Missouri Whitetails - Your Missouri Hunting Resource banner

21 - 40 of 48 Posts

·
Vendor
Joined
·
63,515 Posts
Facts, really? They were his interns, interns don’t intern forever! Can we fleece people by being land consultants or work our butts off trapping their properties???? Which is easier?
they are hunters also and dont trap their own properties.

Are you suggesting that GWs trapping only helped after they left??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,639 Posts
Discussion Starter · #22 ·
Facts, really? They were his interns, interns don’t intern forever! Can we fleece people by being land consultants or work our butts off trapping their properties???? Which is easier?
At this point, I'm not sure where this conversation even goes. I will say this, if you ask 100 wildlife biologist which has a more positive affect on turkey populations 1) trapping or 2) native habitat restoration, all 100 will say #2. Telemetry studies show us that predators travel unreal distances. They are opportunistic on what they come across. When we get to the point where our habitat is where it should be, and then continually do prescribed burns, then I say trap all you want. Heck, if you love trapping, then trap! I just don't understand how its obvious that butterflies, bees, quail, etc are declining in population due to habitat loss, and when the turkey starts to do the same thing we jump over the habitat and go to trapping. The fact is, our habitat IS THAT BAD. Deer are not an indicator of habitat....heck, they can be found in most neighborhoods now eating your roses :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,657 Posts
they are hunters also and dont trap their own properties.

Are you suggesting that GWs trapping only helped after they left??
they are hunters, yes they are and would rather hunt than run traps, while they were interning they are told what to do!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,657 Posts
At this point, I'm not sure where this conversation even goes. I will say this, if you ask 100 wildlife biologist which has a more positive affect on turkey populations 1) trapping or 2) native habitat restoration, all 100 will say #2. Telemetry studies show us that predators travel unreal distances. They are opportunistic on what they come across. When we get to the point where our habitat is where it should be, and then continually do prescribed burns, then I say trap all you want. Heck, if you love trapping, then trap! I just don't understand how its obvious that butterflies, bees, quail, etc are declining in population due to habitat loss, and when the turkey starts to do the same thing we jump over the habitat and go to trapping. The fact is, our habitat IS THAT BAD. Deer are not an indicator of habitat....heck, they can be found in most neighborhoods now eating your roses :)
Well, I'm not sure ANYONE has ever stated not to do habitat work, but some, a VERY FEW have suggested trapping is a waste of time. it is very clear that dead predators cannot eat or even roam great distances!!!
 

·
Biology nit wit exposer
Joined
·
80,689 Posts
We should be thankful we have professionals like Lashley, Woods and many other biologists to acknowledge its not an either or choice. We can do both and use nest predator removal to make good habitat more productive. This bull**** nonsense that it's either or has been way over played.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,639 Posts
Discussion Starter · #26 ·

"MDC issued a total of 6,956 trapping permits for the 2018-19 trapping season"

Now, let's just say each of those permits average 250 acres of trapping each (honestly, this is just a "guestimate" I would like to know the average amount of acres per permit). That's 1,739,000 acres trapped...out of a 44,000,000 acres in Missouri. So, right about 4% of Missouri land. Now, I know there's cities and lakes which take up acreage as well. So, let's say that houses / cities / lakes / rivers take up 20% (again, a "guestimate" which I think is on the high end). So, now, 80% of the land is "trappable". That would make it a hair over 35,000,000 acres...now, we are trapping 5% of the land that is "trappable". Essentially, 950 out of every 1000 acres is not getting trapped. You can increase the 250 acres to 500 acres, and that still only gives you an extra 50 acres. 900 out of every 1000 acres not getting trapped. I know, I know...there's a lot of bare ground that essentially is untrappable. Yes, this would also add to the "untrappable" land. But, is it really that much?

Now, let's say those 6,956 permits average 30 hours of trapping during the season. That's just under 209,000 man hours of trapping. That kind of man hours invested into habitat work (not food plots!) you could really get some stuff done.

I only say all this for perspective, and why biologist state that you can remove a bunch of predators, and others will move right in.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
63,515 Posts
We should be thankful we have professionals like Lashley, Woods and many other biologists to acknowledge its not an either or choice. We can do both and use nest predator removal to make good habitat more productive. This bull**** nonsense that it's either or has been way over played.
More habitat work is better than wating time trapping. Lashley will tell you that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,657 Posts

"MDC issued a total of 6,956 trapping permits for the 2018-19 trapping season"

Now, let's just say each of those permits average 250 acres of trapping each (honestly, this is just a "guestimate" I would like to know the average amount of acres per permit). That's 1,739,000 acres trapped...out of a 44,000,000 acres in Missouri. So, right about 4% of Missouri land. Now, I know there's cities and lakes which take up acreage as well. So, let's say that houses / cities / lakes / rivers take up 20% (again, a "guestimate" which I think is on the high end). So, now, 80% of the land is "trappable". That would make it a hair over 35,000,000 acres...now, we are trapping 5% of the land that is "trappable". Essentially, 950 out of every 1000 acres is not getting trapped. You can increase the 250 acres to 500 acres, and that still only gives you an extra 50 acres. 900 out of every 1000 acres not getting trapped. I know, I know...there's a lot of bare ground that essentially is untrappable. Yes, this would also add to the "untrappable" land. But, is it really that much?

Now, let's say those 6,956 permits average 30 hours of trapping during the season. That's just under 209,000 man hours of trapping. That kind of man hours invested into habitat work (not food plots!) you could really get some stuff done.

I only say all this for perspective, and why biologist state that you can remove a bunch of predators, and others will move right in.
so, with all you just shared, you can't see any possiblity where predator numbers would be an issue?
 

·
Biology nit wit exposer
Joined
·
80,689 Posts

"MDC issued a total of 6,956 trapping permits for the 2018-19 trapping season"

Now, let's just say each of those permits average 250 acres of trapping each (honestly, this is just a "guestimate" I would like to know the average amount of acres per permit). That's 1,739,000 acres trapped...out of a 44,000,000 acres in Missouri. So, right about 4% of Missouri land. Now, I know there's cities and lakes which take up acreage as well. So, let's say that houses / cities / lakes / rivers take up 20% (again, a "guestimate" which I think is on the high end). So, now, 80% of the land is "trappable". That would make it a hair over 35,000,000 acres...now, we are trapping 5% of the land that is "trappable". Essentially, 950 out of every 1000 acres is not getting trapped. You can increase the 250 acres to 500 acres, and that still only gives you an extra 50 acres. 900 out of every 1000 acres not getting trapped. I know, I know...there's a lot of bare ground that essentially is untrappable. Yes, this would also add to the "untrappable" land. But, is it really that much?

Now, let's say those 6,956 permits average 30 hours of trapping during the season. That's just under 209,000 man hours of trapping. That kind of man hours invested into habitat work (not food plots!) you could really get some stuff done.

I only say all this for perspective, and why biologist state that you can remove a bunch of predators, and others will move right in.
Just like habitat work has to be ongoing so does nest predator removal. Neither is one and done. And to put how ridiculous that is into perspective. I'm not going to maintain my habitat in good condition and then volunteer my time and money to improve someone elses land. I will spend the $150 a year I do on trapping my place and invest the 25 hours of my time it will take to run the traps.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 20'

·
Vendor
Joined
·
63,515 Posts
Just like habitat work has to be ongoing so does nest predator removal. Neither is one and done. And to put how ridiculous that is into perspective. I'm not going to maintain my habitat in good condition and then volunteer my time and money to improve someone rises land. I will spend the $150 a year I do on trapping my place and invest the 25 hours of my time it will take to run the traps.
Habitat is ongoing so theres no time to waste on trapping.

Opening the canopy then 3-5 year fire intervals will last a LONG time.

Trappings benefits will last 3-4 weeks on small acreage... MAYBE...

You werent even maintaining your habitat in good condition
Screenshot_20210314-103539.jpg
Screenshot_20210311-165812.jpg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,639 Posts
Discussion Starter · #32 ·
so, with all you just shared, you can't see any possiblity where predator numbers would be an issue?
Ok...remove every racoon in Missouri. How are you going to deal with snakes and raptors? The list of predators and predator reproduction is like a hamster running on his wheel.

Habitat restoration not only provides better food and cover for turkey, but it also will help increase the population of mice, rabbits, reptiles, birds, insects, etc. Along with more blackberry, beautyberry, etc shrub patches. Which, as you are well aware of, are all diet components of predators.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,657 Posts
Ok...remove every racoon in Missouri. How are you going to deal with snakes and raptors? The list of predators and predator reproduction is like a hamster running on his wheel.

Habitat restoration not only provides better food and cover for turkey, but it also will help increase the population of mice, rabbits, reptiles, birds, insects, etc. Along with more blackberry, beautyberry, etc shrub patches. Which, as you are well aware of, are all diet components of predators.
So you agree, do both! That is all many have been saying all along!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,639 Posts
Discussion Starter · #34 ·
So you agree, do both! That is all many have been saying all along!
I'll make this easier. If you want to trap and enjoy it, trap. If you want to make a difference, work on native habitat restoration.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,657 Posts
I'll make this easier. If you want to trap and enjoy it, trap. If you want to make a difference, work on native habitat restoration.
need to do both since the predator numbers are not being kept in check! but, thanks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,639 Posts
Discussion Starter · #36 ·
"Ultimately, the long–term solution to wild turkey populations is not dependent on predator control, but on man’s activities and good habitat management."
— James Earl Kennamer, Ph. D.

"The bottom-line is that predator control must be intensive, large-scale, and continuous to even show minimal positive results...Landowners with an interest in turkeys will receive far better results by focusing their efforts toward providing the birds with all the elements they need to gain an advantage over predators, rather than attempting to get rid of the predators themselves."
- Adam Butler, Turkey Program Biologist

"The high variability of Missouri's turkey hatch each year suggests that predators are not the main factor influencing nest success. Despite the abundance of predators, turkeys will be able to thrive in Missouri as long as sufficient habitat exists."
Robert A. Pierce II
Fisheries and Wildlife State Specialist
School of Natural Resources
Jason L. Isabelle
Resource Scientist
Missouri Department of Conservation
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
63,515 Posts
need to do both since the predator numbers are not being kept in check! but, thanks!
So you still don't know what statistically insignificant means correct??
 

·
Biology nit wit exposer
Joined
·
80,689 Posts
need to do both since the predator numbers are not being kept in check! but, thanks!

Best advice in this thread.

If you have good habitat and an overpopulation of nest predators you can improve production by lowering nest predator numbers.

Its good to see people with open minds that dont think its an either or decision.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 20'

·
Vendor
Joined
·
63,515 Posts
Best advice in this thread.

If you have good habitat and an overpopulation of nest predators you can improve production by lowering nest predator numbers.

Its good to see people with open minds that dont think its an either or decision.
But not at a statistically significant level.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,657 Posts
"Ultimately, the long–term solution to wild turkey populations is not dependent on predator control, but on man’s activities and good habitat management."
— James Earl Kennamer, Ph. D.

"The bottom-line is that predator control must be intensive, large-scale, and continuous to even show minimal positive results...Landowners with an interest in turkeys will receive far better results by focusing their efforts toward providing the birds with all the elements they need to gain an advantage over predators, rather than attempting to get rid of the predators themselves."
- Adam Butler, Turkey Program Biologist

"The high variability of Missouri's turkey hatch each year suggests that predators are not the main factor influencing nest success. Despite the abundance of predators, turkeys will be able to thrive in Missouri as long as sufficient habitat exists."
Robert A. Pierce II
Fisheries and Wildlife State Specialist
School of Natural Resources
Jason L. Isabelle
Resource Scientist
Missouri Department of Conservation
Predators are not the main factor, BUT number 2 in EVERY SINGLE DNR slide show, gotcha! Eliminate a bunch of them and add not as much of an advantage is needed! No one here has every said habitat is not the major play, but only a two (Hessue recently added) think habitat is the only play.
 
21 - 40 of 48 Posts
Top