Missouri Whitetails - Your Missouri Hunting Resource banner
1 - 20 of 63 Posts

· Banned
Joined
·
66,381 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
A very applicable article to the discussions going on right now. Several here are madters at ignoring or twisting research to say what they want it to not what it actually means......

Font Circle Number


(Editor's note: The following was signed by Skip Still, David Baumann, Steve Bennett, Billy Fleming and Robert Gooding, all retired wildlife biologists with master's degrees and combined experience of more than 160 years in South Carolina.)
The South Carolina Legislature continues to ignore the best available scientific information and the recommendations of natural resource management professionals when setting seasons and bag limits for wild turkeys, the South Carolina state wild game bird.
This was done despite the fact that wild turkey populations have been steadily declining in recent years in South Carolina.
In 2015, the legislature enacted Act 41 that set the statewide spring turkey season from March 20 to May 5. Previously, the season began on April 1 except on private land in 12 Lowcountry counties, which opened March 15.

A group of conservation professionals and turkey hunters expressed concern and the legislature mandated that the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources conduct a research study to determine optimal season dates. It was understood that research results would be used to help define future regulations regarding turkeys.

The research was successfully conducted from 2015-2018 by SCDNR staff and a prominent turkey researcher from Louisiana State University. The study compiled turkey harvest data, nesting and gobbling chronology, and hunter information. The best techniques and cutting-edge technology available were used.

Results were presented to the legislature, indicating the spring season should not open prior to April 9, the average date of nest initiation. The findings of SCDNR and LSU researchers were backed up by the Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (SEAFWA), made up of 15 southeastern states plus Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.
SEAFWA conducted an extensive literature review and recommended, in 2016, that spring turkey season opening dates should coincide with average date of initial egg laying.

In 2019, the legislature ignored these recommendations and the results of the research, passing a bill that allows turkey hunting in the lower state from March 22 through April 30 and in the upper state from April 1 through May 10. Only one gobbler can be taken during the first 10 days of the season.

During the hearings, some legislators attempted to question the results of the research, despite the fact that natural resource management professionals strongly supported the results of the research.

Attempts to discredit the research were without substantial merit and were based on the individual wishes of select legislators. One legislative member who supported the 2019 legislation even bragged after the bill had passed that - "sometimes science loses."

This is not the first instance of the state legislature ignoring the recommendations of DNR's wildlife professionals and the science they employ and provide.

One such instance occurred when a legislator, representing a Piedmont county, introduced a bill to allow baiting for deer in the Piedmont counties. SCDNR had conducted a study demonstrating that baiting deer actually resulted in a decreased likelihood of killing a deer, despite what the legislators and many hunters believed. Additionally, deer baiting is implicated in the spread of various parasites and diseases, including chronic wasting disease, a disease that is potentially devastating to deer populations.
Despite data provided by SCDNR, and over strong objections by the agency, a bill allowing baiting for deer in the Piedmont was enacted.
So once again, as a legislator said about the turkey bill, science lost.

But, it wasn't just science that lost. It was the resource and ultimately the people of South Carolina who lose when natural resource professionals are ignored.
The underlying issue runs much deeper than turkeys.
South Carolina is one of only a few states where natural resource management is controlled by the legislature. In the vast majority of other states, natural resource management is controlled by a governing board within each state's natural resource agency, reducing political intrusions into resource management.
Do South Carolinians want to continue with a system of natural resource management where science and professional judgment is often ignored and a system of legislative power, constituent favors, and votes is maintained?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chew

· Banned
Joined
·
66,381 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·

· Registered
Joined
·
6,911 Posts
The science as you call it needs to pick up its game. iN THE 1930,, 40,S 50,S WE HAD SCIENCE BUT THEN CAME THE WILDLIFE FOR PROFIT CROWD.
Instead of today having a fine time hunting upland game birds we have a travesty releasing caged birds for people to pretend to hunt.
We have lost 80 percent of the turkey and it seems more important to put a shiny face on it then it is to correct the obvious failure of science to see the obvious in historical data.
Those things are not good , those things show wildlife guys dropping the dang scientific ball. But i am a deer guy . i HAVE BEEN DRAWN TO THE WOODS MY WHOLE LIFE, as a kid i experienced the native quail the Bobs which were like soft balls not the skinny sparrow quail we see today. Squirrel were plentiful rabbit to.
due to the site jumping around tonight i can not compose the message i wish to. I am all for science what we are getting lacks.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
66,381 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
The science as you call it needs to pick up its game. iN THE 1930,, 40,S 50,S WE HAD SCIENCE BUT THEN CAME THE WILDLIFE FOR PROFIT CROWD.
Instead of today having a fine time hunting upland game birds we have a travesty releasing caged birds for people to pretend to hunt.
We have lost 80 percent of the turkey and it seems more important to put a shiny face on it then it is to correct the obvious failure of science to see the obvious in historical data.
Those things are not good , those things show wildlife guys dropping the dang scientific ball. But i am a deer guy . i HAVE BEEN DRAWN TO THE WOODS MY WHOLE LIFE, as a kid i experienced the native quail the Bobs which were like soft balls not the skinny sparrow quail we see today. Squirrel were plentiful rabbit to.
due to the site jumping around tonight i can not compose the message i wish to. I am all for science what we are getting lacks.
Nothing you just typed is correct.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chew

· Banned
Joined
·
66,381 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·

· High-tech Hillbilly
Joined
·
1,259 Posts
Hawk, I thought the piece you posted had some good points in it and I agree with its main point of having wildlife management controlled by legislators being a bad idea.

I have never understood this backlash against science and scientific studies. Most of the people I know personally who bash science always act like there's some giant conspiracy taking place just because the results of a study might not agree with their particular world view. A few years ago, my dad and one of his friends were talking about the decline of turkeys in the area and their general dislike for MDC. This was about a month before spring turkey season and I actually heard my dad's friend say, "Usually, by this time of year, I'd have 3 or 4 gobblers killed. Not anymore. There just ain't any birds around." Of course, this lack of birds to poach was due to the gross mismanagement of the population by MDC. It didn't have anything to do with the actual poaching itself. While I listened to this conversation I just sat there and wondered how people could become so deluded. It still remains a mystery to me.

Darren
 

· Registered
Joined
·
8,049 Posts
A lot of people let their own personal bias influence the interpretation of the science. This isn’t new. What is new is the increasing bias of science itself. This is just as dangerous as it is often driven by political views and money. Researchers to often start a study with an intended outcome. This discredits the entire scientific community. This makes it even more important to read multiple studies, compare results and to be able to identify bias in procedures and drawn conclusions.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
66,381 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Hawk, I thought the piece you posted had some good points in it and I agree with its main point of having wildlife management controlled by legislators being a bad idea.

I have never understood this backlash against science and scientific studies. Most of the people I know personally who bash science always act like there's some giant conspiracy taking place just because the results of a study might not agree with their particular world view. A few years ago, my dad and one of his friends were talking about the decline of turkeys in the area and their general dislike for MDC. This was about a month before spring turkey season and I actually heard my dad's friend say, "Usually, by this time of year, I'd have 3 or 4 gobblers killed. Not anymore. There just ain't any birds around." Of course, this lack of birds to poach was due to the gross mismanagement of the population by MDC. It didn't have anything to do with the actual poaching itself. While I listened to this conversation I just sat there and wondered how people could become so deluded. It still remains a mystery to me.

Darren
Its a mystery Darren. I believe it has a lot to do with their need to assign blame somewhere other than themselves and a general feeling of inadequacy over their own education/things they cant or dont want to understand. The old "no one know better than me, I sawed it with my own eyes" deal. Many dont understand that what they saw is only a very very small portion of the overall picture.

We have conspiracy theories abounding in the predators debate. Henry and others seem think the research is rigged or reported wrong to discourage trapping. Nothing could be further from the truth. Conspiracy theories in most cases are crutches for the uninformed intentionally obtuse.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chew

· Super Moderator
Joined
·
28,537 Posts
Its a mystery Darren. I believe it has a lot to do with their need to assign blame somewhere other than themselves and a general feeling of inadequacy over their own education/things they cant or dont want to understand. The old "no one know better than me, I sawed it with my own eyes" deal. Many dont understand that what they saw is only a very very small portion of the overall picture.

We have conspiracy theories abounding in the predators debate. Henry and others seem think the research is rigged or reported wrong to discourage trapping. Nothing could be further from the truth. Conspiracy theories in most cases are crutches for the uninformed intentionally obtuse.
Hawk, I belive you missed Darren's point, he wasn't siding with you in the least bit, IMO!
 

· Banned
Joined
·
66,381 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Hawk, I belive you missed Darren's point, he wasn't siding with you in the least bit, IMO!
Uh, sure bob...
 

· Banned
Joined
·
66,381 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
To be fair it's hard to take anything you or Henry post, seriously. You guys may post interesting/factual science based studies. Few are going to read it considering the source. It's a constant pissing match that has lost any sort of entertainment.
Yet you continue to post on these threads...
 

· Senior Member
Joined
·
15,013 Posts
per the posted article

"SCDNR had conducted a study demonstrating that baiting deer actually resulted in a decreased likelihood of killing a deer,"

do you have a copy of this study?

I have a buddy who has 5 feeders and him, his kids and other friends all shoot their deer and turkeys over these feeders.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 20'

· Registered
Joined
·
20,349 Posts
A lot of people let their own personal bias influence the interpretation of the science. This isn't new. What is new is the increasing bias of science itself. This is just as dangerous as it is often driven by political views and money. Researchers to often start a study with an intended outcome. This discredits the entire scientific community. This makes it even more important to read multiple studies, compare results and to be able to identify bias in procedures and drawn conclusions.
The "researchers" have to recieve funding from "somewhere" and "someone"... all of those initials/ credentials following an individuals name doesn't come cheap... thus we have studies involving fish on treadmills.....
 

· Banned
Joined
·
66,381 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
per the posted article

"SCDNR had conducted a study demonstrating that baiting deer actually resulted in a decreased likelihood of killing a deer,"

do you have a copy of this study?

I have a buddy who has 5 feeders and him, his kids and other friends all shoot their deer and turkeys over these feeders.
I believe that the results in kansas would be different because of differences in land ownership patterns and habitat. At least thats how I have heard it explained by Jason Sumners in the past.
 
1 - 20 of 63 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top