The fight for Oklahoma's wild turkeys is on

A broad drop in turkey numbers is disconcerting. Take it as a call to action

A pair of Osage County toms duke it out. (Courtesy Harvey Payne)

Yes, I’ve been there this turkey season, feeling abandoned, standing on the side of a muddy county road with no gobblers within earshot.

There are no turkeys on the property I hunted last year and I’ve made a couple trips up to the area just to see if I might hear them on a roost somewhere else, within a few miles, anyway. No luck—yet.

I have other prospects for hunting and there is plenty of season left. The bird populations is not decimated. But it is disconcerting when a flock seems to disappear, especially when I see the same talk among other hunters on social media.

And, really especially, after the Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation’s early “gobbler report” included recommendations about what hunters can do to help, among which was a line that encouraged hunters to plan hunts in places where “turkey numbers have declined less.”

Ouch.

The main points were:

• Respect new one-tom-per-county regulations statewide (except for more restrictive southeast region one-tom limit)

• Consider taking one or two birds if you normally go for three.

• Consider delaying turkey hunting until later during the season. Less disturbance in the woods in early April allows better nesting conditions.

• Try to plan a hunt somewhere other than the western and southwestern parts of the state.

And I’ll add one.

• Don’t shoot jakes.

And I’ll add another.

• Spend the money you can’t spend on the ammo you can’t find on supporting groups like the National Wild Turkey Federation or Quail Forever/Pheasants Forever.

And one last point.

• Don’t disturb the roosts.

The good message, and perhaps the bright side of this population dip, is that more people may indeed take notice of the population and habitat conditions and take this as a call to action—or more action than they’ve exerted in the past.

Hunting later and taking fewer birds as a way to lessen our impact on birds during hunting season makes sense to me. I’ve watched birds scatter away from pigs and away from coyotes. I’ve also watched a wise bird beat feet out of the country because of a truckload of hunters. I think hunters can be worse that wild predators in a way, especially where roosts are concerned.

Guide “Turkey” Jack Morris taught me early on that taking jakes is bad flock management practice—even if you do prefer that young, tender breast meat. Don’t kill a bird before he has a chance to pass on his DNA.

While I’ve scouted for birds from county roads to find if they’re around this season, I haven’t rushed out into the fields yet. Depending on what I find when I do get out there this week I might take a bird, or I might just take photos (if I’m lucky enough to get close).

If I see several adult toms and one big old rope-draggin’ boss that’s had his day in the sun, he’ll be the one to go, if any. But if that old geezer is out there on his own, or only has a couple of yet-to-be productive jakes in his midst, he walks to mate another day.

Even if the majority of mating is over and hens are moving off to their nests now, I’m going to do my best to assess the local flock, then make my decision—12 gauge, or 300mm Canon.

Talk is indeed heavy around social media about what we should do to help turkeys.

Predator control is a popular topic. Trapping and raccoon hunting are not the common activities they once were, but take it from a guy who started his career interviewing an old wolf trapper out in Alaska’s Bush 36 years ago, “control” of predators—especially with regard to ground-nesting birds—takes an extraordinary effort.

I’m not saying it’s a bad thing. It’s not a worthless effort. It’s just that the effort required to have a real impact typically is sorely under appreciated and people can tend to get single-minded and sidetracked on that topic.

In the outdoors world we fight over words around wildlife populations like “control” and “balance.” It’s admirable but we can also get a little too focused on those values born of human ideology.

“Sustainability” sometimes is the best mere humans can accomplish for our favored wild game species. Wildlife populations swing in wide arcs, and when they dip to low points—especially in these days of crazy climate shifts and habitat work that feels like a losing battle—a widespread decline can be damned disconcerting indeed.

From a veteran outdoors writer’s perspective on wildlife management and predator control efforts that worked—and didn’t work—I can feel confident in offering one bit of perspective.

I am ever hopeful. Broad recovery of wild turkeys back to levels of 10 to 15 years ago statewide can and probably will happen, but it may take awhile. And if it does happen we will look back on an effort that involved broad cooperation among many stakeholders—maybe including some who don’t even realize they’re among that group yet.

There may be some predator control efforts that might help. They likely will be isolated and funded privately, or organized by hunting or trapping groups. Impact of the efforts will likely remain anecdotal.

Sizable chunks of money will have been contributed from a lot of folks for habitat work and to document what we’re doing scientifically. A variety of management measures, including curbed hunting seasons, will have come into play.

Maybe we will learn a new trick along the way, but mostly we will look back and recognize we practiced great habitat preservation and creation that set up the turkeys for real success when we hit a string of good luck with great weather for reproduction and nesting.

A late-winter flock of toms emerges from a stand of Osage County oaks. (Courtesy Harvey Payne)