# Turkey Harvest Records: Am I the only one?



## JMB (Apr 20, 2016)

So if I'm reading this thing right, Georgia hunters have killed just shy of 8,400 birds with about 3 1/2 weeks left in the season. Soooooooo, last year the DNR estimated 26,000 killed and 33,000 in 2014.  If my arithmetic is correct, we need to shoot around 18,000 give or take to reach last year's number. 

I think the state is gonna have a lot of questions to answer.


----------



## Gut_Pile (Apr 20, 2016)

Yep, if everything stays constant, we are on pace to kill 16,469 turkeys this season. That includes youth weekend


----------



## Dinosaur (Apr 20, 2016)

I expect to see some changes before next season. I would be shocked if it isn't in the limit. I know some are not reporting but still, that's going to be way off from last year. I know there are some areas with good and steady populations still, but most are headed down hill. To ignore that and not take action would be crazy.


----------



## Curtis-UGA (Apr 20, 2016)

To give a little comparison Kentucky's harvest is over 14,000 in the first 5 day of their season.


----------



## Dinosaur (Apr 20, 2016)

Curtis-UGA said:


> To give a little comparison Kentucky's harvest is over 14,000 in the first 5 day of their season.



Maybe all our birds migrated to Kentucky.


----------



## GA DAWG (Apr 20, 2016)

I figure they will do away with it once deer season is over and learn those numbers dont jive either but they can always use the ol poacher theory. I guess people dont lie over the phone.


----------



## ADDICTED2HUNTIN (Apr 20, 2016)

Yep it's way off from what they estimated every year. I know I hear less and less gobbling every year. Seems like the birds are there before the season, lots of pics. During the season it's all quiet and it's like the birds go under ground


----------



## Gut_Pile (Apr 20, 2016)

Curtis-UGA said:


> To give a little comparison Kentucky's harvest is over 14,000 in the first 5 day of their season.



Yep, and according to the nwft and state agencies. We have 85,000 more turkeys than Kentucky.


----------



## Atlanta Dawg (Apr 20, 2016)

*Well...*



Gut_Pile said:


> Yep, if everything stays constant, we are on pace to kill 16,469 turkeys this season. That includes youth weekend



I would imagine that most of the Turkey's are taken the first half of the season and goes steadily down hill after the mid point.....It has appeared to me that the level of interest goes down as temperature, bugs, snakes, leaves, etc...go up.....

So I doubt that the last half will be equal to the first half---Just Sayin' !


----------



## Jeff Raines (Apr 20, 2016)

I'm just guessing out loud,maybe the dnr gets a cut of the federal funds based on a game animals population,sort of like the schools get money for each student that is in the school every day


----------



## Gut_Pile (Apr 20, 2016)

Atlanta Dawg said:


> I would imagine that most of the Turkey's are taken the first half of the season and goes steadily down hill after the mid point.....It has appeared to me that the level of interest goes down as temperature, bugs, snakes, leaves, etc...go up.....
> 
> So I doubt that the last half will be equal to the first half---Just Sayin' !



I agree completely. Last week we were on pace for 18,500. So you've already seen a big drop in pace. I'm thinking 15,000 could be the final number. Maybe even lower


----------



## Gut_Pile (Apr 20, 2016)

Just to continue with some more data, there were 356 turkeys killed on average per day the first 20 days of the season. Since then, there have been an average of 158 per day over the last 8 days.


So...with the current trend over the last 8 days, we are more likely to end up around 12,500 total harvest.


----------



## Jody Hawk (Apr 20, 2016)

Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think lowering the gobbler limit will have much impact on the turkey population. We already don't shoot hens. I agree that we don't have the turkeys that we had ten years ago but there's no danger of them going extinct either.

What's hurting the turkeys more than anything in my areas is logging. They are mowing down thousands of acres! I have to look no further than B.F.Grant WMA to see the impact of logging on turkey numbers.


----------



## Curtis-UGA (Apr 20, 2016)

Gut_Pile said:


> Yep, and according to the nwft and state agencies. We have 85,000 more turkeys than Kentucky.



I highly doubt that. 

Perhaps Georgia has inflated the numbers to increase the appeal to out of state hunters.


----------



## Dinosaur (Apr 20, 2016)

Curtis-UGA said:


> I highly doubt that.
> 
> Perhaps Georgia has inflated the numbers to increase the appeal to out of state hunters.



$$$$ Everything is driven by it.


----------



## hrstille (Apr 20, 2016)

Hunters are not the reason turkey population is down. Lowering the limit would not increase the population. Coyotes and other predators are a large part of why the numbers are trending downward. Logging is another reason. If you take away a turkeys habitat, it either moves to another area or it dies.


----------



## Gaswamp (Apr 20, 2016)

I believe that the overall Georgia population is off.  However, I hunt in about 6-8 different counties and the population is either stable or increasing slightly in these areas.  Also, I believe we have some of the best biologist working for us at the state level.  Hopefully, we will know more after the season when the biologist crunch the numbers from reported harvest, phone survey, and cooperator cards


----------



## Dinosaur (Apr 20, 2016)

hrstille said:


> Hunters are not the reason turkey population is down. Lowering the limit would not increase the population. Coyotes and other predators are a large part of why the numbers are trending downward. Logging is another reason. If you take away a turkeys habitat, it either moves to another area or it dies.



No one said the reason it was down was hunters. But if it is down, the answer isn't just keep killing them at the same levels. That just doesn't make sense. Logging isn't gonna stop, predators aren't going anywhere anytime soon. Adjustments have to be made somewhere. There has to be a better answer than "keep killing them".


----------



## mcagle (Apr 20, 2016)

Maybe we should put a bounty on the coyotes, bobcats,coons, and opossums. That should help the population. Not sure lowering the limit will help much. Few hunters limit out, and the ones that won't stop at 3 are not going to stop at 2 either.


----------



## struttin n ruttin (Apr 20, 2016)

You would think the killing would increase the next few weeks. We finally have consistent good weather and the gobblers are starting to become lonely.


----------



## padula54321 (Apr 20, 2016)

Chicken Litter!?


----------



## T-N-T (Apr 20, 2016)

I have slowed my hunting Way down this year due to other stuff going on.
Maybe there is 10,000 others like me?


----------



## Gut_Pile (Apr 20, 2016)

Curtis-UGA said:


> I highly doubt that.
> 
> Perhaps Georgia has inflated the numbers to increase the appeal to out of state hunters.



I highly doubt it too. In fact, would be more than 95% positive Kentucky has more birds. 

I'm not so sure if GA has inflated it's numbers on purpose, rather they just have no clue and made an educated guess.


----------



## PappyHoel (Apr 20, 2016)

Gut_Pile said:


> I highly doubt it too. In fact, would be more than 95% positive Kentucky has more birds.
> 
> I'm not so sure if GA has inflated it's numbers on purpose, rather they just have no clue and made an educated guess.



I tend to agree with this.  But heck, im not a good turkey hunter and i really have nothing to back up my 'theory'.


----------



## Jellyhead Joe (Apr 20, 2016)

Coyotes have been out west for ages and the turkey population hasn't been affected by them. In fact the birds out west gobble way better than our birds. Wild hogs destroy turkey habitat, eat eggs out of nests, and eat every acorn they can find. Also, fire ants are getting worse from year to year. Look at the three main game birds that nests on the ground, grouse, quail, and turkey, numbers for each of these birds have seen a huge decline within my lifetime. 
If you look at the harvest map, you'll see that the county's which follow the 85 corridor seem to have the lowest recorded kills. One thing many of these counties share in common is the chicken farming industry. Up where I live, the fields would be full of birds every time it rained. However, there has been a steady decline of turkeys ever since farmers started fertilizing their fields with chicken litter. Today the wild turkey has almost disappeared from Franklin County. I agree that it is time to take action. We hunters need to voice our concerns so that study's can be conducted to help preserve these birds we love to hunt.


----------



## JMB (Apr 20, 2016)

Quail went bye bye and there was a lot of conjecture. Turns out an eye worm was probably the culprit. Turkeys could be falling victim to a similar fate, but I think you'd see more remains if that were the case...although I never saw quail lying around dead back in the day. 

Georgia has made an international list of deforestation. That's international along with countries in S America, Africa, Asia and Russia. The entire southeast is falling victim to deforestation; a lot of it going to Europe where tax credits are given to businesses who burn wood pellets instead of coal. Both North and South Carolina are gonna get hit hard. 

While we can't stop logging at a commercial level, there are organizations that monitor logging practices and the logging operations are governed by state and federal agencies. Most politicians have turned a blind eye to this. Timber lobby is strong in the south, like big tobacco strong. Pine forests replacing hardwood mixes means a lower load capacity for animals. Less habitat, less turkeys. Natural order. 

So far, the Ga DNR has shown me nothing. They're idea of trout management is ridiculous and archaic, the studies on wild turkey is pretty much too little too late, and enforcement by state agencies is nonexistent when it comes to developers ignoring riparian buffer zones and ethical practice. Heck, my local game warden told me they're nearly 100% complaint driven so he doesn't have time to make his own cases for baiting, illegal hunting, etc.  

Speaking of bait, talk about a bad idea. Nothing spreads disease and can wipe out a turkey population like concentrating several flocks in the same area and having them stamp and scratch around. Plus the corn you buy for bait can be flat out deadly to animals. Read the label. Trail cam pics are cool at a feeder, but not at the expense of the resource.


----------



## Luke0927 (Apr 20, 2016)

Ga human populations is growing rapidly but turkeys are pretty adaptable.  But I don't see how killing 2 gobblers over 3 will do much good.  I would have a hard time thinking hens are no getting breed the problem is getting poults to survive.  Where's granny shooting hawks when you need her and all the kids 'coon hunting 3 nights a week.....

I really think the layer house litter needs to be investigated a lot more as well.


----------



## jakebuddy (Apr 21, 2016)

JMB best post yet
Clear cutting river swamp corridors equals an eviction notice for turkeys.


----------



## Hammer Spank (Apr 21, 2016)

JMB said:


> Quail went bye bye and there was a lot of conjecture. Turns out an eye worm was probably the culprit. Turkeys could be falling victim to a similar fate, but I think you'd see more remains if that were the case...although I never saw quail lying around dead back in the day.
> 
> Georgia has made an international list of deforestation. That's international along with countries in S America, Africa, Asia and Russia. The entire southeast is falling victim to deforestation; a lot of it going to Europe where tax credits are given to businesses who burn wood pellets instead of coal. Both North and South Carolina are gonna get hit hard.
> 
> ...





Yes
Yes
Yes


----------



## saltysenior (Apr 21, 2016)

Luke0927 said:


> Ga human populations is growing rapidly but turkeys are pretty adaptable.  But I don't see how killing 2 gobblers over 3 will do much good.  I would have a hard time thinking hens are no getting breed the problem is getting poults to survive.  Where's granny shooting hawks when you need her and all the kids 'coon hunting 3 nights a week.....
> 
> I really think the layer house litter needs to be investigated a lot more as well.



the falling population seems to be going on in many states in the east....one factor that is common in all these states are hawks....grandma had that shotgun because she seen what they do...


----------



## Dustin Pate (Apr 21, 2016)

Luke0927 said:


> I really think the layer house litter needs to be investigated a lot more as well.



My in-laws have houses and have spread it on their pastures for the last 40 years. The turkey population isn't hurting at all on their land.


----------



## Dinosaur (Apr 21, 2016)

Dustin Pate said:


> My in-laws have houses and have spread it on their pastures for the last 40 years. The turkey population isn't hurting at all on their land.



I would bet a shiny nickel that they have plenty of hawks and coyotes too.


----------



## GLS (Apr 21, 2016)

The kills are under reported, by how much is anyone's guess.  Bet many of us know of some who have continued on past #3.  One  thing is certain is that hunting sure doesn't increase the numbers of turkeys.  Turkeys don't have the high natural mortality rate annually like doves.
Just be grateful that there is no Turkey Dynasty on TV.  Since the huge bounce back in population through re-stocking decades ago, the number of hunters has increased exponentially.   The population of Georgia has more than doubled since 1970 and those folks have to live somewhere including land that was once  turkey habitat until the land was cleared.


----------



## elfiii (Apr 21, 2016)

JMB said:


> While we can't stop logging at a commercial level, there are organizations that monitor logging practices and the logging operations are governed by state and federal agencies. Most politicians have turned a blind eye to this. Timber lobby is strong in the south, like big tobacco strong. Pine forests replacing hardwood mixes means a lower load capacity for animals. Less habitat, less turkeys. Natural order.



It's not just the logging. Forest maintenance plays a big part too. A lot of timber companies have switched to spraying with herbicides rather than prescribed burning. Holland Ware owns about 1,300 acres around me. All of his timber land is a pine straw wasteland because he sprays and has killed everything but the pine trees and the dog fennel. Turkeys can't live on dog fennel alone.


----------



## Dustin Pate (Apr 21, 2016)

Dinosaur said:


> I would bet a shiny nickel that they have plenty of hawks and coyotes too.



Deer as well.


----------



## Dinosaur (Apr 21, 2016)

GLS said:


> The kills are under reported, by how much is anyone's guess.  Bet many of us know of some who have continued on past #3.  One  thing is certain is that hunting sure doesn't increase the numbers of turkeys.  Turkeys don't have the high natural mortality rate annually like doves.
> Just be grateful that there is no Turkey Dynasty on TV.  Since the huge bounce back in population through re-stocking decades ago, the number of hunters has increased exponentially.   The population of Georgia has more than doubled since 1970 and those folks have to live somewhere including land that was once  turkey habitat until the land was cleared.



I don't think it's as much people that have killed over three as it is people that just aren't reporting anything. Whether they don't know about it yet, don't know how, or are just stubborn and don't want to participate. But you are right, there are a lot more killed than the numbers show.


----------



## Beagler282 (Apr 21, 2016)

It seems the numbers would be higher to me.This is a good way of keeping count rather than just guessing.Have to start somewhere. 

The number of birds seem to be holding good in my area of Harris co. The thing that has helped me is that Plum Creek is cutting everything around my private land spots.Birds are abundant this season.My hunting buddies and myself are letting the hens get bred on these private tracks before we go and start harvesting the Toms. That's the only way to ensure the population of birds on the land.We don't take many birds this way but it does let the Toms grow to become some true studs.


----------



## Luke0927 (Apr 21, 2016)

Dustin Pate said:


> My in-laws have houses and have spread it on their pastures for the last 40 years. The turkey population isn't hurting at all on their land.



Layer house or brood house?  My cousin has 11 houses and spreads litter right across from us and a pasture down the rd and there are turkeys all over it. But his is brood litter from what Ive heard layer houses are the trouble because the chickens grow to adulthood.


----------



## FootLongDawg (Apr 21, 2016)

Dinosaur said:


> No one said the reason it was down was hunters. But if it is down, the answer isn't just keep killing them at the same levels. That just doesn't make sense. Logging isn't gonna stop, predators aren't going anywhere anytime soon. Adjustments have to be made somewhere. There has to be a better answer than "keep killing them".



Well said


----------



## JMB (Apr 21, 2016)

Spraying instead of burning is an excellent point! I've hunted birds in pine plantations and they have plenty due to understory growth and biodiversity. 

If you notice the brood surveys have been down since the 90s as well, many years greater than half. Fewer poults surviving could be the result of many variables including avian predation, varmints, good ole rat snakes eating eggs, and poor weather. Just strange it has been sliding for nearly two decades and nobody has studied the why successfully.

Unreported kills are an inevitability, however, greater than 50% going unreported I fear would be a greater number than reality. I could be totally wrong, but figure 10% (800 birds and change) goes unreported. That's a proverbially drop in the bucket to reach 26000+. Even 50% would barely get us there if the harvest holds to trending data.


----------



## threadfin-nole (Apr 21, 2016)

The 1000acre club I hunted every year for the past 10 years was clear cut last year. In years past I would kill at least 1 and most years 2 birds a season. Not anymore. There's been a lot of cutting in Blanton Creek WMA in recent years. There have been 8 birds killed on 5000+acres this season so far. In years past I can remember 20-25 + birds taken on Blanton. 
I think there is definitely some non reporting going on but I also think the DNR doesn't really know for sure how many birds are harvested every year. It's been an educated guess. I started turkey hunting 15 yrs ago. It sure seams like it was better back then.


----------



## saltysenior (Apr 21, 2016)

threadfin-nole said:


> The 1000acre club I hunted every year for the past 10 years was clear cut last year. In years past I would kill at least 1 and most years 2 birds a season. Not anymore. There's been a lot of cutting in Blanton Creek WMA in recent years. There have been 8 birds killed on 5000+acres this season so far. In years past I can remember 20-25 + birds taken on Blanton.
> I think there is definitely some non reporting going on but I also think the DNR doesn't really know for sure how many birds are harvested every year. It's been an educated guess. I started turkey hunting 15 yrs ago. It sure seams like it was better back then.



BUT, there are lower numbers in states that have very little timber harvest...in st. parks where you can't pick a flower the population is in a decline...a lot of folks use local observations and local possibilities to the problem,but if we all look at what is happening thru out the eastern U.S., we will see how bad this event will effect turkey hunting ..


----------



## Dinosaur (Apr 22, 2016)

saltysenior said:


> BUT, there are lower numbers in states that have very little timber harvest...in st. parks where you can't pick a flower the population is in a decline...a lot of folks use local observations and local possibilities to the problem,but if we all look at what is happening thru out the eastern U.S., we will see how bad this event will effect turkey hunting ..



I have to admit I have been a little close minded, and don't know a lot about anywhere outside of GA. and AL. Interesting info you have there.


----------



## Dinosaur (Apr 22, 2016)

threadfin-nole said:


> The 1000acre club I hunted every year for the past 10 years was clear cut last year. In years past I would kill at least 1 and most years 2 birds a season. Not anymore. There's been a lot of cutting in Blanton Creek WMA in recent years. There have been 8 birds killed on 5000+acres this season so far. In years past I can remember 20-25 + birds taken on Blanton.
> I think there is definitely some non reporting going on but I also think the DNR doesn't really know for sure how many birds are harvested every year. It's been an educated guess. I started turkey hunting 15 yrs ago. It sure seams like it was better back then.



It was better back then nole, no doubt.I'm afraid we may have all seen the best turkey hunting.


----------



## Huntinfool (Apr 22, 2016)

I am 100% positive that there a BUNCH of turkey hunters who have no idea they are supposed to be reporting their kills this year.  

Honestly, until there's been sufficient time to educate the hunters across the state (probably 2-3 seasons), we won't get a halfway decent count of what's actually being harvested.

I still give DNR credit for making the move to reported kills.  IMO, it's not going to tell us a whole lot about this year.  There will be too many un-reported kills (intentionally and just because of ignorance of the requirement).  But I do think that problem will go away eventually and we will start to see truer harvest numbers soon.

There's way too much conspiracy theory in this thread.  If DNR wanted to hide something, they wouldn't be doing this.  They'd be doing everything they could to avoid reported kills.

I really just think this is an issue of a lot of folks not realizing that they are now required to report.  It'll get better.


----------



## GADawg08 (Apr 22, 2016)

I killed my first of the season this morning....I reported it and just checked the info for my county. I feel like that number is waaayy off. I agree with the fact that there are probably a lot of guys that don't know they are supposed to report their birds


----------



## JBowers (Apr 22, 2016)

JMB said:


> So if I'm reading this thing right, Georgia hunters have killed just shy of 8,400 birds with about 3 1/2 weeks left in the season. Soooooooo, last year the DNR estimated 26,000 killed and 33,000 in 2014.  If my arithmetic is correct, we need to shoot around 18,000 give or take to reach last year's number.
> 
> I think the state is gonna have a lot of questions to answer.



Our harvest estimates are not inflated.  They are estimates within a small range of error.

The number shown by Game Check is not a harvest estimate, per se.  It is the minimum number of harvested turkeys reported by hunters.  "Reported by hunters" is the most important part.

The annual harvest estimate will be determined through the scientific telephone survey conducted after the season ends.

I agree the Game Check harvest report is low. The answers you seek need to come from the individuals that are not reporting their harvest, whether intentional or unintentional (it is possible that some folks are not aware of the reporting requirement).

Based on a variety of factors, I do expect this year's harvest to be near or below last year's harvest.


----------



## Gut_Pile (Apr 22, 2016)

JBowers, how many people are usually contacted during the phone survey?

Also, this year will there be a question the survey if they were away of the new reporting system, and if so, did they report their bird?


----------



## Struttin'-n-Drummin' (Apr 22, 2016)

Where are ya'll finding these harvest records?  I don't see it when I log into my account.


----------



## Jeff Raines (Apr 22, 2016)

JBowers said:


> The annual harvest estimate will be determined through the scientific telephone survey conducted after the season ends.



Any one else want to take up memory on YOUR phone, that YOU pay for, with a useless app?


----------



## Huntinfool (Apr 22, 2016)

Uh.....it's 27 MB.  Go take two pictures on your phone and you've eaten up more space than that.

The app works great and it's built just fine.


----------



## Jeff Raines (Apr 22, 2016)

Huntinfool said:


> Uh.....it's 27 MB.  Go take two pictures on your phone and you've eaten up more space than that.
> 
> The app works great and it's built just fine.



Did you not read Jon Bowers' post?

The turkey harvest estimate will come from scientific phone calls conducted after the season,not what you call in and report.

So why call it in?


----------



## Gut_Pile (Apr 22, 2016)

JBowers said:


> The annual harvest estimate will be determined through the scientific telephone survey conducted after the season ends.



The survey AND the telecheck correct?

Surely yall will not just use the phone survey


----------



## Curtis-UGA (Apr 22, 2016)

Gut_Pile said:


> The survey AND the telecheck correct?
> 
> Surely yall will not just use the phone survey



Probably will.

Yep another stellar season! Estimated harvest 26,000 actual harvest 12,000.


----------



## Scrub Buck (Apr 22, 2016)

JBowers,

From a Law Enforcement perspective, what is going to be done to those that have not followed the requirement to report their kill?  Also, what is so scientific about the phone survey?  I'm having a real hard time grasping how the phone survey produces scientific fact.  With so many hunters not reporting and following regulations I would imagine your Law Enforcement folks have produced some favorable monetary results for the counties of the state?


----------



## JMB (Apr 22, 2016)

I don't think the estimates have been artificially inflated and I am ignorant to the algorithm used to process the harvest data both this year and last. Understanding there is a margin of error since kills so go unreported, unforeseen circumstance, and good ole fashioned mistakes, it would be evident the telecheck harvest numbers will be skewed. I was simply pointing out that the new system seems to be adding up to about half of last year's estimated harvest. I was just curious about such a large variance in data. I assume a few years down the road the system will be closer to actual numbers, or about 15,000 citations should be written. The main concern, for me, is will the harvest data be accurate enough to be beneficial in future studies to address the decline of the wild turkey in the state and across the southeast?

No conspiracy theories here (but I was a big fan of the X Files)


----------



## Gaswamp (Apr 22, 2016)

Wrd website for deer harvest summary via phone info
http://www.georgiawildlife.com/node/3335

phone survey info from responsive management
http://www.responsivemanagement.com/telephonesurveys.php


----------



## GA DAWG (Apr 22, 2016)

Nobody around here is ever called. I surround myself with different hard killers like I am. Several different kinds from several counties. My dad was called last yr. He hasn't hunted in 10 + yrs. No other person I know has been called. Yet they use it instead of something that all these friends I have use. Mal tons of sence to me


----------



## Gbr5pb (Apr 23, 2016)

So this telecheck is going to be about as useful as the presidential preference primary is what y'all are saying?


----------



## Huntinfool (Apr 23, 2016)

Jeff Raines said:


> Did you not read Jon Bowers' post?
> 
> The turkey harvest estimate will come from scientific phone calls conducted after the season,not what you call in and report.
> 
> So why call it in?



Because it's the law?  And because it will ultimately help get a good estimate of harvest and population.

You were complaining about how much space it took up on the phone that YOU paid for. I was just pointing out how silly that was.  


Take a deep breath. It'll be ok.


----------



## saltysenior (Apr 23, 2016)

Huntinfool said:


> Because it's the law?  And because it will ultimately help get a good estimate of harvest and population.
> 
> You were complaining about how much space it took up on the phone that YOU paid for. I was just pointing out how silly that was.
> 
> ...



  a much more accurate and anti-juggling the number way of determining the population of any game species is by listing to what hunters and other folks see with their own eyes......but that's not an acceptable method , in the eyes of most gov. agencies


----------



## Atlanta Dawg (Apr 24, 2016)

I like the call in deal and am optimistic that in the near future we will see common sense begin to apply to turkey bag limits-most likely a two gobbler limit to begin with-like antlered deer-with perhaps one with a 6 inch or longer beard and one with less than six inches of beard-or two gobblers that have beards 6 inches or longer but either way a maximum of two if which only one can have a beard less than 6 inches.


----------



## Jeff Raines (Apr 24, 2016)

Atlanta Dawg said:


> I like the call in deal and am optimistic that in the near future we will see common sense begin to apply to turkey bag limits-most likely a two gobbler limit to begin with-like antlered deer-with perhaps one with a 6 inch or longer beard and one with less than six inches of beard-or two gobblers that have beards 6 inches or longer but either way a maximum of two if which only one can have a beard less than 6 inches.



So,the 3 bag gobbler limit with no restriction on beard length is dumb?....Ya know,letting people decide for themselves,you want to take that away?
Why do you want to place your standards on everyone else?


----------



## Atlanta Dawg (Apr 25, 2016)

*Sheez !!!*



Jeff Raines said:


> So,the 3 bag gobbler limit with no restriction on beard length is dumb?....Ya know,letting people decide for themselves,you want to take that away?
> Why do you want to place your standards on everyone else?



With all due respect---I don't see the word "Dumb" in my observation/comment anywhere !!  And.....I didn't say that was "My Standard"......Just wanted to set the record and you have a nice day !!!


----------



## Struttin'-n-Drummin' (Apr 25, 2016)

Atlanta Dawg said:


> With all due respect---I don't see the word "Dumb" in my observation/comment anywhere !!  And.....I didn't say that was "My Standard"......Just wanted to set the record and you have a nice day !!!



I don't want the gov't setting any more "records".  They already impose enough restrictions on us.


----------



## Bucky T (Apr 25, 2016)

Setting up minimum size requirements for male turkeys is ridiculous..............................  They are not deer.  Their natural mortality rate is quadruple that of a deer.................

I'm a little confused on why the annual harvest data will be concluded based on the phone survey only??  

What are the numbers from the tele/app check ins going to be used for??


----------



## Gut_Pile (Apr 25, 2016)

Bucky T said:


> What are the numbers from the tele/app check ins going to be used for??



internet forum arguments

and nothing else


----------



## JBowers (Apr 27, 2016)

Gut_Pile said:


> The survey AND the telecheck correct?
> 
> Surely yall will not just use the phone survey



The scientific survey will continue to be used to provide accurate estimates of statewide turkey harvest.

The harvest reporting system provides data on distribution and timing of harvest.  Additionally, it provides a law enforcement tool.


----------



## Gut_Pile (Apr 27, 2016)

I try my best to support DNR and all they do, but are you kidding me?

In what world does it make sense to not use a HARVEST RECORD to estimate annual harvest?


----------



## Gut_Pile (Apr 27, 2016)

I want to know how many people are called on this scientific survey, and will the individuals be questioned on if they used the harvest record this year or not?


----------



## JBowers (Apr 27, 2016)

Gut_Pile said:


> I try my best to support DNR and all they do, but are you kidding me?
> 
> In what world does it make sense to not use a HARVEST RECORD to estimate annual harvest?



For one, the world of wildlife management.  A harvest record is not a statistically valid (i.e., scientific) method of estimating anything. Neither is a reporting system. It's not an estimate; it is a value representing the minimum number of turkeys reported through Georgia's Game Check system.  No confidence interval can be ascribed to it; no standard deviation can be ascribed to it; etc. This is the function of the harvest surveys that we conduct annually.

The statistical surveys we conduct follow established and rigorous scientific protocols that ensure statistical confidence (e.g., in our surveys the 95% Confidence Interval, or better) within established standard errors and other statistical parameters that many folks either don't understand, don't care to understand or simply do not have the background or experience to understand.  I'm seriously not trying to offend anyone.  Nor, do I have the time to attempt to summarize or provide instructional education on statistical surveys, sampling, confidence intervals, sampling errors, sampling probabilities, representative sampling, paramteric and nonparametric statistics, significance v. non-significance, non-response and other biases and all the other wonderful technicalities of statistical science that wildlife biologists must understand to perform the more important parts of their jobs.

The statistical surveys that we conduct provide scientific data that is accurate and defensible (e.g., in a court of law such as when challenged by those organizations that feel differently about hunting and its affect on wildlife).  Harvest records and harvest reporting can't and do not provide the rigor necessary.  This doesn't mean those tools are absolutely useless.  They do provide meaningful information that adds to the body of information used to manage wildlife and inform regulatory decisions.


----------



## JBowers (Apr 27, 2016)

Gut_Pile said:


> I want to know how many people are called on this scientific survey, and will the individuals be questioned on if they used the harvest record this year or not?



The sample size is usually around 2,100 and has been as high as 2,700. Sampling must be random and each individual in the population must have an equal probability of being randomly sampled (typically about 1 in 100 chance) among other nuances that must be considered to ensure representative sampling is met.  This sampling size returns a standard deviation (error) of about 1.8%.  Such that, for example, if the statistical estimate of harvest is 31,568 then there is a 95% chance (Confidence Interval) the true harvest figures lies between 30,999 and 32,137.  Or, another way to state it is that there is a 5% chance the true harvest lies outside that range.

In addition to the consistent core questions included on each survey each year, we usually have a few other questions to evaluate hunter opinion/attitudes/activities that are relevant.  This year there will be such questions relating to the harvest reporting system (Game Check) and the harvest record.  Confidence intervals, standard errors, etc. also apply to the results from these questions as well.

The annual GA Spring Turkey Harvest Survey will begin shortly after the turkey season closes.


----------



## elfiii (Apr 27, 2016)

Jeff Raines said:


> Any one else want to take up memory on YOUR phone, that YOU pay for, with a useless app?



"Useless" is in the eye of the beholder. I find it to be quite useful.


----------



## kmckinnie (Apr 27, 2016)

elfiii said:


> "Useless" is in the eye of the beholder. I find it to be quite useful.



Isn't he one of the ones that said we need a better system.  now we got it and complains.


----------



## QuackAttack101 (Apr 27, 2016)

JBowers said:


> Sampling must be random and each individual in the population must have an equal probability of being randomly sampled (typically about 1 in 100 chance) among other nuances that must be considered to ensure representative sampling is met.



Not trying to argue here.  Honestly just curious.  How is the "population" determined?  Seems to me that determining the true population of GA turkey hunters would be somewhat difficult.  And if your population isn't accurate, then sampling techniques are about as useful as your vote in primary elections.


Once again, not trying to argue here.  Just curious.  No I don't have a degree in statistics but I've taken enough courses on the subject to have a decent understanding of scientific sampling and know that scientific sampling means nothing without a complete and accurate population.  My question is this.  If the survey indicates twice the harvest as the game check system for several years in a row, will the DNR assume that 50% of turkey hunters are dishonest poachers?  Or will someone re-visit just how "scientific" the sampling methods are.   I just feel like that if the results of the survey and the game check continue to be that far off that only 1 of 2 things could be the cause.  

1. 50% of the turkey hunters in the state are dishonest poachers (I'd really like to believe that it's nowhere near that high, but who knows)

2. The scientific sampling wasn't quite as scientific as we thought.

Definitely not trying to call anyone out here or say that anyone at the DNR did a bad job.  Those folks are doing the best job they can with the available resources.  All I'm saying is that if I were conducting surveys and my surveys indicated that 1 out of every 2 turkeys killed in GA were harvested illegally, I might just start questioning my sampling techniques.  I'm not oblivious.  I realize there are a lot of dishonest folks out there, but I highly doubt that it is half of us.

This could end up being a moot point.  Maybe the surveys are more in line with the game check system and just way off from prior year surveys.  Maybe it's just as bad of a season for everyone in the state as it has been for me (That would make me feel a little better ) and that's why the harvest numbers are way down.


----------



## GA DAWG (Apr 27, 2016)

Gut_Pile said:


> I want to know how many people are called on this scientific survey, and will the individuals be questioned on if they used the harvest record this year or not?



Crazy aint it? I dont see how it can get any more scientific than dead solid proof turned in by phone. Lots of phones. A lot more than 2000 phones.


----------



## elfiii (Apr 27, 2016)

kmckinnie said:


> Isn't he one of the ones that said we need a better system.  now we got it and complains.



A "complaining" turkey hunter is a happy turkey hunter.


----------



## nrh0011 (Apr 27, 2016)

QuackAttack101 said:


> Not trying to argue here.  Honestly just curious.  How is the "population" determined?  Seems to me that determining the true population of GA turkey hunters would be somewhat difficult.  And if your population isn't accurate, then sampling techniques are about as useful as your vote in primary elections.
> 
> 
> Once again, not trying to argue here.  Just curious.  No I don't have a degree in statistics but I've taken enough courses on the subject to have a decent understanding of scientific sampling and know that scientific sampling means nothing without a complete and accurate population.  My question is this.  If the survey indicates twice the harvest as the game check system for several years in a row, will the DNR assume that 50% of turkey hunters are dishonest poachers?  Or will someone re-visit just how "scientific" the sampling methods are.   I just feel like that if the results of the survey and the game check continue to be that far off that only 1 of 2 things could be the cause.
> ...



Using random sampling strategies are very simple, cost effective, and require little to no knowledge of the sample population. If every participant has the same probability to be selected then and only then they are able to produce statistics that are unbiased. The cost effective part is probably the main reason they use this strategy but for now lets just assume that it's all the above. Now, as for not using the data reported in game check/harvest logs goes, I'd like to see if they could use this data to somehow compare it to what was recored in the phone survey (for good housekeeping). However, I'm no expert on parametric statistical analyses but have a good bit of experience with it. The fact that the estimates were so far off well I believe there are multiple factors to chalk that up to: a certain level of error is always associated with statistical calculations, people are lazy and won't participate in surveys/provide reliable responses, and last I bet they probably have some sort of constant for kills that go unreported. 

Do I wish this is the way it was? No I don't, and none of you do as well. Hopefully over the next couple of years we will start to see figures that are more along the lines of what is projected. Happy Hunting to all, and stay safe out there.


----------



## Jeff Raines (Apr 27, 2016)

kmckinnie said:


> Isn't he one of the ones that said we need a better system.  now we got it and complains.



NO SIR!

You never read a single post where I complained about the old system.

I complain about hunters wanting more government involvement in our lives.


----------



## kmckinnie (Apr 27, 2016)

Jeff Raines said:


> NO SIR!
> 
> You never read a single post where I complained about the old system.
> 
> I complain about hunters wanting more government involvement in our lives.



I see your post. It was humar toward your post. 
Elfiii sees them to. You tend to complain the other way. 
Peeps up in folks busness post. 
Some folks I think are tring to stop the few violaters for the good of the many and with that comes change. 
We know u standup for being honest and the honar system it just that others need more guidance. 
That camp that needs guidance is rite down the road from me. Their dump site kills better be a counted for. That is my busness when there is a pile of fork horns and spikes galore there. 
I enjoy your post. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.


----------



## JBowers (Apr 28, 2016)

QuackAttack101 said:


> Not trying to argue here.  Honestly just curious.  How is the "population" determined?  Seems to me that determining the true population of GA turkey hunters would be somewhat difficult.



To try and keep it simple, in any year there is a population of licensed hunters eligible to hunt turkeys - individuals with a big game license that is valid any time during the current turkey season.  The random sample is selected from this population.  Obviously, within the eligible population, some hunted turkeys and some did not.  Thus, this is addressed in the survey instrument and the sample provides a data point to be applied to the population to account for eligible individuals that hunted turkeys and eligible individuals that did not hunt turkeys.  In 2014, the sample size was 2,793 with a 95%CI and a sampling error of +1.73%. From the survey data, the estimated number of hunters that hunted turkeys during the 2014 season was 52,982 (thus, the 'true' number of individuals that hunted turkeys during the 2014 season lies between 52,065 and 53,899).  The estimated 2014 statewide turkey harvest was 32,569 (thus, the 'true' turkey harvest for the 2014 season lies between 30,829 and 34,308).

A few other tidbits from the survey that may interest some of you:

Just under half (49.6%) hunted for one week or less;

Just over half (52.9%) hunt mornings only;

About 72% hunt private land exclusively;

Of those who hunted on public, most (71%) hunt WMAs;

89.5% rated their season as satisfactory or better; and

97% male, 3% female, average age 41


----------



## spydermon (Apr 28, 2016)

that's interesting data, but I simply do not see 30,000+ turkeys being killed in 2014.  I know this year will be off, in several ways.  maybe the 30,000 turkey kill is affecting this years population, I don't know...but something sure is
the new system will help get a better idea of kill, although this year is the first.  many still don't know about it or refuse to use it (scared of others knowing).  it will still give a good idea of kills and its a step forward.  roughly 10,000 reported as of now.  give it 2500 ( for those not registered)


----------



## bradleyjanes06 (Apr 28, 2016)

I've always had the theory that deer hunters who don't turkey hunt constantly bait in the off season pull the birds.  Buddy of mine had corn out and tons and tons of pics then he stopped a month before season to get ready for turkey season and we've seen two birds on his property no gobbling no nothing.  Always just assumed the bait pulls them and they don't don't leave.


----------



## QuackAttack101 (Apr 29, 2016)

nrh0011 said:


> Using random sampling strategies are very simple, cost effective, and require little to no knowledge of the sample population. If every participant has the same probability to be selected then and only then they are able to produce statistics that are unbiased.



Oh yeah.  Completely agree that it's cost effective.  But in order to take a random sample sample with all participants having an equal change of being selected, you first have to determine a population (i.e. total number of GA turkey hunters), so I was just curious as to how the population was determined.  I was only curious because I feel like this is a harder population to define.  If you want to do a statistical analysis to determine the percentage of adult males in GA taller than 6', then your population is pretty simple.  All adult males who reside in GA.  But determining the total amount of turkey hunters is more difficult in my opinion because the entire adult population of GA doesn't turkey hunt.  And all folks who purchase a big game license don't turkey hunt (although JBowers addresses this in his response).  And not all turkey hunters purchase a license.  Anyway, I agree that statistical sampling is a great way to get results in a cost effective manner, I was just curious how the sampling was performed.



JBowers said:


> To try and keep it simple, in any year there is a population of licensed hunters eligible to hunt turkeys - individuals with a big game license that is valid any time during the current turkey season.  The random sample is selected from this population.  Obviously, within the eligible population, some hunted turkeys and some did not.  Thus, this is addressed in the survey instrument and the sample provides a data point to be applied to the population to account for eligible individuals that hunted turkeys and eligible individuals that did not hunt turkeys.  In 2014, the sample size was 2,793 with a 95%CI and a sampling error of +1.73%. From the survey data, the estimated number of hunters that hunted turkeys during the 2014 season was 52,982 (thus, the 'true' number of individuals that hunted turkeys during the 2014 season lies between 52,065 and 53,899).  The estimated 2014 statewide turkey harvest was 32,569 (thus, the 'true' turkey harvest for the 2014 season lies between 30,829 and 34,308).
> 
> A few other tidbits from the survey that may interest some of you:
> 
> ...



Cool stuff.  Thanks for the data man.  Guess I'm just an outlier then.  Hunt all day, all season on private and public land.  Lol.  

Are all of the results from the survey publicly available? 

Also, are unlicensed hunters taken into account?  Just seems that if we can't rely on the game check data because not everyone follows the laws/rules, then determining that the population of turkey hunters as being complete based on licensed hunters would also exclude poachers, which is the reason that the game check data isn't reliable.  I don't have a better solution or anything though.  Just posing the question


----------



## gobblinglawyer (May 3, 2016)

I generally take State issued harvest numbers with a grain of salt as the figures are coming from the same crowd that swore for years in open meetings that coyotes weren't eating deer...


----------



## Arrow3 (May 3, 2016)

gobblinglawyer said:


> I generally take State issued harvest numbers with a grain of salt as the figures are coming from the same crowd that swore for years in open meetings that coyotes weren't eating deer...



I always knew you were a smart man...


----------



## kmckinnie (May 3, 2016)

We need a catch and band program on gobblers to gather more data.


----------



## six (May 3, 2016)

I'll band them if you catch them.


----------

