Carnage2011
Well-known member
Not disagreeing at all. I just said there are a lot more people stacked in that 5 day season.
Bulls for Billionaires - MT EQC Meeting today 1:30 PM
- Thread starter Ben Lamb
- Start date
Sure and if you you don’t pressure animals for 6 months straight they will stay on public. You can’t put everyone in the field the whole hunting season. Montana would be easy to fix if anybody had interest. (politicians landowners sportsman)
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
Here's my point, CO is not some paragon of elk management, but it is an example of doing it a different way and having more elk on the landscape. WY another example, different tools utilized also with better results.
IMHO there is no reason why MT can't have it's cake and eat it too. The landscape will support more elk. There are ways of keeping elk on public.
Spot on
Never happen now with CWD being used as a reason
Agreed. Wish I could see a path forward.
Last edited:
Gerald Martin
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2009
- Messages
- 8,689
I want healthy elk herds with bull/ cow ratios of 20-25 bulls/100 cows. Not the 12-16/100 we have now.
I want lessened pressure on public lands so that elk spend more time on public and are dispersed rather than in large herds on sanctuary properties. My experience is that large amounts of low stress areas seems to aid in dispersed herds with fewer animals instead of herds of 200-500 elk spending months in large herds in concentrated areas.
Given a bull/cow ratio of 16/100 which I believe is a high average statewide, the 2020 FWP counts estimate a total of 136,000 elk statewide which means there are only @22,000 bulls alive in the entire state in the spring.
If the bull/cow ratios were at 25/100 there would be a total of 34,000 bulls left alive post season without raising the total number of elk.
Personally, I would be satisfied with shorter seasons and the ability to have an opportunity to have a bull tag every two or three years with better quality and higher success rates.
Over a 10-20 year average, I bet the average hunter would kill more bulls hunting biannually with higher bull/cow ratios, than every year with low bull/cow ratios and a success rate of @10%.
I also bet that the average quality of bulls killed would be better as hunters would be more willing to pass on smaller bulls knowing they only get to hunt every other year and there are more bulls to hunt.
Cow elk would be available to hunt every year in units over objective.
Do you think the habitat in MT as a whole is on par with CO'S habitat? There has to be something different that allows CO to be so "giving" with their tags and have the elk to support so.many tags.
No. Not even close. But overall we hunt it harder than they do. They give animals breaks and we don’t. We put the boot right to their throat.
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
Gerald Martin
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2009
- Messages
- 8,689
I also strongly believe that we can develop a better structured Block Management Program without a lot of additional costs.
Certain aspects of Block Management are great but two reoccurring negative themes keep popping up.
1. Confusion, inefficiency, or to much difficulty over securing permission on some Type 2 Block Management properties.
2. Lack of accountability, poor hunter behavior, overcrowding on Type 1 properties.
As @Ben Lamb has suggested having landowners work together among themselves and FWP to figure out what type of management strategy they would like to see implemented and how much hunting pressure they are willing to accommodate would help manage larger areas for a better outcome. Whether this becomes a Type 3 or these concepts are incorporated into the current system doesn’t really matter but incorporating the concepts will help improve.
I feel very strongly that if FWP would develop a portion of their website dedicated to listing Type 2 properties, their rules, boundaries, etc., and then allowing hunters to book online like you do a VRBO or Air BnB rental it would streamline access for hunters because you could find what properties were available on dates you can hunt quickly and easily.
This website would allow for easy accountability for landowners if there are violations of game laws or property violations since hunters would have to register their licenses and ALS numbers to gain access. Violators convicted of violating game laws or breaking BMA rules could easily be prohibited from booking properties or even kicked off the booking system for serious violations.
FWP could more easily collect data from hunters using Block Management properties by hunters either voluntarily filling out a post hunt survey online or perhaps even make filling out surveys a prerequisite before booking permission on another property.
Landowners could block out certain dates prior to allowing public bookings for family and friends, but wouldn’t receive compensation for the hunters using their property on blackout dates.
There’s a lot more than could easily be added to this type of system but I believe building a system from a similar framework could help open more properties to controlled public access.
I have to say that I am amazed (and highly grateful) how many landowners enroll in Type 1 Block. Given what I have seen of some hunters’ behavior I know I would never be willing to enroll my property.
It’s somewhat ironic because Type 1 Block Management is almost all I hunt, because I am often hunting spur of the moment and haven’t been able to plan far enough in advance to know which Type 2 properties I want to secure permission on and what dates I can hunt before those properties book up.
I know if I could peruse a Block Management website two or three weeks in advance of a hunt, I would be more likely to find a likely property and plan a hunt around when I could get permission, rather than calling half a dozen or more ranches until I find an available date. It’s a waste of my time and I feel sorry for wasting the ranchers time as well because I know there’s probably a dozen more people other than myself calling them after they are full.
Certain aspects of Block Management are great but two reoccurring negative themes keep popping up.
1. Confusion, inefficiency, or to much difficulty over securing permission on some Type 2 Block Management properties.
2. Lack of accountability, poor hunter behavior, overcrowding on Type 1 properties.
As @Ben Lamb has suggested having landowners work together among themselves and FWP to figure out what type of management strategy they would like to see implemented and how much hunting pressure they are willing to accommodate would help manage larger areas for a better outcome. Whether this becomes a Type 3 or these concepts are incorporated into the current system doesn’t really matter but incorporating the concepts will help improve.
I feel very strongly that if FWP would develop a portion of their website dedicated to listing Type 2 properties, their rules, boundaries, etc., and then allowing hunters to book online like you do a VRBO or Air BnB rental it would streamline access for hunters because you could find what properties were available on dates you can hunt quickly and easily.
This website would allow for easy accountability for landowners if there are violations of game laws or property violations since hunters would have to register their licenses and ALS numbers to gain access. Violators convicted of violating game laws or breaking BMA rules could easily be prohibited from booking properties or even kicked off the booking system for serious violations.
FWP could more easily collect data from hunters using Block Management properties by hunters either voluntarily filling out a post hunt survey online or perhaps even make filling out surveys a prerequisite before booking permission on another property.
Landowners could block out certain dates prior to allowing public bookings for family and friends, but wouldn’t receive compensation for the hunters using their property on blackout dates.
There’s a lot more than could easily be added to this type of system but I believe building a system from a similar framework could help open more properties to controlled public access.
I have to say that I am amazed (and highly grateful) how many landowners enroll in Type 1 Block. Given what I have seen of some hunters’ behavior I know I would never be willing to enroll my property.
It’s somewhat ironic because Type 1 Block Management is almost all I hunt, because I am often hunting spur of the moment and haven’t been able to plan far enough in advance to know which Type 2 properties I want to secure permission on and what dates I can hunt before those properties book up.
I know if I could peruse a Block Management website two or three weeks in advance of a hunt, I would be more likely to find a likely property and plan a hunt around when I could get permission, rather than calling half a dozen or more ranches until I find an available date. It’s a waste of my time and I feel sorry for wasting the ranchers time as well because I know there’s probably a dozen more people other than myself calling them after they are full.
That is crazy and I understand what you are pointing out but for reference. So while very good point not really apples to apples.
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
When I was a resident I mostly hunted Type 1 for weekend type excursions then Type 2 when I had more time to do my homework. The http://map.mtbullypulpit.org/ was a great resources, but looks like it's down?
Honestly it wouldn't be that hard to create a map/ app that allowed you to do what your suggesting where ranches just are greyed out after they fill up for certain dates.
There were two Type 2 BMAs I hunted several times, they still are active, really great landowners, I feel very lucky to have gotten to hunt on their land. Definitely wish I could help make it an easier process for them, I imagine it's a massive PITA having folks calling your house for permission all season long.
Block management is a joke and should go away. Use that funding for long term access and we would be money ahead. I’m not going to ask for permission to hunt and the areas you have to are locked up. Money could be spent more wisely and again throwing money at the problem won’t fix anything. Most the landowners in block would allow access anyway.
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
Can’t say what it’s like in 2022, but that was not my experience in 2013- 2016… everyone in region 7 I asked let me on.
Gerald Martin
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2009
- Messages
- 8,689
I can’t imagine many working ranches who would prefer signing long term access agreements without having the annual ability to reassess whether they are still interested in participating.
BuzzH
Well-known member
I would read this twice...CWD is going to used as a weapon by GF/FWP to never stop November mule deer seasons.
Mule deer are toast...it will never get better in our lifetimes.
Best we're going to have is 6-8 bucks per 100 does and top age classes will be 2-3 years old.
B&C may as well lower minimums to 140 right now, as that's all we're going to have in Wyoming soon. Good meat bucks.
