CONNECTICUT'S TURKEY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM: MONITORING HARVEST AND HUNTER EFFORT
Abstract: We monitored wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) harvest and hunter activities during spring gobbler, fall firearms, and fall archery seasons with a combination of mandatory check stations, kill report cards and hunter surveys. During 1981 to 1999, surveys were used to estimate hunter effort...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2000-01-01
|
| Series: | Wildlife Society Bulletin |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2328-5540.2000.tb00279.x |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Abstract: We monitored wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) harvest and hunter activities during spring gobbler, fall firearms, and fall archery seasons with a combination of mandatory check stations, kill report cards and hunter surveys. During 1981 to 1999, surveys were used to estimate hunter effort and expenditures, and to assess hunter opinions about turkey populations, hunting opportunities, and potential regulatory changes. Surveys provided hunters with the opportunity to communicate with the Wildlife Division and provided the Wildlife Division the opportunity to annually assess hunter opinions, collect field observations, and develop a turkey population index at little cost in Connecticut. In 1998, applications for turkey hunting permits were modified to collect information on hunter densities, distribution, and success rates for each turkey management zone. Biological data have been collected at mandatory check stations during the spring gobbler (1981–96) and fall firearms (1990–present) seasons. Check stations provided data on population health and age–sex composition. In 1997, the check station system was replaced with a mandatory kill report card system. After evaluating weight, spur length, beard length and foot color on spring kill report cards, we found that 37% of the hunters incorrectly identified foot color. Changes in data collection have resulted in little difference in reporting rates and significant reductions in cost. Hunter survey and check station data were positively related (r2 = 0.98, P < 0.05). We believe that information about hunter behavior and attitudes is as important for harvest management as data on the turkey population. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2328-5540 |