Turkey Hunting Data 1983-2015
Wisconsin
I made a chart of turkey harvest numbers for Wisconsin. It's kind of interesting to see the numbers over a long period of time. Enjoy...
YEAR Permits Sold Harvest Success Rate 1983 1,200 182 15.2 1984 1,950 303 15.5 1985 2,025 496 24.5 1986 3,675 793 21.6 1987 6,040 1,478 24.5 1988 11,070 2,486 22.5 1989 21,280 4,400 20.7 1990 29,877 6,465 21.6 1991 37,414 6,846 18.3 1992 43,925 8,798 20 1993 61,767 12,316 19.9 1994 71,420 12,637 17.7 1995 68,588 15,323 22.3 1996 75,812 18,000 23.7 1997 92,734 20,992 22.6 1998 101,141 28,338 28 1999 112,256 33,168 29.5 2000 132,318 38,686 29.2 2001 151,522 39,211 25.9 2002 160,101 39,336 24.6 2003 169,277 42,970 25.4 2004 186,608 47,477 25.4 2005 193,826 46,183 23.8 2006 200,869 46,662 23.2 2007 205,306 52,428 25.5 2008 208,972 52,880 25.3 2009 218,133 52,581 24.1 2010 214,356 47,722 22.3 2011 210,384 40,133 19.1 2012 201,984 42,612 21.1 2013 217,798 37,804 17.4 2014 210,496 41,815 19.9 2015 208,250 40,977 19.7 2016 TOTALS 3,832,374 882,498 23
Wow, sorry this didn't turn out like I wanted. I'll see if I can fix it.
Wow, sorry this didn't turn out like I wanted. I'll see if I can fix it.
Please delete thread as I can not edit it. Sorry for the jumbled numbers that mean nothing!
I take it is number of license sold, number of birds harvested, and success rate
Shed, if you have it in a file, just do a screen shot (on Macs it's Apple/Shift/3 keys) and then crop it, or attach as a jpeg.
Here it is as a screen shot.
We've had electronic registration five springs now. Not saying that's playing with the numbers, but it very well may be. Additionally, post-season surveys find roughly one in five don't even hunt. That also skews the success ratio.
The success rate is figured per tag, as it should be. No way to know for sure how many guys/gals skip the hunt for one reason or another, but past surveys have shown it to be close to one in five.
I seem to remember an exceptionally bad winter a few years back.
GVS, that certainly could have played a role in many areas, no doubt.
Bad winters and a greedy DNR that refuses to lower the tag numbers has not helped things.
"Its got nothing to do with guys that get3, 4 or 5 tags and fill them making the success rate per hunter far higher than is being reported. ;-)"
Success rate is per tag sold, not hunter.
Using your example (certain hunters shooting far more birds than others) actually skews the data the other way. The success rate per licensed hunter would be less if you take away those who shoot multiple birds.
Example, 200 tags for 100 hunters, and 50 birds shot. Twenty of the hunters shot 40 of the birds, the other 80 shot only 10.
Success average per tag sold = 25 percent
Success average per licensed hunter = 50 percent
Success rate for the top 20 hunters = 200 percent
Success rate for other 80 hunters = 12.5 percent
Antis buying a tag to save a turkey ….. LOL
Radical yes, but the majority (of the tiny minority who are true antis vs. simply non-hunters) are all talk; a few are avid posters online, commenting across the web. Patricia Randolph and others like her push their tiny membership to attend the CC hearings. That's why you see the turnouts with some antis mixed in in Dane, Milwaukee and Waukesha. That said, you almost certainly wouldn't even need one hand to count the number of tags antis buy statewide.
I think they should do away with the permit system and let people hunt whenever they want during the month long season. That approach works in a lot of other states.
I think they should leave it just the way it is. I give a rats a$$ what other states do.
I'd like to see the fall numbers. I live in St. Croix CO and also hunt Pierce CO, the numbers seem way down this year and we had a mild winter. They seem to have been coming down the last few years. I live in a valley and there's generally a winter flock nearby and the largest flock I've seen since spring has been less than six. Early 2000s it wasn't uncommon to see 70+ in a winter/early spring flock, and then the numbers were in the 30s. It's been several years since I've seen a flock of 20+ and they've been more like 12-16.
+1 buckmaster
dc-archer, attached link in case you missed it where this is discussed in depth
I'm a multi tag guy, but I hunt all the seasons I can.
2015, I bought 2 tags. 2 toms taken.
2014, 3 tags, 3 toms taken.
2013, 3 tags, 3 toms taken.
2012, 2 tags, 2 toms taken.
2011, 1 tag, 1 tom taken.
2010, 2 tags, 1 tom taken. I lose memory from there, and didn't hunt birds as hard before then.
This year, I took one for my first season, and waiting on 5th and 6th. I know a lot of guys who hunt multiple seasons, and are as successful. I also know guys who hunt very little, and shoot very few. It's like any statistic. There are guys who lift the percentages, and others who lower them. The numbers seem realistic to the many people I know, based off of what their success rate is. Some guys hunt good birdy areas while others have very little action. Add in public land....some beat to hell, and it is very realistic.
Anyone who hunted in the early 80s would understand why they do the seasons the way they do it now. Back then in some areas we would have hunters calling to hunters. Could you see 4 or 5 hunters calling in 40 acres. Why would anyone want to make this like gun hunting deer.
Knife2sharp, the numbers are way down in Pierce. Our land is one of the highest points near Beldenville. You hardly hear any gobbles for miles in every direction. I also hunt other properties in Pierce. It's just as bad. I have hunted those areas since it opened there. It's NEVER been this bad. Yet the DNR refuses to cut back the tags.
That's one of the disadvantages to going to a smaller number of zones that are larger. Hunters begged for it, got it, and now there are some challenges to managing numbers on a larger landscape.
skookumjt, +1
Was opposed to the change in zones, and still don't like it. We are in a huge zone (2), with the highest population centers taking up tags no doubt and here in rural "north 2" we are swimming in turkeys yet our tags sell out while 2-3 other zones have tags unlimited and often in four periods while we get only the last two weeks. So a few guys wanted to "move around the zone" more and got the change … while the vast majority hunt the same spots near home and now are lumped with millions of citizens.
That is where we should submit a proposal to make more zones. I believe it would get support as there are highs and lows in all the zones and the populations could be managed better.
Always an option. Nothing saying we can't change again. No idea what the consensus would be.
Cue you know who chiming on on the process even though he hates turkey hunting.
I believe that turkey hunting and how it is structured, is one thing the DNR got right. Leave it alone.... You can get tags if you want them, low pressure for the most part....
My main home is in Zone 2 kettle area,,,,,, it does not need to be broken up, and micro managed.....
Keep It Simple Stupid
If I had to pick one thing I dislike about the present system. It would be the large zones. That said, I wouldn't change a thing. When the DNR starts meddling to make things "better" is when they really screw it up.
