Turkey hunters venturing on an out-of-state trip for the spring season will face new challenges in South Dakota in 2025.
A recent policy shift capped the number of spring turkey-hunting licenses for nonresidents in the Black Hills. The move reduces the total number of licenses available from an unlimited pool to 2,225.
Last year, the state issued 3,170 nonresident licenses under the unlimited system.
Many Minnesota turkey hunters flock to South Dakota every year, drawn by the Black Hills’ abundant gobbler population, scenic beauty, and the opportunity to tag the distinctive Merriam’s subspecies. But those turkeys and that beauty have drawn more hunters than South Dakota residents are willing to tolerate. Some residents have grumbled that there are more hunters than the turkey population can support.
RELATED COVERAGE FROM OUTDOOR NEWS:
The increasing nonresident demand and concern about declining turkey populations resulted in South Dakota hunters putting forth a petition and demanding a change. Dana Rogers, executive director of the South Dakota Wildlife Federation, summarized the sentiment.
“These are our public trust resources,” he testified to the South Dakota Game, Fish and Parks Commission in July. “We pay for everything year-round. We live here.”
The federation represents South Dakota resident hunters. The South Dakota Game, Fish and Parks Commission is a state body appointed by the governor and tasked with overseeing wildlife management.
Rogers and others point to data showing that nonresidents accounted for 69% of the spring turkey harvest in the Black Hills last year. The 2,225-license cap the commission endorsed was a compromise. Some resident proponents pushed for a limit as low as 1,000.

Mandatory reporting
The turkey population is not the only wildlife-management challenge South Dakotans are grappling with these days.
Residents more recently petitioned to mandate big-game harvest reporting due to concerns about the state’s pronghorn and mule deer populations being below target levels.
Mandatory reporting, proponents argue, would provide accurate, real-time data essential for sustainable management of those species. Voluntary harvest surveys, which inform population estimates and license allocations, suffer from declining participation rates, with less than half of hunters responding, proponents argued.
MORE COVERAGE FROM OUTDOOR NEWS:
John Tertuliani: River fishing one last time before winter sets in is good for the soul
Commentary: In Congress’ final days, wildlife, outdoor recreation legislation sent to president
Outdoor Insights: Can Minnesota legislators remember what compromise means this upcoming session?
However, despite strong resident support for mandatory reporting, the GF&P Commission opted to deny the proposal. Members cited logistical concerns and claimed that existing voluntary systems are robust.
Game, Fish and Parks Department staff noted they are working on an electronic tagging system, set to launch in 2026, that would improve data accuracy without imposing mandatory requirements.
The new “tags” would exist online, and hunters would log onto the department’s website or app to report when the tag has been filled – effectively implementing mandatory reporting. Hunters are currently required to attach a physical, non-electronic tag to harvested big game such as deer.
South Dakota is one of only a handful of states without mandatory big-game harvest reporting.
Public access milestone
The calls for mandatory reporting and capping nonresident turkey licenses all fit within South Dakota’s broader conservation initiatives. And while news of capped licenses and soon having to learn a new licensing system is unlikely to have nonresidents celebrating, one new initiative is.
In November, South Dakota achieved a milestone in its public access programs. The state has now secured public access to 1.6 million acres of private land for hunting and other outdoor activities.
The state has set a new goal of 2 million acres.
Most of the acres are tied to the Walk-In Area program, which pays landowners for public access. In South Dakota, when the program is stacked on top of a habitat-improvement program such as the federal Conservation Reserve Program – which pays landowners to rent some of their private land for conservation – the acres become Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program acres. Those acres are some of the best public hunting the state has to offer.
In the long term, South Dakota’s recent shifts may lead to healthier turkey populations and better hunting experiences for everyone. For now, they serve as a reminder that hunting, like any other use of natural resources, requires careful management and a willingness to adapt.
But whether it’s through data-driven decision-making or expanded public access programs, future adaptations and management decisions will be influenced most by the people who show up. That’s something South Dakota residents continue to learn.
About me
To Outdoor News readers wondering who I am, my name is Joshua Haiar and I’m looking forward to contributing South Dakota news to this publication regularly.
Born and raised in the southeastern part of South Dakota, I grew up hunting and fishing. I joined the Navy as a public affairs specialist after high school and later earned a degree from the University of South Dakota.
I report full-time for South Dakota Searchlight, covering a range of topics including conservation efforts, wildlife management, and outdoor recreation policies.
4 thoughts on “South Dakota limits number of Black Hills nonresident turkey tags”
Tell Minnesota residents to vote for the good guys and maybe they will stay home more.
Please get your facts straight before writing an article that gives the appearance that SD residents aren’t welcoming to our NR friends.
We love our NR friends and family, but our BH turkey numbers are far from “abundant”. If you are a serious turkey hunter in the black hills, you’ve been “grumbling” for 6-10 years as you watch the turkey population continually fall to the decimally low numbers we have now due to several factors, one of them being over hunting. Don’t believe me? Ask the GFP to show stats of lower and lower success harvest %’s over the years and ask about the population decline in the northern hills.
Residents have given up opportunity in the BH by eliminating the second tag option, but NR didn’t have any sort of limitations up until now.
It’s refreshing to see the SD GFP put the turkeys in the #1 seat and not the $$ NR dollar that we’ve seen in the past.
Again, as a guide that LOVES providing opportunity to NR hunters, I feel like this is a step in the right direction to save our BH turkey numbers.
Has anyone heard of Oregon state? Seriously the best kept secret in all of turkey hunting. You guys should write an article on this state. The residents there are typically happy that you’re there hunting turkeys. Turkeys galore, plenty of tags, beautiful scenery. Hard to beat!
I completely agree with Foster! SDGFP favors nonresident more times than not. Just look at the pheasant and waterfowl hunting/guiding in this state. It’s nice to see them finally putting the turkeys population first. I’ve been hunting turkeys in the Hills ever since I moved to SD from MN in 2000. I’ve NEVER seen the population this low and the hunter #’s so high. It makes for a bad experience for everyone.
The turkey population took a giant hit in the October blizzard in 2012 that killed 1000’s of cattle and the wildlife took even bigger hit. Add to that they didn’t decrease the number of tags when needed to help the turkey population rebound after several bad recruitment years (due to large hail storms in early June killing the poults). It’s great to see that SDGFP is putting the turkeys first and not the $. Let the population rebound and then they can relook at it. Otherwise they will completely crash like the walleyes on Red and Mille Lacs!