Chapter I Policy and Management STATUS AND DISTRIBUTION OF WILD TURKEYS IN THE UNITED STATES: 2014 STATUS Robert E. Eriksen 1 National Wild Turkey Federation, 770 Augusta Road, Edgefield, SC 29824, USA Thomas W. Hughes National Wild Turkey Federation, 770 Augusta Road, Edgefield, SC 29824, USA Tyler A. Brown National Wild Turkey Federation, 770 Augusta Road, Edgefield, SC 29824, USA Maria D. Akridge Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634, USA Kelsey B. Scott Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634, USA Cecilia S. Penner National Wild Turkey Federation, 770 Augusta Road, Edgefield, SC 29824, USA Abstract: Wild turkey ( Meleagris gallopavo ; hereafter, turkey) populations in North America expanded dramatically from historic lows in the late 1920s and rose exponentially as restoration work accelerated between 1950 and the early years of the 21st century. However, during the first decade of the 21st century, populations appeared to continue to increase in some areas, while others stabilized or began to decrease. Areas that continued to have increases were locations where restoration work was still in progress, where such work was recently completed, where habitat conditions had improved, or where there had been increased protection. Causes of perceived declines in the southeastern, midwestern, and northeastern United States are largely unknown but speculated to be related to habitat loss, reduced acreage of early successional habitat conditions, and density dependent factors. To continue to monitor status of turkey populations in the United States, during 2014 we surveyed biologists with state wildlife agencies responsible for turkey management programs to provide status of turkey abundance and distribution in their jurisdictions. We used our results and those from 2009 (Tapley et al. 2011) to describe current status and distribution of turkeys in the United States (excluding California), including population parameters, hunter and harvest numbers, and status of active state restoration programs. In 2014, we estimated turkey numbers to be 6.0–6.2 million. Turkey populations may have decreased by as many as 250,999–293,899 turkeys between 2009 and 2014. Also during 2014, compared to 2009, we estimated spring harvest to decrease by 5.8% and fall harvest to decline by 24.9%. Compared to 2009, we estimated number of spring hunters to have declined by 2.3% in 2014 and number of fall hunters to have increased by 10.4% in 2013. Standardized methods of data collection for tracking harvest, hunter numbers and population estimates among states would facilitate reporting and provide consistency for future status assessments. Programs to encourage recruiting new hunters, reactivating lapsed hunters, and engaging individuals with disabilities may help to assure future of funding and science-based management of turkeys. Proceedings of the National Wild Turkey Symposium 11:7–18 Key words: distribution, habitat, harvest, hunters, Meleagris gallopavo , population, range, restoration, status, United States, wild turkey. Associate Editor: Healy 1 E-mail: beriksen@nwtf.net 7 23285540, 2015, S1, Downloaded from https://wildlife.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/j.2328-5540.2015.tb00375.x by University Of Florida, Wiley Online Library on [09/12/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License By the late 1930s, outlook for the future of wild turkeys ( Meleagris gallopavo ; hereafter, turkey) as a game species in the United States was pessimistic due to significant and continuing declines in most areas and extirpation of turkeys in at least 15 states (Blakey 1941). Habitat destruction, severe declines in numbers, regional extirpation, and other factors cast doubt on survival of turkeys in the wild (Davis 1949). However, farmland abandonment and regeneration of forests harvested in the 1920s and 1930s resulted in improved habitat conditions where remnant populations existed and allowed turkey populations to recover in some areas (Kennamer et al. 1992). In 1959, at the 1st National Wild Turkey Symposium, Mosby (1959) reported on a survey documenting the first positive changes in turkey numbers, distribution, and harvest since the early 1940s. By the late 1960s, marked improvement in turkey populations had occurred (Aldrich 1967). Additionally, trap and transfer programs for turkeys were established by state wildlife agencies in the 1950s through the 1970s, increasing occupied range substantially and resulting in growing populations. Turkeys were reestablished where they had been extirpated and were introduced beyond their historic range, establishing new populations in several states and Canadian provinces (Mosby 1959, 1973, 1975; Bailey 1980; Kennamer 1986). With the combination of improved habitat conditions, more effective regulations and law enforcement, research, and success of trap and transfer of turkeys over a 60-year period, turkeys were reestablished on former range and populations expanded beyond this range throughout much of North America. Today, turkey populations occur in all states, with the exception of Alaska, 6 of 13 Canadian provinces, and Mexico (Kennamer and Kennamer 1996; Tapley et al. 2001, 2007, 2011). From 1970 to the present, surveys of state agencies designed to develop population estimates have been conducted every 5 years and results have been published in all but one of the subsequent wild turkey symposia (Mosby 1959, 1973, 1975; Bailey 1980; Kennamer 1986; Kennamer and Kennamer 1990; Tapley et al. 2001, 2007, 2011). Herein, we describe current distribution of turkeys in the United States. We report estimates of turkey popula- tions of each subspecies and their current range. We compare current information with that from 2009 (Tapley et al. 2011). We also report hunter numbers and harvest figures for fall of 2013 and spring of 2014. Finally, we document status of remaining active state restoration and introduction programs. METHODS During summer of 2014, we sent questionnaires to members of the National Wild Turkey Technical Commit- tee. This Committee was comprised of state wildlife biologists responsible for managing turkey programs in their respective states. We provided an appropriate state map on which county lines were delineated to allow Technical Committee members to outline turkey range and estimate population densities at the county level. Population and range estimates provided by Technical Committee members were based on the most accurate information available at the time of the survey. Substantial variation existed among states in the methods employed to collect population data and identify and calculate range estimates. These methods included brood surveys, harvest as a percentage of total population, turkeys per square kilometer of forest, winter counts, and combinations of various survey techniques. Some variation in occupied range estimates was evident in inconsistencies of range- mapping across state boundaries. For 4 states (Florida, South Dakota, Tennessee and Washington) that did not supply a population estimate but provided spring harvest estimates, we calculated a population estimate using an estimation constant of 0.131 that we divided into spring harvest estimates. We derived this constant by examining population estimates and spring harvest figures from 5 states (Kansas, Louisiana, Mis- sissippi, Missouri and New York), which we selected based on what we believe to be efficacy of their survey methods. For these 5 states, we then calculated percentage of estimated population represented by spring harvest in each state. This percentage resulted in an estimation constant that ranged from 0.106 (Mississippi) to 0.168 (Louisiana); mean of these estimates was 0.131. California provided population and harvest data for the 2008–2009 survey but failed to provide any data for the 2013–2014 survey. California supports a large turkey population (Tapley et al. 2011) and lack of data from California made it difficult to compare population and harvest levels from the earlier survey to the current one. We therefore present population and harvest figures using 2008–2009 data from Tapley et al. (2011), excluding California estimates. We believe population and occupied range estimates were the best available, given technical limitations and methods used to reach these estimates. RESULTS Population Estimates by Subspecies In 2014, we estimated the most common, widely distributed and numerous subspecies, the eastern turkey ( M. g. silvestris ), at between 4.5 and 4.6 million individuals, a decrease of 285,757–318,757 turkeys from 2009 estimates (Table 1). Respondents estimated the Rio Grande subspe- cies ( M. g. intermedia ), not including California, to number 853,447, a decrease of 11,553–15,053 from 2009 estimates. Merriam’s turkey ( M. g. merriami ) populations, not including California, reportedly declined by 71,689– 77,689 from 2009 estimates to the current level of 262,311. In 2009, biologists estimated that California contained a population of 242,000 Rio Grande turkeys (Tapley et al. 2011) and 2,000–4,000 Merriam’s turkeys. Biologists estimated Florida turkeys ( M. g. osceola ) to have increased by 14,649–34,649 from their estimated popula- tion of 80,000–100,000 in 2004, the last year for which estimates were available (Tapley et al. 2007), to 114,649 in 2014. Gould’s turkey ( M. g. mexicana ) numbers remained relatively stable at 1,200 turkeys, comparable to the 2009 estimate of 1,150–1,250. Some states reported population declines for hybrid turkeys. Overall, however, hybrid populations increased by about 3,000 from the 2009 estimate of 293,200–293,500 to 296,581 in 2014. 8 Policy and Management 23285540, 2015, S1, Downloaded from https://wildlife.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/j.2328-5540.2015.tb00375.x by University Of Florida, Wiley Online Library on [09/12/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License Texas had the largest estimated turkey population, followed by Alabama, Kansas, Wisconsin, and Georgia (Table 2). Fifteen states reported increased populations since the 2009 survey. North Carolina had the greatest estimated increase at 73%, Merriam’s turkeys in Colorado increased by an estimated 35%, and both South Carolina and Delaware reported estimated population increases of 33% for eastern turkeys. Oregon estimated hybrid popula- tions to have increased by 67% (Rio Grande–Merriam hybrids) and Kansas by 29% (Rio Grande–Eastern hybrids). Nineteen states reported estimated decreased populations, with Rhode Island reporting the largest decline (45%; Table 3) followed by Pennsylvania (39%) and Missouri (30%). Six states reported increases in one or more subspecies but show an overall estimated decline in turkey numbers, bringing number of states reporting declines to 25. Washington reported an estimated decline of 57% within the eastern subspecies, and Merriam’s turkeys declined by an estimated 60% in South Dakota. No state reported a decline larger than 60% in any subspecies. Four states (Connecticut, Idaho, Iowa and Michigan) reported no change in turkey numbers. As described above, 5 states (California, Florida, South Dakota, Tennessee and Wash- ington) did not provide data on populations. Distribution Much of North America is occupied by turkeys (Fig. 1). All of the contiguous United States and Hawaii supported turkey populations, though habitat quality varied and some areas were not suitable for turkeys. Additionally, viable populations existed in Mexico and 6 Canadian provinces (Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Ontario and Quebec). Respondents estimated more than 3,883,117 km 2 in the United States to be inhabited by turkeys in 2014 (Table 4). Between 2009 and 2014, estimated range of turkeys in the United States reportedly increased by about 15%. Much of this increase was the result of 2 states, Illinois and Oklahoma, reporting occupied range for the first time in 2014, providing a complete range estimate for the contiguous 48 states and Hawaii. Discounting the increase resulting from Illinois and Oklahoma, occupied range increased by 241,885 km 2 between 2009 and 2014. Whether the remainder of this increase resulted from more accurate measurement of range or actual range expansion is unknown. Of 47 states reporting occupied range figures for both 2009 and 2014, 24 reported increases, 9 reported no change, and 14 reported decreases in occupied range. Restoration Fifteen states continued to have active trap and transfer programs, though most programs were limited. Utah, Texas, Nevada, North Dakota and Oregon had the most active trap and transfer programs in 2014. Texas was still completing restoration of eastern turkeys to east Texas, while the other states were moving turkeys to suitable but unoccupied range. Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, Maine, Michigan, New Mexico, New Jersey, Tennessee and West Virginia moved limited numbers of turkeys within their Table 1. Estimates of wild turkey populations by subspecies in the United States, 2009 and 2014, based on survey data submitted from state wildlife agencies. Subspecies 2009 a 2009 a without California 2014 c Eastern 4,830,633 to 5,003,633 4,544,876 to 4,684,876 Florida N/A b 114,649 Rio Grande 1,063,706 to 1,065,806 821,706 to 823,806 853,447 Merriam’s 336,000 to 344,000 334,000 to 340,000 262,311 Gould’s 1,150 to 1,250 1,200 Hybrid 293,200 to 293,500 296,581 Total 6,524,689 to 6,708,189 6,280,689 to 6,462,189 d 6,072,984 to 6,212,984 a Tapley et al. (2011). b N/A = not available. c Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, and New York survey and harvest data were used as a basis for a derived constant (0.131) in population estimates for Florida, South Dakota, Tennessee and Washington. d 2009 totals were adjusted for a better comparison of nationwide numbers because California failed to provide data in 2014. Table 2. Top 20 states in the United States with largest estimated wild turkey populations in 2014, based on survey data submitted from state wildlife agencies. This does not include California, for which data were not available. State Population Texas 508,500 Alabama 400,000 to 450,000 Kansas 350,000 Wisconsin 350,000 Georgia 335,000 Missouri 317,000 North Carolina 260,000 Mississippi 225,000 to 275,000 Tennessee 248,748 Kentucky 220,000 Michigan 200,000 Pennsylvania 210,235 New York 180,000 Virginia 175,000 Ohio 165,000 Florida 152,534 Iowa 150,000 Nebraska 144,733 Oklahoma 136,000 Arkansas 130,000 to 140,000 Status and Distribution of Wild Turkeys Eriksen et al. 9 23285540, 2015, S1, Downloaded from https://wildlife.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/j.2328-5540.2015.tb00375.x by University Of Florida, Wiley Online Library on [09/12/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License Table 3. Estimates of wild turkey populations by state in the United States, 2009 and 2014, based on survey data submitted from state wildlife agencies. Population estimate State Subspecies 2009 a 2014 % change Alabama Eastern 500,000 400,000 to 450,000 N/A b Arizona Rio Grande 100 200 100% Merriam’s 35,000 30,000 –14% Gould’s 1,000 1,200 20% Hybrid N/A 200 N/A Arkansas Eastern 115,000 130,000 to 140,000 13% California Rio Grande 242,000 N/A N/A Merriam’s 2,000 to 4,000 N/A N/A Colorado Rio Grande 5,000 3,500 –30% Merriam’s 20,000 27,000 35% Connecticut Eastern 35,000 35,000 0% Delaware Eastern 4,500 6,000 33% Florida Eastern N/A 37,885 c N/A Osceola N/A 114,649 c N/A Georgia Eastern 300,000 335,000 12% Hawaii Rio Grande N/A N/A N/A Idaho Hybrid 30,000 30,000 0% Illinois Eastern N/A 103,153 N/A Indiana Eastern 130,000 110,000 –15% Iowa Eastern 150,000 150,000 0% Kansas Eastern 85,000 87,500 3% Rio Grande 215,000 175,000 –19% Hybrid 68,000 87,500 29% Kentucky Eastern 200,000 220,000 10% Louisiana Eastern 80,000 60,000 –25% Maine Eastern 40,000 to 60,000 50,000 to 60,000 25% Maryland Eastern 32,000 33,000 3% Massachusetts Eastern 21,000 to 27,000 30,000 43% Michigan Eastern 200,000 200,000 0% Minnesota Eastern 75,000 85,000 13% Mississippi Eastern 227,203 225,000 to 275,000 –1% Missouri Eastern 450,000 317,000 –30% Montana Merriam’s 135,000 120,000 –11% Nebraska Hybrid 175,000 144,733 –17% Nevada Rio Grande 1,700 1,200 –29% New Hampshire Eastern 45,000 35,000 –22% New Jersey Eastern 22,000 23,000 5% New Mexico Rio Grande 2,000 to 2,500 N/A N/A Merriam’s 25,000 to 30,000 14,458 –42% Gould’s 150 to 250 N/A N/A Hybrid 200 to 500 N/A N/A New York Eastern 250,000 to 300,000 180,000 –28% North Carolina Eastern 150,000 260,000 73% North Dakota Eastern N/A N/A N/A Merriam’s N/A N/A N/A Hybrid 15,656 22,588 44% Ohio Eastern 200,000 165,000 –18% Oklahoma Eastern 18,000 19,000 6% Rio Grande 120,000 117,000 –3% Oregon Rio Grande 42,000 35,000 –17% Hybrid 3,000 5,000 67% Pennsylvania Eastern 345,300 210,235 –39% Rhode Island Eastern 5,500 3,000 –45% South Carolina Eastern 90,000 120,000 33% South Dakota Eastern 11,500 13,126 c 14% Rio Grande 1,500 N/A N/A Merriam’s 80,000 32,136 c –60% Hybrid 10,000 N/A N/A 10 Policy and Management 23285540, 2015, S1, Downloaded from https://wildlife.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/j.2328-5540.2015.tb00375.x by University Of Florida, Wiley Online Library on [09/12/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License states to initiate populations, supplement areas where declines had occurred, or transfer turkeys into unoccupied isolated ranges. During 2013, only 1,832 turkeys were moved between and within states. Some states plan to continue to maintain ability to trap and transfer turkeys to supplement populations or to reduce conflicts in suburban areas. Remaining states indicated that their restoration efforts were completed. Tapley et al. (2007) may be consulted for prior restoration history. Harvest Estimated harvest was 103,697 during fall 2013 and 665,928 during spring 2014 (Table 5). Combined spring and fall harvest for 2013–2104 was 769,625 turkeys, a decrease of 45,503 compared to 2009 estimated harvest (Tapley et al. 2011; 5.6% decrease). Nationwide, spring harvest declined by 2.6% and fall harvest declined by 20.8% from 2009 levels. Missouri reported greatest spring harvest (47,603), followed by Georgia (44,106), Pennsyl- vania (41,260) and Alabama (40,600). Rhode Island (113) and Nevada (61) reported least spring harvests. Spring harvests were estimated to decrease in 30 states and increase in 14 states. Delaware and North Carolina reported greatest estimated increases in spring harvest (120% and 34%, respectively). New York (54%) and Rhode Island (45%) reported largest declines in spring harvest. Of 49 states reporting occupied range, 4 states reported spring harvests of at least 1 turkey per 2.6 km 2 . Pennsylvania was greatest (1.28/km 2 ), followed by New Jersey (1.18/km 2 ), Alabama (1.16/km 2 ) and Georgia (1.16/km 2 ; Table 6). Forty-two states reported a fall turkey hunting season in 2013 (Table 5). Fall turkey hunting is a long standing tradition in some states, but is a relatively new opportunity for hunters in others. Texas reported greatest estimated fall harvest (19,066), followed by Pennsylvania with a harvest of 16,755 turkeys. Mississippi and Rhode Island reported smallest estimated number of fall turkeys taken, with harvests of 50 and 8, respectively. Fall harvests increased in 10 states but decreased in 23 states between 2008 and 2013. Seven states reported no fall season and 9 states failed to provide fall harvest figures. Maine had the largest increase in estimated fall harvest (219%), as popularity of that season grew. Indiana and Rhode Island instituted fall seasons between 2004 and 2009. No state initiated a fall hunting season between 2009 and 2014. Seven states that held spring seasons maintained closed fall seasons in 2014. Hunter Numbers Respondents estimated number of turkey hunters during fall 2013 and spring 2014 hunting seasons at 2.66 million. This compares to an estimated 2.64 million turkey hunters in 2009, representing a 0.57% increase in turkey hunter numbers between 2009 and 2014 (Table 7). Spring 2014 hunters totaled an estimated 2,006,134, with Pennsylvania (230,275) and Missouri (148,913) having greatest number of spring hunters. Rhode Island (1,349) and Nevada (117) reported fewest spring hunters. Between 2009 and 2014, spring hunter numbers decreased in 27 states and increased in 17 states. Minnesota reported the largest increase in spring hunter numbers (77%). Mississippi spring hunter numbers increased by 55% and spring hunter numbers in Delaware increased by 46%. The largest decreases in spring hunter numbers were reported in New York (33%) and Nevada (57%). Table 3. Continued. Population estimate State Subspecies 2009 a 2014 % change Tennessee Eastern 310,000 248,748 c –20% Texas Eastern 8,000 to 10,000 8,000 0% Rio Grande 450,000 500,000 11% Merriam’s 500 500 0% Utah Rio Grande 20,000 to 23,000 10,350 –48% Merriam’s N/A b 7,590 N/A Hybrid N/A 5,060 N/A Vermont Eastern 50,000 to 55,000 30,000 to 50,000 –40% Virginia Eastern 150,000 175,000 17% Washington Eastern 530 229 c –57% Rio Grande 7,700 8,397 c 9% Merriam’s 33,000 19,847 c –40% Hybrid N/A N/A N/A West Virginia Eastern 100,000 90,000 –10% Wisconsin Eastern 360,000 to 450,000 350,000 –3% Wyoming Rio Grande 4,300 2,700 –37% Merriam’s 17,300 10,800 –38% Hybrid 2,400 1,500 –38% Total 6,524,689 to 6,708,189 6,072,984 to 6,212,984 a Tapley et al. (2011). b N/A = not available. c Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, and New York survey and harvest data were used as a basis for a derived constant (0.131) in population estimates for Florida, South Dakota, Tennessee and Washington. Status and Distribution of Wild Turkeys Eriksen et al. 11 23285540, 2015, S1, Downloaded from https://wildlife.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/j.2328-5540.2015.tb00375.x by University Of Florida, Wiley Online Library on [09/12/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License Number of turkey hunters participating in the fall 2013 season increased an estimated 10.4% to 657,013 from a 2008 fall total of 595,110. Pennsylvania and Wisconsin reported greatest numbers of fall hunters, with 199,088 and 57,840 hunters, respectively. Rhode Island (125) and Mississippi (200) had fewest fall turkey hunters. Between 2008 and 2013, fall turkey hunter numbers increased in 11 states and decreased in 19 states. New Mexico had the largest increase in estimated fall hunter numbers (159%). DISCUSSION Turkeys made a remarkable comeback during active restoration projects and shortly after becoming reestab- lished. Exponential growth occurred during latter years of the 20th century and continued into the early part of the first decade of the 21st century (Kennamer and Kennamer 1995; Tapley et al. 2001, 2007, 2011). As the century approached its second decade, most states had completed restoration efforts and turkey populations appeared to stabilize or decline. This stable to downward trend seems to have continued, although current turkey numbers are estimated to be 6.0–6.2 million turkeys, still a significant accomplishment since Mosby (1959). The 49 states with turkey populations all have a spring hunting season and 42 states have a fall season. No new seasons were established in the past 5 years, although Maryland recently instituted a short winter season during January 2015. A comparison of 2014 population data to data from 2009 indicated an estimated decline of between 250,999 and 293,899 turkeys (3.96–4.52%) nationwide. It must be noted that no 2014 population data for California were available for developing these estimates. Over the past 10 years, turkey populations may have declined 5.96–7.52%, thus reducing by half increases of 1.2–1.4 million turkeys reported between 1999 and 2004 (Kennamer and Kennamer 1996, Tapley et al. 2001), returning populations to levels reminiscent of the mid-1990s. Turkey managers and researchers have noted this trend and are developing research to address causes and initiate more uniform survey and data collection techniques (e.g., Byrne et al. 2015, Casalena et al. 2015). Estimated harvest (spring and fall) decreased by 5.5%. Two states with least reported harvests (Nevada and Rhode Figure 1. Estimated distribution of wild turkeys by subspecies and ocellated turkeys ( Meleagris ocellata ) in 2014. Data from the United States based on survey data submitted from state wildlife agencies. Distribution of wild turkeys and ocellated turkeys in Mexico is based on Lafon and Schemnitz (1996) and Gonzales et al. (1996). 12 Policy and Management 23285540, 2015, S1, Downloaded from https://wildlife.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/j.2328-5540.2015.tb00375.x by University Of Florida, Wiley Online Library on [09/12/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License Island) are both limited by extent of suitable habitat and occupied range. Four states reported harvests of at least 1 turkey per 2.6 km 2 of occupied range. Variations in number of turkeys killed per square kilometer could be a result of season length and structure, bag limits, hunting hours, habitat quality, or available suitable habitat. Estimated number of hunters increased by less than 1% in the 5-year reporting period. Although small, this increase may have helped to reduce impact of an estimated 1% decrease in hunters observed between 2004 and 2009 (Tapley et al. 2011). However, it should be noted that a decrease in hunter numbers of 6% was reported between 1999 and 2004 (Tapley et al. 2007), thus appearing to continue a trend of declining hunter numbers. This trend could be related to turkey population declines perceived by hunters. Turkey hunters in the 21st century have continued to enjoy fruits of successful reintroductions, relatively stable turkey populations, and expanded acreage of occupied range. However, turkey numbers appear to have declined to some degree over fairly wide expanses of their range. Biologists charged with managing this charismatic species will need to standardize collection of population data, continue to monitor trends, determine limiting factors, and be prepared to adjust harvest rates through modification of season structures, bag limits and season lengths as needed. For example, a declining trend in spring gobbler harvest prompted Arkansas biologists to recommend closing the fall turkey season until populations recover. Also, the management plan for turkeys in Pennsylvania provides guidelines for reducing fall season length if a 3-year decline in spring harvest is observed within a wildlife management unit (Casalena 2006). MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS State agency managers should begin to standardize population data collection methodologies to assure that data are comparable among states and year to year. Standardized data collection and analyses will allow documenting regional trends and may provide a basis for evaluating trends and determining possible causes for declines observed over the past decade. Continued monitoring is of the utmost importance to detect changes in population trends. We encourage state wildlife agencies to devote increased resources to turkey research and management; this will require overcoming the view that turkey populations are fully restored and that funding is better spent elsewhere (see Porter et al. 2011). Analyses of population and harvest trends, hunter numbers, and other parameters will allow agency biologists to recommend harvest strategies that will provide for sustainable use of this valuable resource. Continued declines in turkey populations may cause hunter numbers to continue to decline and interest in hunting to decline (Porter et al. 2011). Hunter contributions to state agency budgets and local economies are considerable and form the basis for most wildlife conservation activities in the United States (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2011). If turkey population trends are determined to be habitat-related, agencies and their partners will need to work toward enhancing habitat conditions for turkeys. Table 4. Estimated occupied range by wild turkeys by state in the United States, 2009 and 2014, based on survey data submitted from state wildlife agencies. 2009 a 2014 State Km 2 Mile 2 Km 2 Mile 2 Alabama 101,010 39,000 101,010 39,000 Arizona 33,346 12,875 33,346 12,875 Arkansas 116,550 45,000 76,041 29,360 California c 75,545 29,168 104,149 40,212 Colorado 49,210 19,000 68,189 26,328 Connecticut 9,420 3,637 9,420 3,637 Delaware 4,144 1,600 4,144 1,600 Florida 125,441 48,433 81,942 31,638 Georgia 102,587 39,609 98,777 38,138 Hawaii 4,271 1,649 4,197 1,621 Idaho 38,721 14,950 38,850 15,000 Illinois N/A b N/A 117,172 45,240 Indiana 85,470 33,000 84,788 32,737 Iowa 40,445 15,616 72,024 27,809 Kansas 66,480 25,668 213,096 82,277 Kentucky 78,032 30,128 102,268 39,486 Louisiana 77,700 30,000 45,765 17,670 Maine 58,951 22,761 39,440 15,228 Maryland 11,655 4,500 11,655 4,500 Massachusetts 11,810 4,560 12,497 4,825 Michigan 124,701 48,147 150,515 58,114 Minnesota 138,456 53,458 160,320 61,900 Mississippi 109,516 42,284 124,148 47,934 Missouri 61,888 23,895 176,596 68,184 Montana 51,800 20,000 51,800 20,000 Nebraska 103,600 40,000 105,466 40,721 Nevada 2,598 1,003 2,598 1,003 New Hampshire 18,840 7,274 18,130 7,000 New Jersey 6,112 2,360 6,967 2,690 New Mexico 93,240 36,000 77,409 29,888 New York 70,500 27,200 69,930 27,000 North Carolina 90,881 35,089 116,827 45,107 North Dakota 20,720 8,000 28,703 11,082 Ohio 77,700 30,000 82,340 31,792 Oklahoma N/A N/A 156,604 60,465 Oregon 90,650 35,000 99,579 38,448 Pennsylvania 117,332 45,302 117,332 45,302 Rhode Island 1,554 600 1,813 700 South Carolina 56,980 22,000 56,980 22,000 South Dakota 61,383 23,700 54,871 21,186 Tennessee 102,598 39,613 103,600 40,000 Texas 384,278 148,370 373,129 144,066 Utah 28,000 10,811 30,839 11,907 Vermont 23,310 9,000 24,308 9,385 Virginia 64,623 24,951 92,890 35,865 Washington 103,600 40,000 48,496 18,724 West Virginia 59,283 22,889 58,534 22,600 Wisconsin 169,653 65,503 126,909 49,000 Wyoming 42,872 16,553 46,715 18,037 Total 3,367,456 1,300,156 3,883,117 1,499,280 a Tapley et. al. (2011). b N/A = not available. c California range data was estimated by National Wild Turkey Federation Staff as California did not submit data. Status and Distribution of Wild Turkeys Eriksen et al. 13 23285540, 2015, S1, Downloaded from https://wildlife.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/j.2328-5540.2015.tb00375.x by University Of Florida, Wiley Online Library on [09/12/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License Table 5. Estimated number of wild turkeys harvested in spring and fall hunting seasons by state in the United States, 2008–2009 and 2013–2014, based on survey data submitted from state wildlife agencies. 2008–2009 a 2013–2014 % change State Fall (2008) Spring (2009) Total Fall (2013) Spring (2014) Total Fall Spring Total Alabama N/A b 36,300 N/A N/A 40,600 c N/A N/A 12% N/A Arizona 902 1,110 2,012 1,007 740 1,747 12% –33% –13% Arkansas 506 11,122 11,628 N/A 9,122 9,122 N/A –18% –22% California 7,033 23,398 30,431 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Colorado N/A 3,500 3,500 700 4,100 4,800 N/A 17% 37% Connecticut 211 1,502 1,713 107 1,118 1,225 –49% –26% –28% Delaware N/S d 312 312 N/S 687 687 N/A 120% 120% Florida N/A 27,296 27,296 N/A 19,982 19,982 N/A –27% –27% Georgia N/S 45,294 45,294 N/S 44,106 44,106 N/A –3% –3% Hawaii N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Idaho 2,080 2,429 4,509 2,000 3,100 5,100 –4% 28% 13% Illinois N/A N/A N/A 1,191 13,513 14,704 N/A N/A N/A Indiana 639 12,993 13,632 615 10,872 11,487 –4% –16% –16% Iowa 1,400 15,000 16,400 703 11,401 12,104 –50% –24% –26% Kansas 4,871 33,350 38,221 3,600 31,400 35,000 –26% –6% –8% Kentucky N/A N/A N/A 2,678 29,924 32,602 N/A N/A N/A Louisiana N/S 9,000 9,000 N/S 10,100 10,100 N/A 12% 12% Maine 684 5,766 6,450 2,182 6,553 8,735 219% 14% 35% Maryland 215 2,910 3,125 157 3,334 3,491 –27% 15% 12% Massachusetts 158 3,072 3,230 200 2,750 2,950 27% –10% –9% Michigan 5,000 40,000 45,000 6,064 31,377 37,441 21% –22% –17% Minnesota 1,187 12,210 13,397 1,078 11,447 12,525 –9% –6% –7% Mississippi 24 24,696 24,720 50 27,483 27,533 108% 11% 11% Missouri 9,875 44,713 54,588 8,477 47,603 56,080 –14% 6% 3% Montana 2,640 2,900 5,540 1,833 2,629 4,462 –31% –9% –19% Nebraska 8,800 22,000 30,800 6,748 18,960 25,708 –23% –14% –17% Nevada 29 248 277 N/S 61 61 N/A –75% –78% New Hampshire 503 4,056 4,559 855 3,885 4,740 70% –4% 4% New Jersey 164 3,387 3,551 130 3,046 3,176 –21% –10% –11% New Mexico N/A N/A N/A 335 1,896 2,231 N/A N/A N/A New York 11,600 34,600 46,200 3,300 15,900 19,200 –72% –54% –58% North Carolina 98 e 12,579 12,677 N/S 16,912 16,912 N/A 34% 33% North Dakota 2,632 2,051 4,683 1,012 1,947 2,959 –62% –5% –37% Ohio 2,139 20,710 22,849 1,037 16,568 17,605 –52% –20% –23% Oklahoma 2,750 26,000 28,750 3,385 22,394 25,779 23% –14% –10% Oregon 835 4,575 5,410 692 3,878 4,570 –17% –15% –16% Pennsylvania 24,288 46,137 70,425 16,755 41,260 58,015 –31% –11% –18% Rhode Island 3 206 209 8 113 121 167% –45% –42% South Carolina N/S 16,234 16,234 N/S 19,211 19,211 N/A 18% 18% South Dakota 6,644 9,386 16,030 2,350 5,884 8,234 –65% –37% –49% Tennessee 1,987 31,982 33,969 1,811 32,586 34,397 –9% 2% 1% Texas 19,181 19,531 38,712 19,066 19,941 39,007 –1% 2% 1% Utah N/S 2,374 2,374 N/S 2,295 2,295 N/A –3% –3% Vermont 790 6,104 6,894 608 5,157 5,765 –23% –16% –16% Virginia 3,505 16,661 20,166 5,351 17,582 22,933 53% 6% 14% Washington 848 4,123 4,971 1,150 3,730 4,880 36% –10% –2% West Virginia 1,206 9,929 11,135 1,014 9,014 10,028 –16% –9% –10% Wisconsin 10,698 52,581 63,279 4,633 37,804 42,437 –57% –28% –33% Wyoming 1,962 3,145 5,107 815 1,963 2,778 –58% –38% –46% Total 138,087 707,472 845,559 103,697 665,928 769,625 –25% –6% –9% a Tapley et al. (2011). b N/A = not available. c Spring of 2013. d N/S = no season. e Winter of 2009. 14 Policy and Management 23285540, 2015, S1, Downloaded from https://wildlife.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/j.2328-5540.2015.tb00375.x by University Of Florida, Wiley Online Library on [09/12/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License Table 6. Estimated turkey harvest per square kilometer and square mile by state in the United States for spring and fall seasons combined, 2013–2014, based on survey data submitted from state wildlife agencies. Total Occupied Range Harvest/Occupied Range State Harvest km 2 mile 2 km 2 mile 2 Alabama 40,600 101,010 39,000 0.40 1.04 Arizona 1,747 33,346 12,875 0.05 0.14 Arkansas 9,122 76,041 29,360 0.12 0.31 California N/A a 104,149 40,212 N/A N/A Colorado 4,800 68,189 26,328 0.07 0.18 Connecticut 1,225 9,420 3,637 0.13 0.34 Delaware 687 4,144 1,600 0.17 0.43 Florida 19,982 81,942 31,638 0.24 0.63 Georgia 44,106 98,777 38,138 0.45 1.16 Hawaii N/A 4,197 1,621 0.00 0.00 Idaho 5,100 38,850 15,000 0.13 0.34 Illinois 14,704 117,172 45,240 0.13 0.33 Indiana 11,487 84,788 32,737 0.14 0.35 Iowa 12,104 72,024 27,809 0.17 0.44 Kansas 35,000 213,096 82,277 0.16 0.43 Kentucky 32,602 102,268 39,486 0.32 0.83 Louisiana 10,100 45,765 17,670 0.22 0.57 Maine 8,735 39,440 15,228 0.22 0.57 Maryland 3,491 11,655 4,500 0.29 0.77 Massachusetts 2,950 12,497 4,825 0.24 0.61 Michigan 37,441 150,515 58,114 0.25 0.64 Minnesota 12,525 160,320 61,900 0.08 0.20 Mississippi 27,533 124,148 47,934 0.22 0.57 Missouri 56,080 176,596 68,184 0.32 0.82 Montana 4,462 51,800 20,000 0.09 0.22 Nebraska 25,708 105,466 40,721 0.24 0.63 Nevada 61 2,598 1,003 0.02 0.06 New Hampshire 4,740 18,130 7,000 0.26 0.68 New Jersey 3,176 6,967 2,690 0.46 1.18 New Mexico 2,231 77,409 29,888 0.03 0.07 New York 19,200 69,930 27,000 0.27 0.71 North Carolina 16,912 116,827 45,107 0.14 0.37 North Dakota 2,959 28,703 11,082 0.10 0.27 Ohio 17,605 82,340 31,792 0.21 0.55 Oklahoma 25,779 156,604 60,465 0.16 0.43 Oregon 4,570 99,579 38,448 0.05 0.12 Pennsylvania 58,015 117,332 45,302 0.49 1.28 Rhode Island 121 1,813 700 0.07 0.17 South Carolina 19,211 56,980 22,000 0.34 0.87 South Dakota 8,234 54,871 21,186 0.15 0.38 Tennessee 34,397 103,600 40,000 0.33 0.86 Texas 39,007 373,129 144,066 0.10 0.27 Utah 2,295 30,839 11,907 0.07 0.19 Vermont 5,765 24,308 9,385 0.24 0.61 Virginia 22,933 92,890 35,865 0.25 0.64 Washington 4,880 48,496 18,724 0.10 0.26 West Virginia 10,028 58,534 22,600 0.17 0.44 Wisconsin 42,437 126,909 49,000 0.33 0.87 Wyoming 2,778 46,715 18,037 0.06 0.15 a N/A = not available. Status and Distribution of Wild Turkeys Eriksen et al. 15 23285540, 2015, S1, Downloaded from https://wildlife.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/j.2328-5540.2015.tb00375.x by University Of Florida, Wiley Online Library on [09/12/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License Table 7. Estimated number of wild turkey hunters by state in the United States, 2008–2009 and 2013–2014, based on survey data submitted from state wildlife agencies. 2008–2009 2013–2014 % change State Fall Spring Total Fall Spring Total Fall Spring Total Alabama N/A a 57,700 61,800 N/A 53,100 55,700 N/A –8% –8% Arizona 4,667 6,108 10,775 4,104 5,315 9,419 –12% –13% –13% Arkansas 5,500 76,000 81,500 N/S b 75,000 75,000 N/S –1% –8% California 13,233 27,500 40,733 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Colorado 3,500 13,700 17,200 5,103 18,307 23,410 46% 34% 36% Connecticut 5,500 6,800 12,300 3,849 8,850 12,699 –30% 30% 3% Delaware NS 2,139 2,139 NS 3,117 3,117 NS 46% 46% Florida N/A 36,895 36,895 N/A 35,403 35,403 N/A –4% –4% Georgia NS 81,732 81,732 NS 69,380 69,380 NS –15% –15% Hawaii N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Idaho 5,700 10,700 16,400 4,300 c 9,800 d 14,100 –25% –8% –14% Illinois N/A N/A N/A 34,504 54,436 88,940 N/A N/A N/A Indiana 15,020 59,000 74,020 9,366 59,237 68,603 –38% 0% –7% Iowa 10,243 54,767 65,010 8,272 50,966 59,238 –19% –7% –9% Kansas 9,250 43,500 52,750 8,188 45,415 53,603 –11% 4% 2% Kentucky N/A N/A N/A 2,678 29,924 32,602 N/A N/A N/A Louisiana NS 20,250 20,250 NS 26,000 26,000 NS 28% 28% Maine 5,200 18,000 23,200 19,000 e 19,000 19,000 N/A 6% N/A Maryland 2,000 9,400 11,400 1,700 9,900 11,600 –15% 5% 2% Massachusetts N/A 16,440 16,440 N/A 21,000 21,000 N/A 28% 28% Michigan 20,818 121,205 142,023 32,394 103,969 136,363 56% –14% –4% Minnesota 4,981 31,942 36,923 8,200 56,404 64,604 65% 77% 75% Mississippi 150 30,557 30,707 200 47,251 47,451 33% 55% 55% Missouri 17,799 151,475 169,274 14,898 148,913 163,811 –16% –2% –3% Montana 5,170 6,590 11,760 4,359 5,749 10,108 –16% –13% –14% Nebraska 8,800 35,000 43,800 10,836 34,430 45,266 23% –2% 3% Nevada 91 273 364 N/S 117 117 N/S –57% –68% New Hampshire 4,000 19,260 23,260 10,000 19,000 29,000 150% –1% 25% New Jersey 2,600 11,500 14,100 870 11,900 12,770 –67% 3% –9% New Mexico 1,155 10,100 11,255 2,989 9,284 12,273 159% –8% 9% New York 70,000 112,000 182,0