Chamberlain has published some data on nest success in areas that were burned during monitoring. The difference in 36 and 33% for 1st and 2nd attempts is statistically (and realistically) insignificant and covers 2-3 months of the nesting season. 2 of the 3 studies showed higher success with 2nd nests - also insignificant, but those showed higher production later.

Chamberlain has published some data on nest success in areas that were burned during monitoring. The difference in 36 and 33% for 1st and 2nd attempts is statistically (and realistically) insignificant and covers 2-3 months of the nesting season. 2 of the 3 studies showed higher success with 2nd nests - also insignificant, but those showed higher production later.
[/quote]

That would be great if the same number were nesting the 2nd time as the first.

I agree…..it certainly seems to be an emotional topic for some and one that is apparently not even being considered. Good luck with your research fellas.

Here’s the bigger point I think you are missing about this…….In order to do sho nuff research to prove this idea then I need access to more information than what I can get. I DO have access to enough info though to point to the definite potential of fire being the culprit and something that needs to be looked into more…..Enough so that you would think the folks trying to figure out the problem would have it on their list of possibilities. Yet, it doesn’t seem like anyone will even consider it. That is bias research if you do that because of an emotional attachment to the situation.

As far as the quail plantations and June burning for hardwood control, etc……..I was just throwing out some possible solutions. I’m sure if it IS found out to be fire causing the turkey issues then folks can figure out how to work around it within their own operation.

i believe last year I had a picture of a poult in September that probably was a 3rd nest. Single tiny bird.

I would agree that to some extent the urban areas like in Jefferson Co for example will have an impact on its density number. However, just like we said in the deer thread and density map……all of these areas arent exactly void of wildlife. Do turkeys not also use open ag fields as part of their home ranges? Do they not also exist in the edge of town?? Each of these density numbers is a pretty accurate representation of the number of turkeys being killed in each county. I’d also point out about this idea of taking out the urban areas is that it would only make the situation look that much worse for counties like Bullock, Russell, and Macon….as well as your southwestern counties which are the most rural of any in the state. How much metro area do they have to deduct if we do this??

As far as the number of hunters in each county…….Yes, it would be awesome to have the number of individual hunters who reported killing a bird in each county but GC doesn’t provide that info. However…..and I’m saying upfront that this is speculation……I don’t believe that would change things that much. Meaning that I don’t believe there are turkey gobblers running around all over Macon, Bullock, and Russell skewing the data because they just arent being hunted. I think people are likely hunting and harvesting what each area is producing fairly equally across the landscape…....of course there will be some variation but not enough to account for what the density map is showing overall with the low numbers.

Now you see the problem with wildlife research. Ill talk to Chamberlain and see if he can make 1st and 2nd nesting attempt sample sized more equitable.



Here is the issue. I hear this every year - burning is causing problems with turkeys, burning burns up nests, burning disrupts turkeys, yada, yada, yada. By folks who don't know anything about fire in the woods. I know what a great management tool it is for turkeys and other wildlife and how it is part of the natural process of our environment. I also have done research on what happens to a forest when burning is stopped. I also, directly see the turkey population response to regularly and correctly burned properties. Yea, I get defensive about it when it is blamed and there are so many other issues to point a finger at.
Here is a fact. Alabama has 23 million acres of timberland in the State. Roughly 1 million acres are burned each year. Is it remotely possible for an activity that impacts 4% of the states woodlands to have a noticeable impact on turkey populations, even if all fire was bad? That is 96% of the state forests that are NOT burned in a given year.



Again, your "density map" has no meaning. It is just made up stuff with poor data input. However, the area you are talking about are some of the largest landowners in the State and their properties are managed PRIMARILY for game. Your telling me you think they harvest their turkeys at the same rate (proportion of the population) as, say, the national forest, management area or a timber company lease? Come on, get real. These places are as low pressure as a hunted population can get.

Emotion is the enemy of rational thought……



I agree with everything you are saying about fire being a great tool for wildlife. I agree it builds great habitat and is the main driver for supporting the populations in many of these areas……I also agree that it is a natural part of our environment……..But if you are going to use that as part of your defense then how can just ignore the fact that it didn’t naturally happen in Feb, March, and April……That’s a little convenient isn’t it?....Mother Nature likely had a reason for when she burned naturally.


Also, there’s the blatant facts to look at here in what we know about egg production from chicken and turkey breeders/producers……..And that’s the big flashing neon sign that says “For best egg production it is very important to not disturb the hens during nesting”………I would call lighting up half of Macon, Bullock, and Russell counties during nesting season a very plausible cause that may be “disturbing nesting”……Again, I’m pointing at the reasons for why this should be considered and there are more than enough.

Give it up, gobbler. We live in a brave new world now and facts don't matter. Defund the police and crime will go down. Stop producing energy in the USA and buy it from Iran, and it will save the planet. And burning is bad for turkeys.

Gobbler, appreciate that you and a few others that actually know what you are talking about chime in from time to time. I learn a lot from ya'll.

Do they kill less on these other lands?? Likely yes........Does either or any area leave a bunch of excess gobblers running around at the end of the season??....No, likely not.......The density map is likely showing you a pretty good overall output of gobblers for each county with some variation to consider. Those variations dont account for the entire southwest corner of the state though. Also, I'll say this too about the plantation land......I could see where having 5,000-7,000 acres or more to roam around and turkey hunt on could make someone bias as to how good the turkey hunting is compared to other areas.

I think the overall issue here as in most wildlife related questions is the lack of actual population data. When using course scale surrogate data to explain population trends it is spurious to use that for fine scale population measurements and causal factors.

Side note: a lot of the research Ive seen has been psuedoreplication anyway, so Im not sure what the impacts are or arent. But, I highly doubt fire has an impact on county level populations outside of maybe a couple counties dominated by NF with large scale burns.

You know someone used the term KISS in a prior post……and with that in mind. to me when looking at this issue it would be about the same is if I went back to when I was a kid working in my aunt and uncles chicken houses……. And let’s say that we were all standing around trying to figure out what was causing the problem in egg production….. meanwhile, there’s a guy running up and down the middle of the chicken house playing a trumpet and spooking the birds. If anyone came to that situation to assess the issue the first thing that would jump out at them in blaring fashion using common sense would be to have that dude stop playing the trumpet…….And in the same manner if someone were to go assess why turkeys might be having an issue with egg production and they go out and find that there is massive amounts of fire occurring during nesting season…..It would seem just about as obvious as the trumpet…THEY DONT LIKE BEING DISTURBED DURING NESTING…....Occams razor…….At least enough to consider.

Gobbler named off 130,000 acres worth just at a bare minimum across a few counties where we’re at….…I’m sure you could add a bunch more to that and its just a drop in the bucket for what gets burned in southwest AL. I mentioned this before but the reason I believe these burn acres can have an impact even though they are only a certain % of the total land mass is because these burn acres basically represent your nesting grounds in these areas. The burn tracts on the landscape create the perfect cover to draw in the birds for nesting. In other words, the use of fire is likely concentrating them to those tracts during nesting……and then when weather delays burning season…..the late fire being ran through these stands could easily cause enough disturbance to see decreases in “egg” production....birds are finicky to disruption. I believe the reason we are seeing it being more of a factor in recent years is due to the warming trend causing turkey to likely breed earlier as well as the change to the Feb 10 end date of deer season which pushed the start of burn season back as well.

We have four properties in the example below……One property burns while the other three do not…..During nesting season which of the four stands are the hens likely to use??.....In the example our burn acreage only represent 25% of the total but how much influence does it have over total reproductive success for this area?? A lot more than just its representative size correct?

Now that you have all your hens within that hen house…….Does the whole house have to be burned to cause enough disruption for something like a 15-30% decrease in egg production and overall success rates??.....

I think I’ll listen to Matt and Ted on this.

If you get that last diagram then we can take the property lines away now ……zoom out……and just look at the landscape in the manner of burn areas and non-burn areas……When nesting season hits the hens are likely going to concentrate into the burn areas and these “squares” will be far and away the ones with the most influence over turkey reproduction. These are also the same stands that are likely to be heavily disturbed by late season fires. Take that same diagram now and lets say the burn property produces the same habitat but adjust its burn schedule so that its done outside of turkey nesting season…..Looking at everything we know about less disturbance being better for egg production…..Do we not have the real potential for productivity to increase if we took that disturbance away??

The area Gobbler is talking about would actually be a great area to try just such an experiment…..Take two of the 5,000 acre plantations…….Have one of them adjust their burning schedule to be well outside of turkey breeding season and the other to continue doing spring burning and see if there is a noticeable difference in success rates. Keep in mind that when I talk about this being a factor of influence I’m saying that the later the burn happens the worse the impact…..So in the years where folks are able to burn everything on Feb 11……those years are not gonna have the same impact as years when Feb 11 is wet and so is Feb 25…..and weather conditions push all of these burns back farther into March and April..... It’s the very fact that we are hitting some years just on time and some years late that I believe is causing a lot of back and forth swings. As warming trends cause spring to back up more and more we are crossing this late threshold more and more….especially in extreme south Alabama.

I understand your hypothesis and it may have an impact (or not) at the local level but according to gobbler the number of acres (on private) burned is very small. The biggest problem is using surrogate data (harvest) to predict populations. It simply may or may not be the case. Maybe longitudinally you could use it to support change in management (like 10 or 20 year trends), but otherwise it is just a snapshot of harvest and not necessarily population.
I
I get the point of birds returning to an almost like population sink kind of situation. And at least some literature seems to support that. Summary of the source:Fire and Turkeys in SE US

"Fire frequency: Fire frequency strongly affects plant community composition, and a fire-return interval of 1-3 years has been found to maintain the herbaceous
ground-flora desirable in pine-grassland communities. Turkeys, however, use a variety of habitat types throughout the year, necessitating a range of vegetative
conditions. For instance, during nesting stages, and during the first ~2 weeks after poults hatch, dense vegetation (typical in areas burned 2 years prior) is
desired for protection from predators. But, once poults begin roosting in trees, areas not burned in 3 or mores years are likely to be utilized. Similarly, during
the non-breeding season, turkeys more often use areas not typically burned, such as hardwood forests in bottomlands, drainages, and swamps. As such, the
variable habitat conditions required by turkeys throughout their annual cycle require sites with fire histories ranging from frequent to not-frequent fire."

"The authors note that valid
concerns exist regarding growing season burns which coincide with peak
nesting,[b] though studies show that females preferentially select sites that
were burned within the past two years, and as such do not typically choose
to nest in sites scheduled to burn.[/b] Also ameliorating potential effects of
exposure to fire, females exhibit a high propensity for re-nesting if a nest is
destroyed."

I haven't read that study, but this hints that return intervals of less than three years could be an issue. And the Authors agree-

"The authors suggest that growing season burns can be
appropriate when managing for turkeys, particularly
where managers are unable to meet objectives using
dormant season fire alone, though it is not
recommended to be employed at a return interval ≤ 2
years since these stands are preferred by females during
nesting and brooding periods. It appears that fire-return
intervals of ≥ 3 years are appropriate, particularly if
distributed in a mosaic throughout a fire-managed
landscape so to increase proximity of burned and
unburned areas. "

BUT...That being said, I stick with my original point and add one thing-I highly doubt fire is a major factor on county level populations outside of maybe a couple counties dominated by NF with large scale burns (if less than a 3 year return interval).

I have to get back to work. But that isn't a good experimental design. One could argue your sample size is 2. Pretty tough to get significant results that way.

And there is 32 million acres of land in AL. That is.04% being burned that he listed. That isn't all that is burned, but it's a significant amount of it. You gotta admit that if you add up every acre that is burned it's gonna be miles below 1 % of the land in the state. And a big majority of that is burned before the nesting season.

I don't doubt that somewhere a nest is burned up every year, but the impact is quite insignificant when compared to the long term habitat improvement. If you don't have any turkeys, it's not because of burning. Use the common sense you spoke of earlier. Don't burn your land if you don't want to, but I'm gonna burn mine.