Sounds like a good idea

Anybody that owns land should either be trapping or paying somebody to trap. The incentive is a no Brainer. Problem is if you work a regulat job it's dang near impossible to do on your own at the scale it needs to be done. Also alot of people think burning is the miracle cure. Out of the 2 things mentioned I would put trapping ahead of burning but both are important.

The state can easily do a bounty system. It's our funds why not? As far as roadkill and collecting tails it won't work out, they will be some but not near as much as you could get in a few days or a weekend of trapping.

Burning vs trapping is a no brainer, predators have been out of control for a long time.

I’ve burned for the last 5 years and have Less turkeys in the spring. We’ve killed hundreds of coons and possums the last 10 years population has grown but have less gobbling birds than 5 years ago. I don’t know what to do at this point

If you’re seeing evidence of more turkeys, give it another year or you’ve got a bad gobbler that’s keeping the others tight lipped.

Here’s what you really need to know for a trapping incentive like this…….How many coons and coyotes need to be trapped in order to produce an additional “one”......It’s going to be one of those things that has to be averaged out over 5-10 year type time periods in order to capture the good and the bad years but you don’t want to set the number of coons and coyotes to be caught any higher than you have to in order to create desired change……The higher you set it the lower the profit margins become for the trapper…….If 15 coons and 3 coyotes produce the desired result and we make the quota 20 and 5…..then you just lower the profit margin for the trapper and in turn lower the allure for folks to get into trapping

See you gotta figure out the sweet spot for where to set the number of coons and coyotes to be caught…… The turkey hunter is willing to pay the trapper “X” amount for the early week and bird…..If its $500…then its $500……..The number of coons and coyotes you require to punch that ticket ends up hitting the trapper…….He gets paid less per coon and coyote the more you make it……To spur on folks doing it for a side hustle you need to make it be as lucrative as possible and still produce positive results for turkey populations……So therefore you don’t want to set the quota WAYY beyond the threshold that makes a difference with the turkey.

So back to the original statement of…….It would be good to have a general idea of an “exchange rate”……The more I think about it the more I think about 15 coons and 3 coyotes would be about right for 1 early bird tag……..I think that would be about the threshold to create a good bit of participation……If I could sell that many tails for $500 while getting paid to trap the land at the same time then I could see a bunch of Alabama boys going out cashing in on some extra spending money…(See blood tracking dogs as an example)…Make it $600......$700..... and it looks even better and so forth.....


See its important where you set the quota here. It would make a BIG difference on whether it was a success or failure……..Its HUUUGE…..Where is that sweet spot that is within the price range turkey hunters and landowners are willing to pay that gets a lot of trappers out there trapping AND produces more birds in the end??

You can’t limit the predators to coons and coyotes. They may be in the top % of a threat but there’s a whole lot more that need kilt. One is gonna be illegal. I do agree with most of this thread, not trying to say anyone is wrong.

I hear you, I do……..but at the end of the day we have to operate within the realm of being realistic with what we can currently do….For widespread “above the table solutions”, you have to approach avian predators as a constant that has to be worked around with other means. I’m just throwing out numbers to represent a concept……The main point being that if you set up a system that makes it lucrative for folks to get out and trap then there’s plenty of folks to make that happen……You have to figure out what makes the numbers work right……Those bounties out west that were paying $10 per tail were doomed to fail from the start……You gotta make it enough $$ to motivate folks to go out and run traps…….Its no different than blood tracking if folks are able to see the potential……… There's folks to go out and trap......

Because hunters like me don't want to pay for an incentive for folks to sell coon tails with my license dollars. If someone wants to trap their place, go for it. If they want to pay someone to do it, go for it. I think there is a great benefit from it.... on private land and at an intensive scale. I don't think it will make a difference state-wide and I don't want my license dollars to go to it. Thats why! Im a HUGE burn promoter and think that would make more of a difference (a no-brainer you might say! ;)) but I don't agree with my tax dollars going to it either. If it's worth it to a landowner he should do it..... without me paying for it.

Yea, Im a big promoter of pay for your own shucks!

This right here

A "tails for tags" program could actually be a moneymaker. An earned tag could require 25 predator tails and $100. Tag could be good from March 15-25th. Make the fine for hunting without the tag immediate seizure of gun, vehicle and all hunting gear. Same for untagged gobbler. Relinquish the seized goods after a $10.000 fine is payed.

If only 500 hunters bought the tag it would generate $50,000 which should cover any administrative costs and remove 12,500 predators. Any fines could be earmarked for preseason burns in WMA's.

Will never happen but it is not a bad idea.

If you were to offer an incentive that allowed hunters to start March 15 with an extra bird I believe you would get a whole lot more participation than just a few hundred people......I think it would be in the thousands.......I think there's something like 50K turkey hunters in Alabama......I was thinking something along the lines of 5K participating and that may be way low.....At 5K though you would be taking out 100K predators at a 20 tail rate......If 10K hunters participated it would be 200K.......If half of the turkey hunters were to participate it would be 500K......

The reality of a trapping incentive would be that some years it helps and some years it doesn’t……Some years it helps a lot and other years it helps a little bit…….But in the meantime it gives all turkey hunters a means of doing something to help the cause and it would look a whole lot better on the state than if they just lower bag limits even further. An incentive stands a good chance of making a positive impact while making hunters happy……Lowering bag limits wont change anything and would just throw fuel on the fire with hunters……

Where do we go from here?.....Double down on limiting season dates and bag limits??.....Promote a trapping incentive??.....Do nothing and just let it ride??.....What’s the next move??

The incentive is you improve your own property.

I'd be out if they slapped a 100 dollar tag fee into the mix

Pretty sure there’s already a trapper’s license fee on the books….An incentive like this needs to be as trapper friendly as possible in order to motivate guys to go out and chase the extra $$$.....If its not then it’ll be a failure. I see it being a thing where you might not have a lot of turkey hunters go out themselves and trap but who are more than willing to support their local trapper to do it for them.

The money is being wasted anyways. It was a suggestion to put it to good use instead of it being spent on bat studies and other irrelevant crap.