37 percent sow harvest?

jejack26

Well-known member
Joined
May 21, 2018
Messages
382
Location
Montana
Anyone know how montana fwp came up with shooting bears as long as we stay below 37 % sow harvest? I went past harvest stats for areas that I hunt thinking it would make sense, but not connecting the dots.
 
That’s the number that the dart landed on.
Just kidding.
I’m sure it was determined by all of the data they collected from decades of research. FWP is famous for basing management decisions off solid data.
Or, Most likely, the MOGA told them that was the number to use.
 
Anyone know how montana fwp came up with shooting bears as long as we stay below 37 % sow harvest? I went past harvest stats for areas that I hunt thinking it would make sense, but not connecting the dots.
The data showed a decline in populations that had more than 37% female harvest. That was the "tipping point" of female harvest that was considered defensible if black bear hunting was attacked. If FWP/Commission went beyond what the studies told them, it would make it very ripe for groups to start suing our black bear seasons.
 
Interesting. We just adjust permits the following year if the sow% and or harvest level is high here in MN. Been keeping permits low to build the population for some years now.

Had a few"good years"....low harvest levels...lately think we might have things turned in the right direction.

Some high correlation between food abundance before and during the season here...poor foods=higher harvests.
 
The data showed a decline in populations that had more than 37% female harvest. That was the "tipping point" of female harvest that was considered defensible if black bear hunting was attacked. If FWP/Commission went beyond what the studies told them, it would make it very ripe for groups to start suing our black bear seasons.
I'm no biologist, but it seems like reducing the overall number of sows in the population would be just as much of a factor in population decline as percent sow harvest. Here in region 4, our spring harvest has increased about 45% over the long term average starting in 2021. That number would likely be higher if it wasn't for all the snow we had last year.

2016: 71 bears
2017: 79
2018: 70
2019: 81
2020: 76
2021: 122
2022: 111
2023: 70
2024: 133

Seeing how this commission likes to expand opportunity, and seeing how the historic sow harvest frequently hits 35-36% but very rarely hits 37%, its almost like they chose that number to ensure that most BMU's will stay open until June 15th every year. Hound hunting for bears is still new and its only going to get more popular every year. Between the hound hunting and the statewide season extension, it sure seems like a lot of expanded opportunity in a short amount of time. I'm predicting a population decline, at least in region 4.
 
I'm no biologist, but it seems like reducing the overall number of sows in the population would be just as much of a factor in population decline as percent sow harvest. Here in region 4, our spring harvest has increased about 45% over the long term average starting in 2021. That number would likely be higher if it wasn't for all the snow we had last year.

2016: 71 bears
2017: 79
2018: 70
2019: 81
2020: 76
2021: 122
2022: 111
2023: 70
2024: 133

Seeing how this commission likes to expand opportunity, and seeing how the historic sow harvest frequently hits 35-36% but very rarely hits 37%, its almost like they chose that number to ensure that most BMU's will stay open until June 15th every year. Hound hunting for bears is still new and its only going to get more popular every year. Between the hound hunting and the statewide season extension, it sure seems like a lot of expanded opportunity in a short amount of time. I'm predicting a population decline, at least in region 4.
I find interesting how big and all the different bear populations included within region 4.
 
Back
Top