The interest in turkey hunting is in response to increased turkey populations and increased hunting opportunities. Indiana is no different; as our turkey populations have increased, so has our number of turkey hunters. Today, with harvests over 10,000 for several years and hunter success rates around 25 percent, the number of spring turkey hunters afield is now over 50,000.

All in all, considering the variations in summer production from the high in 2004 to two low years in 2005 and 2006, we're expecting a 2007 spring harvest somewhere around 13,000 birds; however, hunter success may drop a little from around 26 percent to around 21 percent, considering the potential growth in hunter numbers in response to the high harvest in 2006.

G&F: How is the new fall turkey season being received? Has the fall hunting affected the spring hunting? Why or why not?

Backs: Fall turkey hunting has not caught on like spring turkey hunting, and the interest in fall turkey hunting has actually waned a little from the initial interest in many other Midwest states.

Fall hunting has a longer and richer tradition in the Appalachian states, but even in those areas of the country, the interest in spring hunting far exceeds that of fall hunting. Fall turkey hunting opportunities are a by-product of well-established wild turkey populations, and generally speaking, fall turkey-hunting opportunities in most Midwest states are fewer than spring hunting opportunities.

And the vast majority of turkey hunters want an emphasis on spring hunting opportunities. They do not want liberal fall hunting opportunities, which might negatively impact spring hunting opportunities. Biologically, the potential for over-harvest is far greater in the fall (either-sex bag) compared with "gobbler-only" spring hunting.

Currently, interest in fall turkey hunting in Indiana is very low. Besides the spring preference of most turkey hunters, the opportunities for fall hunting are very limited in Indiana.

We also had no data regarding fall hunting in Indiana under our license structures, our habitats, and other competing fall hunting opportunities. We finally were able to get a fall season going in 2005 with a very conservative season framework, which we indicated we would evaluate in three to five years after collecting fall harvest data in Indiana. . . .

Because of the conservative fall season structure, any potential impact on the spring harvests or hunter success has been minimized, next to none.

G&F: How are the sales of the Game Bird Habitat Stamp doing? Were there more stamps bought in 2006 than in previous years? How is the money (from the Game Bird Habitat Stamps) proportioned among pheasants, quail, turkey and grouse management?

Backs: The number (of stamps) sold dropped by about 3 percent last year and generated approximately $199,194 in 2006. Weather, time available to hunters, access, perceived game availability, etc., are all factors working to determine the demand. The money is not proportioned out into each game category.

As you can see, the amount generated is not substantial and dividing it up would dilute the capability to accomplish significant projects. Some portions of the money are used to purchase game bird lands for hunter access; some has been used to contribute to the Goose Pond acquisition recently. Some (of the money) has been used to participate in leasing land for access, as well as contributing to private land projects targeting creating upland game habitat. We are currently focusing on taking advantage of opportunities for land acquisition adjoining our major public fish and wildlife areas.

G&F: Is the money generated by the Game Bird Habitat Stamps keeping pace with the challenges facing the DNR for upland birds?

Backs: No, it is a catch 22. Private land development is moving forward at an unprecedented pace, continually reducing the opportunity for hunters and access. Habitat continues to decline and the number of hunters is declining or at best remaining stable at the present time.

One of our major concerns is our aging hunting population and the lack of youth who are coming into the sport. This all equates into potentially selling less habitat stamps in the future.

WATERFOWL
Biologist Adam Phelps provided his insight on the status of duck and goose populations in our state. Here's what he had to say.

G&F: How did the sale of Waterfowl Stamps do? Is the sale of these stamps keeping pace with the challenges facing the DNR for waterfowl management?