Below average hunter numbers and harvest???

[Jape]

Saw this article today and it seems as though they try to equate the number of hunters to the total harvest. They base the number of hunters off those who stopped at the checkpoint, which seems problematic to me. While elk numbers may or may not be down due to management techniques, the experience of many on here in attempting to get tags this year does not comport with their conclusions.

Bad weather, fewer hunters lead to decade's smallest elk harvest along Rocky Mountain Front

A combination of unseasonable storms, low hunter turn out leads to smallest Montana elk harvest in decades.

www.greatfallstribune.com

 

[R.K.]

I didn't even see an active checkpoint this year- and I hunted A BUNCH.

 

[Wildabeest]

I saw one checkpoint in MT just south of Gallatin Gateway as you come out of the gorge. Passed it 4 times over a week, and there was never anyone there. Just a sign saying all hunters must stop.

 

[d-edward]

Another example of FWP using narrow, distorted KPIs to inaccurately assess hunt participation and success. Bad data leads to bad decision making for wildlife management.

 

[Jape]

Another example of FWP using narrow, distorted KPIs to inaccurately assess hunt participation and success. Bad data leads to bad decision making for wildlife management.

Exactly my thoughts. What’s most shocking to me is how FWP buries their head in the sand like the problems will magically fix themselves.

 

[d-edward]

Exactly my thoughts. What’s most shocking to me is how FWP buries their head in the sand like the problems will magically fix themselves.

It's just that these types of season progress reports frustrate me. I don't want to turn this into another bash FWP thread, but the numbers and observations in the article aren't any more accurate than my anecdotal observations while out hunting this fall.

Was it a tough fall to find animals? For me, yes. Did I see fewer hunters than in the last few years? Not really.

As @Wildabeast points out, check stations are only open and manned periodically. There are often not check stations in the places I hunt. If they truly want to increase the accuracy of these reports, they need to sample more hunters afield and need to mandate harvest reporting.

 

[sdkhunter]

Exactly my thoughts. What’s most shocking to me is how FWP buries their head in the sand like the problems will magically fix themselves.

Agree. Unfortunaly as more state game departments are cash strapped - especailly with the movemens in many states to reduce the amount of higher priced non-resident tags, managment goals seem to include finicial goals more and more.

 

[Jape]

And I’m careful not to point the finger if I haven’t formulated some solutions but the report just seemed so disingenuous.

 

[WyoDoug]

I believe it. But I also attribute smaller than average success rates to be a combination of the following:

• Drought - with extreme drought conditions, fewer young are produced and surviving extreme hot summer severe winter conditions
• Overcrowding - I saw more hunters on one ridge during my elk hunt than I ever seen in my lifetime. You could not go 100 yards without seeing orange moving around. With the internet, people talk about the "hot" areas and then the following years you see a huge influx of hunters putting in for that area.
• Habitat loss due to development, another reason to support local conservation efforts

 

[BuzzH]

I believe it. But I also attribute smaller than average success rates to be a combination of the following:

• Drought - with extreme drought conditions, fewer young are produced and surviving extreme hot summer severe winter conditions
• Overcrowding - I saw more hunters on one ridge during my elk hunt than I ever seen in my lifetime. You could not go 100 yards without seeing orange moving around. With the internet, people talk about the "hot" areas and then the following years you see a huge influx of hunters putting in for that area.
• Habitat loss due to development, another reason to support local conservation efforts

Really? How much time did you spend hunting Montana?

 

[SAJ-99]

Another example of FWP using narrow, distorted KPIs to inaccurately assess hunt participation and success. Bad data leads to bad decision making for wildlife management.

I don't think they use the data for that purpose. More accurate data is collected in the phone-call process after the season is over. That said, no system is perfect.

 

[d-edward]

I don't think they use the data for that purpose. More accurate data is collected in the phone-call process after the season is over. That said, no system is perfect.

Definitely agree that the postseason surveys are a more accurate measure, but there's nothing compulsory about answering the calls from the nice old ladies doing the surveys when they call in the evening, either. Again, it's just an incomplete picture.

And I think I saw in another thread here that there are some aspects of wildlife management that are being made prior to the completion of those post-season surveys because the perceived harvest is low.

 

[Dan O]

The Augusta check station was open the entire rifle season. It seems to run 24/7 from what I have seen over the years. The early storms did push a number of Elk onto the game range prior to rifle season. They did limit the number of area 425 cow tags this year to about half of what they have in the past. Bull tags stayed the same at 5. I was told the last active bull tag holder had the last week reserved on the Cobb ranch. According to the article all bull tags were filled. I don't know if it came off private or the game range. I saw about 600 head of elk on the game range one afternoon. Also saw a number of small MD bucks and does. Saw quite a few WT does also and a nice 5x5 on private. I also watched a 5x5 whitetail buck in the town of Augusta that had something wrong. He would make a tight circle to his left and then try to lick his left hind quarter. He did this around 40 or 50 times while I watched him. He did have some hair tuffed up like he had been in fight with another buck. I reported this to the check station and they were going to have a warden try to locate him. They said a guy had wounded a buck in the shotgun area just out of town. The gal at the check station did say they were concerned about CWD but had no reports of it in the area to date.

 

[stealthy_bowman]

I think that is a super miopic view. Where I was in region 3, hunter participation and harvest was off the charts.
We started in one end of a unit that was absolutely packed with hunters, however that particular area was devoid of elk. So we tried to move to another area of the unit and literally every possible camp site was taken. So we then decided to move all the way to the opposite end of unit, which was a good 1.5 hour drive and the trail head there had over 50 rigs. Yes I said 50. We managed to find one spot left where we could set up camp.
Furthermore, that morning, it seems like every elk in the unit went through the area. Literally the whole camp was tagged out by the time we got there at 12:30 on opening day. Guys stating that hundreds of elk moved through the area. An elk was also shot by a guy while in the camp itself. By the time the evening rolled around, only 3 rigs were left as everyone went home with elk. We were late to the party and missed out, but such is life.
Even so, I have no interest in going back to an area with that much pressure. At least from my point of view, hunter participation was way higher and so was the elk kill and I hunted that same unit last year as a point of reference. That said, making a generalization from my experience, in just one unit, for the whole of MT would be foolish as I have no idea what the scene was like in even the adjacent unit.

 

[SAJ-99]

there's nothing compulsory about answering the calls from the nice old ladies doing the surveys when they call in the evening, either. Again, it's just an incomplete picture.

A "complete" picture is logistically (cost and implementation) impossible. Statistical collection methods allow them to make an accurate guess. Agree, you don't have to answer the call, but they can move on to the next random number on the list. Once they get an adequate sample size, they can move forward. Then they might apply adjusts for people just blatantly lying or cross reference with the other collected data points. Every hunter is supposed to stop at those check stations, but we know not everyone does. They are also pretty sparse. I went out of my way to check in a deer I took and the FWP guy was surprised I went a mile out of my way.

I like some other states' methods a little better, but none are perfect. Is the method they use for waterfowl better where they ask how many days you hunted and how many you shot? To your point, that data isn't used to set the current season but should give a better picture, albeit in rearview mirror, of hunting/harvest trends. Just not sure what the solution is.

 

[d-edward]

A "complete" picture is logistically (cost and implementation) impossible. Statistical collection methods allow them to make an accurate guess. Agree, you don't have to answer the call, but they can move on to the next random number on the list. Once they get an adequate sample size, they can move forward. Then they might apply adjusts for people just blatantly lying or cross reference with the other collected data points. Every hunter is supposed to stop at those check stations, but we know not everyone does. They are also pretty sparse. I went out of my way to check in a deer I took and the FWP guy was surprised I went a mile out of my way.

I like some other states' methods a little better, but none are perfect. Is the method they use for waterfowl better where they ask how many days you hunted and how many you shot? To your point, that data isn't used to set the current season but should give a better picture, albeit in rearview mirror, of hunting/harvest trends. Just not sure what the solution is.

No argument here on your first point. There are absolutely fiscal, temporal and logistical challenges to gaining a complete picture.

What I’m critiquing is the approach to data collection that the accuracy today is “Meh, good enough.” There are ways to work with the above constraints and automate elements of data gathering that helps with understanding overall participation and success.

Mandatory questionnaire at POS when applying or purchasing next year’s tag, collecting success rates using BMA rosters when hunters leave the property... I’m sure there are far better ideas than what I have. It’s the apathetic approach to improving wildlife counts and hunter success rates given how important they are to tag distribution and season setting that disappoints me.

 

[d-edward]

A "complete" picture is logistically (cost and implementation) impossible. Statistical collection methods allow them to make an accurate guess. Agree, you don't have to answer the call, but they can move on to the next random number on the list. Once they get an adequate sample size, they can move forward. Then they might apply adjusts for people just blatantly lying or cross reference with the other collected data points. Every hunter is supposed to stop at those check stations, but we know not everyone does. They are also pretty sparse. I went out of my way to check in a deer I took and the FWP guy was surprised I went a mile out of my way.

I like some other states' methods a little better, but none are perfect. Is the method they use for waterfowl better where they ask how many days you hunted and how many you shot? To your point, that data isn't used to set the current season but should give a better picture, albeit in rearview mirror, of hunting/harvest trends. Just not sure what the solution is.

I should add: kudos to you for going out of your way to stop at the check station.

 

[SAJ-99]

I should add: kudos to you for going out of your way to stop at the check station.

I came from a state where it was mandatory to check in a killed deer at a check station. That is impossible in MT because the season is so long and you can't staff check stations every day for the whole season due to costs. The MT check station data should be taken with a grain of salt. It is mostly useless. Mostly a customer service function and collecting age data. I think a web-based check in would be a step in the right direction, but FWP would need to run dual statistical collection methods for a few years to see what adjustments need to be made to old data. The bottom line is that people will still complain and every view is largely based on anecdotal experiences. As was pointed out on previous post, if you see a lot of elk on a hunt, you conclude there is plenty. If you hunt for 5 days and don't see anything but orange there are too many permits issued and too few elk. I think mid-winter flights are a pretty accurate way to count big game. The question then becomes accessibility.

 

[BuzzH]

Mid winter flights are a joke and the fwp ignores them if they don't find enough animals. They blame weather and that piece of shit helicopter for poor counts.

 

[buck137]

What they should do, is recruit places, like bars, hardware stores, or any place that sells tags, to become game check stations, then make it mandatory to have game checked, that way they have accurate numbers unlike they do now.