC to give usable numbers, you need every hunter to participate, and that's just not gonna happen.

But the issue with the hunter survey from the dcnr point of view was that it did nothing for enforcement. If your ultimate goal is to cut way back on the season and limits, then you want an enforcement tool, and GC is it. We said this was the goal when it started and it all seems to be right on schedule. But it hasn't passed yet. Write your CAB member and tell him what you think.

Why would this be their ultimate goal unless some science (whether that be GC or valid sampling, I don't care which) supported it? That doesn't make any sense. If the answer is MONEY, then obviously there is more money in having a long season (see, for example, deer season). I just don't see anyone cutting the season short for the sake of cutting the season short, or cutting bag limits just for the sake of cutting bag limits.

Now, whether they actually have ANY scientific reason to cut the season shorter or to cut the bag limit is an extremely valid question. If they have, they haven't bothered to share that with us, other than to say vaguely that populations are down. What's their proof in that? That's what I want to see.

In my area, there seem to be lots of turkeys. This year's hatch seemed to be very, very good. Probably a combination of drier and warmer weather at hatch time. In my area, the weather around hatch time seems to make a huge difference.

They have already proven they don’t make management decisions based on facts or science. They pushed the season back last year “to be fair to weekend hunters”.

I disagree PCP.......You don't need every hunter to participate.....you just need enough to make it a valid sample size and you need about the same amount of folks to participate each year. It becomes nothing more than another sampling method that uses trends for making decisions. For example, as long as roughly 30% of hunters participate each season and that doesn't fluctuate a bunch from year to year.....then the trends are still valid. If harvest numbers remain constant over time then one can say that the population is good enough to sustain that yield

They knew from the start they would never get 100% compliance. It's just their way of insuring they get a good same size while threatening ALL hunters with fines in the process.....just like you're saying.....an enforcement tool

But there is no scientifically valid way to measure this "sampling method", as you call it. There is no way to know whether the harvest increased or whether hunters just reported better. If you are trying to measure 100% of the harvest then you need 100% participation. I will say that it measures the legal harvest, but I don't know how much that is gonna help in managing the resource if more than half the hunters have given up trying to be legal.

Because the ultimate goal of this administration is to make money. You can go back and read what Sykes wrote and said on the radio and see that he wanted to cut the limit and the season almost as soon as he took the job. His view is that a lower limit will give a higher number of hunters a chance to be successful, and that will mean more license sales. If you are really interested, look on the Big Daddy Lawler web page and find the interview he did with him and a nwtf guy 6 or 7 years ago.

True…..I bet they have some way of gauging it using historical success rates or something…..The only thing that really makes it differ from the old survey is that you’re not getting a response from folks who killed zero….I wonder how constant the traditional percentage was for the % of total hunters killing zero…..whether we’re talking deer or turkey. I don’t believe for a minute that they actually ever though they’d get 100% compliance. I’m sure they had a goal of “x” amount and then a means of using that number to extrapolate it or use the trends just like a random sampling problem. I believe that about one of the only ways they can really use the info is to look at trends to see if the yield is sustainable or declining.

first off I knew I could count on PCP to carry the load on my position on this! We don't, and I don't think we ever will, know how many turkeys we have in AL. We could, however, get some good estimates. A banding study across the state catching and banding thousands of birds would get 1) an excellent idea of what the percentage of gobblers are harvested each year and 2) after a couple years, provide some estimate of population, especially in conjunction with GC and the phone survey they do now. This should have been done years ago - cheap and easy. We don't have a statistically valid reproductive survey. There is a "observation" survey done but it is low participation and not valid. "Although it is not considered scientific data, results of the brood survey play a critical role in our assessment of turkey populations" from beards and spurs. Ive never seen the data and doubt there is any size to the sample. Many other states have done defined "routes" for years and have good data. We don't know the trajectory of the population (obviously) and, while I don't see as many as I used to and I believe we have generally fewer than 10 years ago, I don't see it as cause for alarm. Breeding Bird Survey, done for decades, say we are increasing. We don't know how, or if, gobbler harvest or timing effects poult production. I doubt there is ANY connection. We don't know how or if a later start date effects nesting and poult production, again, I doubt there is ANY relationship but I am open to the possibility. All the talk about dominant gobblers and their role in breeding and pecking order is simply speculation. Although I hear it and it sounds neat, there is NO data on this subject and any discussion of it is only one persons opinion. I have heard that the dominant gobbler does all the breeding and his removal upsets the "pecking order" and it takes time to restructure and get sub gobblers tuned up to breed. In the same presentation, I have heard the presenter say that some nests are fathered by more than one gobbler! WHAT? how is this possible, I asked! Just part of the program. That's why I say speculation - no publications on this although it would be well received by the scientific community if the data were there.

We do know predator control usually increases nest and poult production. We know good habitat management leads to increased turkey numbers. We know burning, good timber management, food plots, etc are good for turkeys. We know a lot about home ranges, habitat use, food habits, roost habitat, yearly and seasonal mortality and causes, seasonal movements, nesting and brood rearing habitat, predation, nest survival and, to some extent, poult survival.

So, if you disagree with the regulation change, flood the CAB (every member) with letters stating your opinion and send a copy to Chuck. Apparently only 2 letters were given to the CAB before this meeting and they were solicited to support the regulation changes. NO letters were sent against these changes. Make your voice known........ and use PCP's working and logic

This^^^^

They proved science didn't matter when they approved 10 extra days of deer season in the north zone for Will Ainsworth.

If the population could sustain the extra harvest that would occur without issue due to the extra ten days in Feb then there’s nothing wrong with them extending the season to offer more opportunities for hunters to get in the woods and hunt as well as keeping the overall regulations for the state as a whole more simplistic versus dicing us up more and more……”Hunter satisfaction” is a part of management too. The rut being over has nothing to do with it being sound or not as folks try to make it out….Folks like to use the phrase…”There’s no biological reason to hunt them in Feb!”…..As if there’s a “biological reason” for hunting during the rut…..or a “biological reason” for killing male deer period really….What’s the “biological reason” for that? I hate that phrase now because its just something someone said that sounded intelligent and catchy and stumped someone at the time probably so folks ran with it even if they didn’t have the first clue what they were saying.

Probably need to start a new thread for this discussion.

Good to see you weighing in, Gobbler.

No new discussion needed. I was offering evidence in support of turkey Joe's statement

It's all good....wasn't trying to single you out or anything.....that whole bilogical reason argument has always irked me

No one on here started that argument. The DNR are the ones saying they are basing their decisions on science, and then changing the starting date to be fair to weekend hunters. I just got an email from the state summarizing the meeting discussion. Looks like this season will be the last normal season we will see.

Advisory Board Tables Alabama Turkey Reg Changes Until February Meeting 0
Conservation Advisory Board will again consider proposal to reduce limit to three gobblers and start season later.
BY DAVID RAINER - ADCNR ON AUGUST 27, 2020HUNTING
The Alabama Conservation Advisory Board (CAB) approved a three-day extension of the red snapper season and tabled a motion to change the season dates and bag limit for wild turkeys at its recent meeting in Mobile.

Chris Blankenship, Commissioner of the Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (ADCNR), recommended a three-day extension of the red snapper season, which the Board approved unanimously. The extra red snapper days are set for Oct. 10-12. The Board also voted to give the Commissioner leeway to adjust those dates should inclement weather interfere with the planned extension.

“We saw an increased participation in red snapper season,” Commissioner Blankenship said. “People couldn’t play travel ball. They weren’t going to Disney World or going on family vacations. Consequently, we saw increased participation on all weekends of the red snapper season. Because of that, we closed the season on July 3 as we were approaching the quota on red snapper. After checking the data and seeing the final landings, we have about 128,000 pounds of red snapper quota left.”

The Commissioner said the approved extension is the Saturday, Sunday and Monday of Columbus Day weekend.

The Board heard a presentation from Mike Chamberlain, the Terrell Professor of Wildlife Ecology and Management at the University of Georgia, about the decline of wild turkey populations in the South. Chamberlain’s presentation was the same one given to Arkansas Game and Fish Commission, which wanted to see data on how harvest impacts the population dynamics.

“Arkansas’ turkey population has been declining for a number of years,” Chamberlain said. “The trajectory of the population in Arkansas is almost identical to the trajectory of the population in Alabama, except that Alabama is about seven or eight years behind.”


The Alabama Conservation Advisory Board tabled a motion that would change turkey season to open later and reduce the season bag limit to three gobblers.

Chamberlain, who is studying wild turkeys in numerous states from Arizona to North Carolina, said gobbling activity begins about 45 days before the peak of nesting.

“Gobblers become receptive well before the hens do,” he said. “We know two things drive gobbling activity. One is hen availability. As hens become less available, gobbling increases. The other is competition amongst themselves. If your buddy is gobbling, you gobble.

“What we see is that a lot of gobbling in March corresponds to no breeding activity. We also see that gobbling really picks up when hens start to nest.”

Chamberlain said what we’re dealing with in the South is an increased harvest of gobblers and a survival rate of hatchlings that is not high enough to sustain the population.

“What we see is a slow, gradual decline across all the states in the Southeast,” he said. “The survival rate of a clutch is 1 to 1 1/2 poults per hen. That is not sustainable. So, it makes sense that the populations have slowly declined.”

Chamberlain also said his studies indicate that about 80% of the harvest occurs before the peak of incubation.

“If you remove four toms from 2,400 acres, gobbling decreases four-fold,” he said.

Chamberlain pointed out that the reported harvest on the opening weekend of Alabama’s 2020 season was 43% higher than the harvest from 2019, a trend that held true throughout the Southeast.

“We know that early in the season, the dominant birds are the ones being shot,” he said. “So that 43% disproportionately affects the older, dominant birds.”

Chamberlain said the result of taking the dominant birds out of the population is an increase in the length of nesting activity. Instead of most of the egg-laying occurring within a few weeks, he said the hatching of the eggs is now stretched out over as much as 100 days.

“If all of these hens drop their clutches within a couple of weeks, they will hatch about the same time,” he said. “By scattering them across the landscape across 100 days, you give predators the advantage. With all the eggs hatching at one time, predators can’t possibly find all of them. If you stretch it across three months—rat snakes, raccoons, horned owls – you’re giving them an advantage.

“The science suggests the activity we’re doing is contributing to this prolonged nesting effort.”

Board Chairman Joey Dobbs asked Chamberlain if he had suggestions on how to stop the decline of the turkey population in Alabama and the Southeast.

“There are some things we can control and some things we can’t,” Chamberlain said. “This bird, uniformly across the Southeast, is dealing with habitat issues—declining quality, fragmentation, urbanization. We have diseases that are popping up that are affecting the birds. We have predator communities that are much more diverse than they were. We can’t control any of that because most turkeys live on private land.

“What we can control is what we know impacts this bird. That is harvest. We’ve known this since the mid-90s.”

After Chamberlain’s presentation, a motion was made to change the dates and bag limit for Alabama’s turkey season with a starting date of April 1 through the first Saturday in May with a season bag limit of three birds. The current regulations open the spring turkey season in most of the state on the third Saturday in March with a season bag limit of five birds.

Before the vote, Board Member Patrick Cagle offered an amendment to table that motion until the February 2021 Board meeting to ensure hunters in Alabama would not run afoul of a new regulation with the current regulation already printed in the Alabama Hunting & Fishing Digest. The Board unanimously approved the amendment to table the motion.

When asked for a recommendation on turkey season by Chairman Dobbs, Wildlife and Freshwater Fisheries Director Chuck Sykes said the decline in Arkansas’ turkey numbers is an ominous indication of where Alabama is headed without change.

“I would ask the Board to move the season starting date to as late as possible with a three-bird bag limit,” Sykes said. “I think Dr. Chamberlain showed that Arkansas is in a bad way right now. We’re headed in that direction. The sooner we can take proactive solutions, the better. I don’t want to kick this can down the road any farther. Thank y’all for saying you will take this up at the first meeting of 2021 and make a decision. It’s time.”

Does sound like done deal for next Feb. meeting

That’s the one thanks parrothead. Y’all dang trophy hunters killing them dominant tams have ruined it for everyone

Well, I guess we can go spend our money is other states prior to 4/1. Way to go CAB!

Screw it, if we're not conforming to dates anymore, let's go hunt them right now. Screw 'em. I can probably get off on monday if yall wanna go.

Dates are just numbers on a calendar.

.....as well as an edible sweet fruit grown in many tropical regions around the world

CNC, really. I dont need help to go pooo.

Last year, chuckles and company showed us they clearly have no regard for any biological data or benefits of the resources.
If they can arbitrarily change the season, just to suit the fancy of their weekend hunting buddies, then I can arbitrarily change it to suit my fancy.

Old Mississippi will get hammered even more if they move it to April 1.

Ain’t no turkeys in Ms.

Great to see you posting here again, gobbler!

I too, had wondered about the theory that the hens have to fall in love with a new gobbler to breed him, and then the same guy posting from the same Facebook account that it is so important for the hens to breed multiple gobblers and increase the genetic diversity of each clutch. The two ideas seem to contradict each other, and made it look to me like he was looking for any sort of excuse to reduce hunting. Gotta give the guy credit though, he has gotten rich off all these turkey studies.

Here is a question you can probably answer that no other biologist will touch - is there a study from anywhere that shows that legal hunting of spring gobblers reduces poult recruitment? Forget about the season timing having an effect, I'm talking about hunting having any effect period. That seems to me to be one of the easier studies that could be made; count the poults in unhunted places, and then count them on similar land that is hunted. Has this ever been done?

I sent a letter to every member of the CAB back in January, and got only 2 responses. I guess they trashed them if they are claiming nobody contacted them. I will send out another round before next year's meeting. I hope everyone else will too.

For those wanting data: is this year 2 or 3 (or more) of the studies that have been ongoing on a few of the WMA's (delayed opening, telemetered birds)? Anybody know when the studies are supposed to wrap up?

But what about this

Dominance and breeding is a difficult thing to ascertain in turkeys because hens can store sperm for as long as 50 days before using it to fertilize eggs.

So Alabama is the next Arkansas? Really? And it’s based on what data that who has collected over the last 7-8 years? I’m sorry, that’s sensational speculation. Fearmongering. Not very credible. And, even if it happens to be correct, it’s reckless to state that without backing it up.