Trust the Science

[deast1988]

This Reads pretty solid, Do as we say not as we do! Hope it comes through clear enough for people to read it.

Trust the Science, while we still see WMAs burn, loggers cut.

Forestry service, Blames WRD.
WRD says outside of our hands,

Hard copies pay Youtubers, to promote upticks in non resident licenses.

NWTF says let’s fund the research, YouTube says money for research. State won’t let us trap, it’s a cycle of pointing fingers. But the woods continue to burn, I’ve said it DNR is a timber company, deer and trees pay the bills.

They have the blue prints to bring the birds back, they’ve already done it once. It’s no conducive to the pockets of the politicians, so we shall see how it unfolds.

I know private landowners who have rebounded flocks, by financing there own land management.

 

[spencer12]

Number 3 says hens won’t just breed any Tom, but number 6 says hens eggs will have a higher chance of fertility if they are bred by multiple toms, that’s contradicting itself.

 

[deast1988]

Number 3 says hens won’t just breed any Tom, but number 6 says hens eggs will have a higher chance of fertility if they are bred by multiple toms, that’s contradicting itself.

Read about the lost nest, then add it to all the burning. But then one can reason, will the poults survive if the 1st nest is lost. Ceder Creek WMA Is burning right now.

 

[Fieldglass]

Cedar creek is still smoldering today. Scramby eggs

 

[doehunter]

Wow

 

[BlueNole]

This Reads pretty solid, Do as we say not as we do! Hope it comes through clear enough for people to read it.

Trust the Science, while we still see WMAs burn, loggers cut.

Forestry service, Blames WRD.
WRD says outside of our hands,

Hard copies pay Youtubers, to promote upticks in non resident licenses.

NWTF says let’s fund the research, YouTube says money for research. State won’t let us trap, it’s a cycle of pointing fingers. But the woods continue to burn, I’ve said it DNR is a timber company, deer and trees pay the bills.

They have the blue prints to bring the birds back, they’ve already done it once. It’s no conducive to the pockets of the politicians, so we shall see how it unfolds.

I know private landowners who have rebounded flocks, by financing there own land management.

Can I like this twice??

 

[antharper]

I like the part , If a hen loses her 1st nest and re-nest the 2nd or 3td attempts almost always fail . But all I hear is we can burn the first nest and they’ll just re-nest .

 

[spencer12]

I like the part , If a hen loses her 1st nest and re-nest the 2nd or 3td attempts almost always fail . But all I hear is we can burn the first nest and they’ll just re-nest .

No you didn’t read it right, hunter disturbances are what cause the nest to fail the first time, burning them is ok.

 

[buckpasser]

The hens can tell if the disturbance was in good faith (burning way too late because of laziness or misinformation) or if it was an unjustified disturbance (killing one of the many Toms too early that happened to be the only one she would have bred with). Oh, never mind, that says she will breed with several Toms. Anyway, just follow blindly, okay? Quit trying to use common sense and their own contradictory information against them!

 

[Whit90]

I have no words...

 

[Hoosier06]

The problem is that the "science" has such a small sample size. The questions asked are not the right questions either. There needs to be a comparison with the burns. They say that burning is beneficial, but to what extent? It's safe to say that if you burnt the whole state during nesting season then turkeys would likely be negatively impacted. Inversly if you burn 1 acre there is plenty remaining area for the birds to nest in. My question is what is the % of habitat that can be burned and when that will lead to a net increase in turkey numbers?

 

[across the river]

The problem is that the "science" has such a small sample size. The questions asked are not the right questions either. There needs to be a comparison with the burns. They say that burning is beneficial, but to what extent? It's safe to say that if you burnt the whole state during nesting season then turkeys would likely be negatively impacted. Inversly if you burn 1 acre there is plenty remaining area for the birds to nest in. My question is what is the % of habitat that can be burned and when that will lead to a net increase in turkey numbers?

The real problem is less than 10% of the state is public land (of which only a portion is reasonable turkey habitat) yet people seem to think the DNR can manage that small percentage of land to not only bring up turkey populations across the state, but also provide great hunting opportunities for all. Must be the same group of people who think the DNR can somehow plant a couple of waterfowl impoundments and magically move the flyways.

Anyway, turkeys prefer “burns” that are 1 to 2 years olds. Once they hit 3 or more, they typically get so thick that they don’t use them. If you are burning areas that haven’t been burned in over three years, the number of turkeys “nesting” in it would be negligible regardless of when you burned. They also prefer nesting areas close to woods, so multiple smaller burns are better than one large one. However, most land owners don’t give a rip about turkeys. Burning in spring when stuff starts growing is better for controlling the plants the burn is attempting to control, and it is easier to burn a whole large chunk of land at once than 50 acres at a time. Most land doesn’t get burned at all unless it is after a clearcut, but it is still better to burn, even in spring and larger tracts, than it is to not burn at all.

In general habitat terms, a turkey needs a mixture of fields, hardwoods, and brushy areas to meet all of its needs and maximize abundance. If you don’t have at least a third in hardwoods, you won’t carry as many birds as you could. If you have nothing but hardwoods, but no nesting or brooding habitat, then you won’t carry as many birds as you could if you did. Most people don’t lease or own enough land to really make a difference, so if you have 200 acres and burn 20, 50, or all 200 of it, you are still highly dependent on the acreage around you. It really doesn’t matter in the grand scheme of things what you do. All you can do as a landowner, is try to provide diverse habitat, whether you have 100 or 1000 acres to maximize what’s available on you place. As far as burning specifically, a small amount on rotation each year is better than the whole tract every five. Long narrow burns are also better than wide chunks, because the turkey, and specifically hens with poults, will be far more likely to use it areas close to cover than they would walking out exposed in the middle of a huge burn.

 

[ssramage]

We're the government and we're here to help...

 

[Dupree]

We're the government and we're here to help...

They help so much. Look at the gas cans you can buy these days. What would we do without the govt?!?!?

 

[across the river]

They help so much. Look at the gas cans you can buy these days. What would we do without the govt?!?!?

Apparently, most of you wouldn't have a place to hunt.

 

[Whit90]

Apparently, most of you wouldn't have a place to hunt.

Your not wrong, which is why we all feel so strongly about our public lands.

You paint with a broad brush within a lot of your comments, sir.

 

[across the river]

Your not wrong, which is why we all feel so strongly about our public lands.

You paint with a broad brush within a lot of your comments, sir.

No, I paint with a realistic brush. I have nothing against public land or public water, and hunt and fish both, in addition to private. At the same time, I understand that I have zero control over that land like I do private. A large percentage of the public land in the state is National Forest, Corps of Engineers, UGA, or even private entities of which the GA DNR has no association with other than the fact that those entities allow people to hunt it, and in some situations allow the DNR to form WMAs that are to be managed by the DNR for specific hunts, quotas, etc….. that may be slightly different in terms of rules or management than the tract of land, (I.e. National Forest) as a whole. The “owner” (National Forest Service, UGA, GP, USACOE, etc…) controls the land, and they aren’t nearly as concerned with turkeys as you are. They are not going to burn 40 acres at a time, or in February, because you think a nest might get burned up. They are going to often burn in April or May and in large chunks because there goal is to control undergrowth and they only have so much money in their budget, and bigger burns are cheaper than a bunch of little ones. It is something the DNR and the “turkey doc” have zero to do with it. Similarly, you can “feel strongly” about your private lease, but the timber company or private land owner is the one making the call. I just find it ironic that the people who are entirely limited to hunting land that they don’t own or control get mad at the people who also have zero control over it in most cases, because they don’t think there are enough turkeys. The land doesn’t exist for you to turkey hunt. It exists as a national forest, or was purchased to build a lake, or is used for research, etc.. and you get to turkey hunt it as a bonus, just like people get to hike it, or mountain bike it, or bird watch on it, deer hunt, take pictures, fish, you name it. You, and others on here, are looking at it through your own lens, but I’m sure mountain bikers and hikers want more trails, butterfly watchers want more wildflowers planted, tree huggers want no trees cut or burning period, but they don’t control it either. The burns, logging, habitat management etc…. is going to be done based on what the ultimate goal is, fire prevention, tree removal, understory removal, etc…. and turkey hunting isn’t anywhere near the top of the list. If you feel that “passionate” about it, write your legislators, attend public meets to Forest service has, attend DNR meetings, etc….. And while I don’t think it will get you very far, for the simple reasons turkeys are not going to register high on the priority list, it will get you further than griping on the GON forum will. Ultimately, the fate of the turkey, like the quail, will fall on private landowners. The DNR has limited control of that. And while I have read enough research to understand why the regulations were changed, I think the DNR cannot manage habitat through season and limit regulations. 800 or 1000 acres of continuous planted pines and pine needles isn’t good habitat for
much of anything other than mushrooms and pine beetles, yet that is much of what covers the state, especially above the fall line. It is what it is. Turkeys are going extinct, but it will never get back to what it was 30 years ago in GA either because the habitat is so much different. Those expecting the DNR to wave a magic wand or burn Cedar Creek in February and fix it all, are extremely naive in my opinion.

 

[Whit90]

@across the river , While I agree that there is no magic wand, I don't think everyone is as dumb as you make them out to be. But the whole "turkey issue" conversation is over now, because you solved it for us. Turkeys are going extinct, so lets just forget about turkeys and hunting in general and not talk about any of the issues that are going on. Its a loosing battle anyway. There's absolutely nothing that could be changed that would have any type of positive impact. No need to grip about things you cant control. Thanks.

 

[Hoosier06]

60 million out of 330 mil of the dnr budget is for managing land,wma,freshwater habitat recreation and wildlife education.

Does anyone have any insight how that 60 million allotted for wildlife management is spent?

 

[spencer12]

60 million out of 330 mil of the dnr budget is for managing land,wma,freshwater habitat recreation and wildlife education.

Does anyone have any insight how that 60 million allotted for wildlife management is spent?

Burning in April.