2017 TURKEY BROOD REPORT provide some food for thought.

Discussion in 'Turkey Hunting General' started by hazelvillebucks, Jan 13, 2018.

  1. hazelvillebucks

    hazelvillebucks Well-Known Member

    Oct 28, 2014
    Then you would be talking Egypt river talk about how 2 zero h to p ratio and 2 zero brood could change with out changing the habitat.
    Hawk we have been here , the Coon is the Bad, in Bad Habitat. You can post the charts in their complete version if you wish.
     
  2. Hawk

    Hawk Well-Known Member Sponsor

    Oct 15, 2009
    Coons are irrelevant in good turkey nesting habitat. They are very impactful in poor turkey nesting habitat.
     

  3. 20'

    20' Well-Known Member

    Aug 9, 2017

    hawk, wouldn't low coon numbers in good habitat be even better for turkey numbers?
     
    DCSarchette likes this.
  4. Hawk

    Hawk Well-Known Member Sponsor

    Oct 15, 2009
    Studies have found that that isnt the case.

    Low coons numbers will help poor and marginal habitat produce birds.
     
  5. 20'

    20' Well-Known Member

    Aug 9, 2017

    But low coon numbers would help good habitat as well? Does that make any sense? Low predators numbers will help ANYWHERE?
     
  6. Hawk

    Hawk Well-Known Member Sponsor

    Oct 15, 2009
    It makes sense, thats why its so hard for some people to understand that coon numbers in great habitat are irrelevant.
     
  7. EZRA

    EZRA Well-Known Member

    Jul 8, 2016
    Here is the latest bad news from my county, every farmer now owns a dozed and a Trac hoe or knows one and they have been ripping all the tree rows of all there horizontal branches and then dozing them up In a huge pile then calling it land improvement which gets them a big tax write off and dozed work paid for, while increasing predator habitat and decreasing turkey habitat what a mess! I hope they slam the farm bill of all this bull crap year after year scam. Wake up missouri
     
  8. henry

    henry Fan Boy aka Mr Twisty and

    That's right. The fact it makes sense is why some people can't understand it.
     
    DCSarchette likes this.
  9. Hawk

    Hawk Well-Known Member Sponsor

    Oct 15, 2009
  10. hazelvillebucks

    hazelvillebucks Well-Known Member

    Oct 28, 2014
    There is very good reason why no one understands that. HAWK WE HAVE UNCOVERED THE TRUTH OF WHY THE REINTRODUCTION OF THE WILD TURKEY WAS SUCCESSFUL BEYOND expectations.
    GUESS WHAT it s the same reason we have lost over 75 percent of the Turkey the last 28 years.

    THE NUMBERS ON THE HISTORICAL CHARTS SHOW WHAT TO DO. WHEN ONE IS ABLE TO READ CHARTS AND DO WHAT THE CHART SAYS TO DO THE PROBLEM UNDOES ITSELF.
     
  11. hazelvillebucks

    hazelvillebucks Well-Known Member

    Oct 28, 2014
    HAWK I GUESS YOUR WHIPPER SNAPPER HAS NOT LIVED IN THE DAY OF TURKEY WITH EGG SUCKER POPULATION CONTROL. IN SOY BEANS TURKEY WHEN THEY WERE THE PEST WOULD GO RIGHT DOWN A ROW JUST AFTER THE BEANS GERMINATED AND DESTROY EVERY BEAN.
    Went thru BLACKBIRD CREEK BOTTOMS SOUTH OF MARTAINTOWN SAT. in he early till about 1978 that was a slam dunk to see 150 to 200 turkey. Saturday i saw a bird , it was a crow. BIG BEAN FIELD OFF OF 129 IN THE CHARITAN RIVER BOTTOMS . THERE WERE 2 COVES N THE BEAN FIELD THAT THE FARMER NEVER BOTHERED COMBINING . collateral damage of the turkey when we had turkey.
    WHEN WE HAD TURKEY AND ONE WANTED TO DO A SMALL FIELD OF BEANS ONE HAD TO ADD OATS OR WHEAT OR THE BEANS GOT DESTROYED AS SOON AS THE BABY LEAVES APPEARED.
     
  12. Hawk

    Hawk Well-Known Member Sponsor

    Oct 15, 2009
    It wasnt egg sucker control, it was reintroduction and expanding population.
     
  13. hazelvillebucks

    hazelvillebucks Well-Known Member

    Oct 28, 2014
    THAT IS WHY EVERYONE WHO TRIES TO REVERSE THE NUMBERS WILL GET THE GOLDEN AGE FOR TURKEY ONCE AGAIN. MISSOUI HAS LOST OVER 75 PERCENT OF THE TURKEY , THE CAUSE IS BECAUSE THE EGG SUCKING COONS FUR ENTERED A BEAR MARKET 28 YEARS AGO. THE NUMBERS IN THE CHART TELL THE STORY.
    IT is why the hatch was toast in the best weather in a quarter of a century.
    CONTROLLING THE COONS DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE HATCH NUMBERS WILL NOT REFLECT BAD WEATHER. BUT THE NUMBERS WILL BE MUCH BETTER THAN BAD WEATHER PLUS A 5 FOLD INCREASE IN COON POPULATION DENSITY.
     
  14. Hawk

    Hawk Well-Known Member Sponsor

    Oct 15, 2009
    It wasnt the best weather in a half century.
     
  15. Hooks

    Hooks Well-Known Member

    Aug 20, 2010
    Down the bayou
    I have a theory and I would be really interested to know what the nesting success rates were on ground that had haycutting operations versus those that did not.
    EVERY SINGLE farmer I hunt on has reported to me how many hens they kill and destroy their nest on nearly a yearly basis. They average 3 nests a year. The worst was a farmer destroyed the nest AND killed 6 hens in one haycutting in one field.
    Don't know there is any accurate way to compile that data. The farmers I know would never report to MDC voluntarily and I don't blame them. Also, I don't know that there is anything that can be done about that.
     
  16. birdman

    birdman Active Member

    276
    Jul 31, 2014
    Tall Timbers is the only place that I've ever found that actually tried to determine the true impact nest predators have on gamebirds. Their research was geared towards quail, but the same principles would apply to turkeys. Their research clearly showed populations were suppressed EVEN IN AREAS OF GOOD TO EXCELLENT HABITAT, WHEN PREDATOR NUMBERS EXCEED A CERTAIN THRESHHOLD. In fact, I have never seen any other predator management research that even attempted to quantify the predator density before trying predator control. Tall Timbers found that if predator populations were below a certain threshold, removing more predators wasn't going to make any difference. This is where we used to be back in the days when we had a real fur market. On the other hand, their research found that nest success and poult survival could be improved by predator reduction if you had good habitat, but predator populations were excessive. I have never seen one person on this forum claim that habitat wasn't the most important thing. But it simply is not true that excessive predator numbers won't suppress populations. In fact, if you check out Tall Timbers management recommendations, you will find they recommend predator control if necessary. Do you honestly think a research organization with their reputation would recommend predator control under any circumstances, if they weren't certain it could improve populations? And one other thing. It is absolute nonsense that predators will repopulate as fast as you remove them. Everyone on here who has ever made a serious effort to reduce their raccoon and opossum populations has found the following year they don't have nearly as many as they originally had.
     
    watermen, henry and 20' like this.
  17. Hawk

    Hawk Well-Known Member Sponsor

    Oct 15, 2009
    Tall timbers has isolated habitat. Its not applicable to Missouri.

    Youve never seen it replicated because no other research outfit would structure it that way.


    No one said they would repopulate as fast as they are removed, they said they would repopulate fast enough to make the ones removed irrelevant when you cant trap thru nesting....

    Show us the study where Tall Timbers trapped but stopped Jan 31.....

    Also, it should be explained why quail are making a great comeback across Missouri where they have proper habitat while dealing with the same predators that turkeys are.... if your quail studies are applicable to turkeys then that shouldnt happen....
     
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2018
  18. henry

    henry Fan Boy aka Mr Twisty and

    Good post. Pretty much 100% of us who have made a serious effort under current coon and opossum population levels have seen lower numbers a year later. That should be plenty of time for them (turkeys)to hatch .
     
    DCSarchette likes this.
  19. Hawk

    Hawk Well-Known Member Sponsor

    Oct 15, 2009
    It just doesnt take many coons or opossums to get all the nests on an area the size of most Missouri farms. And the amount it takes can and will easily show back up in 3-4 months.

    Tall Timbers is dealing with 5000+ acre areas and year round trapping.
     
  20. DCSarchette

    DCSarchette Well-Known Member

    614
    Oct 6, 2016
    Bland, Mo.
    IMO--common sense dictates that if an animal is dead it isn't going to suck an egg, or more. If said egg/eggs should hatch, it/they becomes part of the populous. I understand completely the concept of replacing, but if said predator is replaced from the neighbors, the neighbors are then one shy of their original population of predators, which may be replaced from another neighbor, the chain reaction continues. I think what is being suggested by the trappers on this subject, is if trapping became half as popular as coon hunting was when hides were worth owning a dog, predation would soon be down, and poult numbers would rise. I can remember, and took a big part in coon hunting in the late 60's, and early 70's. I can remember up to around $30 hides. What would that $30 hide be today $70-$80? more?? What ever, it would feed a hound, which would supplement the cost of enjoying the sport, or the part time income of the sport, which it was to a lot back then, and would be still, if hide worth had kept up with the cost of living.(not expected nor feasible in today's society). I understand the concept of nest/poult protective habitat that has been removed in the last few decades, (fence rows, brushy fields,feathering?? that was not wanting to duck limbs in my day that had not been properly cut back). Which was also cover for stalking by said predators. I, as a predator, have used such, to stalk my prey. CRP ?? when I was a kid, a farm used/needed every acre they had to raise a steer/fat hog for the freezer, or smoke house. Then the farms were owned by "farmers", not land owners. I can go on and on about CRP being intended as an aid to farmers, but being a wolf in sheep's clothing by causing the purchase of acreage to have CRP (percentage of state populous) basically pay for it, thus part of the beginning of the break up of the "family farm". Which was/is good business, can't blame them. Yotes in this day, were mostly run at will across large parcels of acreage, known as "family farms", and everyone knew everyone, thus not a lot of problems of yote hunters crossing their land, and helping said "family farms" of ridding their "farm" of new born calf, pig, lamb nabbers, not to mention young wild life that contributed to the table fare. Hawks were generally shot almost on sight, especially around the buildings/house, to prevent the loss of what laid our breakfast, supplied Sunday dinner, and contributed to the family income with the sign at the end of the drive that said "eggs for sale". The years I just explained were the years of both a successful turkey program, and deer populations increasing. Could this be from "common sense", or science?? I lean towards common sense. Sorry for the book---It's cold as a well diggers buttocks outside, and I am old and bored. Thanks for being bored enough to read it, if you got to this >.< (period)