Man I don’t know. I’d assume a gut pile right at a gate where the landowner has to jump it to open his gate is also frowned on in Ohio
Extreme hunting pressure in region 7.
- Thread starter DFS
- Start date
Man I don’t know. I’d assume a gut pile right at a gate where the landowner has to jump it to open his gate is also frowned on in Ohio
Carnage2011
Well-known member
Ya I agree, I just thought there was going to be more based on your first sentence.
I spent 4 days out there chasing antelope this week and finally called it quits. Hunters everywhere, every buck with 8” horns getting killed. Had a hunter shoot over me at a buck that I wasn’t even sure was in MT. I was 321 from the buck and didn’t shoot because of his location. This guy was banging at it from 800+ and I was basically between him and the antelope. Quite a deal!
Oh and in those 4 days, I seen 500-600 deer and exactly 7 bucks. 6 were spikes/2 points and 1 was a 4 point.
Carnage2011
Well-known member
Exactly. At some point we can’t cater to every single person in the field. If they aren’t smart enough to not field dress an animal at the gate, they probably won’t read that section of the regs anyway! (If they can read at all)
Gerald Martin
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2009
- Messages
- 8,577
All the bucks were just over that next hill. If you would have tightened your bootstraps and looked a little harder…..
The empty books were picked up but here’s the third. Should be finished by the end of the week and a few more added for deer season
Killing mature bucks versus immature isn't really a conservation issue. It's a personal choice (one that I made as well). Does still get bred, the herd still grows. It's also a social issue relative to what the people want to see in the deer herd, in which Montanans have been clear that they value the opportunity to hunt deer every year over the opportunity to hunt large antlered animals every few years.
But let's recap where R7 is after a couple of years post-free-for-all:
A.) In the last 10 years, R7 has seen a remarkable growth in hunter pressure from both residents and non-residents as western Montanans head east for deer & birds and NR's come for everything. In 2022 & 2023, NR take of antlered mule deer was higher than resident harvest.
B.) In 2022, the Commission cut antlerless tags by 90%.
C.) In the 2023 legislative session, SB 281 was passed that limits NR's to 1 antlerless licenses if they do not have a combo, and 2 if they do (no more 7 does for Jim-Bob from Bemidji).
D.) In 2023, the Commission disallowed the remaining antlerless licenses from being used on public land.
E.) In 2024, more units went to Limited Entry in R4 to stem the loss in those districts.
F.) In 2024, FWP convened a stakeholder group to help develop the sideboards for the new Deer Management Plan, which should be completed sometime next year.
BirdManMike
Well-known member
Is the proposal to limit non residents to 2 weeks of bird hunting per season going to come back next legislative session?
This can be an inconvenient reality for a lot of us to admit, but you’re absolutely right.
As we have seen throughout our history- when a population becomes accustomed to relying upon “the outside” for financial support, it is very difficult to wean them off of it. It would appear that Montana residents are no different, nor if it fair to expect them to be.
Last edited:
I've heard of some upland stuff coming back but not the 2 week NR season. I don't think that will pass given the outcry from the hospitality industry, and communities in R6 & R7 last session.
Rie Bread
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 4, 2024
- Messages
- 417
Rural Montana is for sale and unfortunately the people that buy in to it don’t understand that rural is more than eating at a cute diner and thrifting on Main Street….
Forkyfinder
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2023
- Messages
- 2,310
Im sure its an a hole move there - but someone whos never hunted might not.
I dont know. I sure wish people knew the damage this does.
I think we are going to see more landowners pull their land from Block Management. Besides the numbers of hunters, I think it’s the lack of appreciation shown. Whether it’s in-state or out of state hunters, they think public land is theirs because it’s public and they can do whatever they want.
By & large, the western funding system has worked well. Like any system, it needs constant monitoring & maintenance to ensure it's proper working order. Non-residents are eager to purchase licenses at an increased rate, and residents bear the reality of living in western states where it's more expensive in terms of cost of living, harder to find good jobs, the weather can be unpleasant (I'll take lake effect snow storms over 45 below & a 30 mph wind any day of the week).
The privilege of coming to a state to hunt versus the rights of citizens who live, pay taxes and contribute to the communities they live in is something that we should all keep in mind when discussing what other things NR's should get.
Perhaps, but where is that puck heading? Is the state of things in Montana (specifically NR-related and crowding issues) better or worse than they were 10 years ago?
When Montana's Constitutional "Right to Hunt & Fish" was enacted back in 2004, it was pointed out that citizens would view any imposition on that right as an infringement and it would cause the legislature to feel more empowered as the state's wildlife managers, rather than FWP employees. I listened to those and other arguments, yet I voted for the amendment to add that right to the MT Constitution.
Looking at the trend of the last twenty years and the legislature adding more and more opportunity in the face of an exploding human population that is coinciding with losses of private hunting access, I see where those warnings were warranted. Doesn't mean we can't work towards change, but it sure makes it hard to manage people/wildlife when the legislature invents new ways to extend seasons, add more licenses, etc.
We have a legislative session coming in January. Many of the bills to be carried get drafted in December. If change is desired, that is the time to start working with your legislators.
Looking at the trend of the last twenty years and the legislature adding more and more opportunity in the face of an exploding human population that is coinciding with losses of private hunting access, I see where those warnings were warranted. Doesn't mean we can't work towards change, but it sure makes it hard to manage people/wildlife when the legislature invents new ways to extend seasons, add more licenses, etc.
We have a legislative session coming in January. Many of the bills to be carried get drafted in December. If change is desired, that is the time to start working with your legislators.
4ohSick
Well-known member
There has been discussion on other threads about studies showing that a lack of age range in bucks results in later successful breeding of does, which results in lower body weight for fawns going into winter and lower fawn survival. I know the Montana legislature has a bit of a love-hate relationship with science, but I don't think the book is closed on this either way and would love to see some interest in studying the impacts of a mule deer herd dominated by 1.5 year old bucks.
rogerthat
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2015
- Messages
- 2,852
There is some science that supports better herd dynamics with older age class male animals in ungulate herds. Later calving/fawning dates, poorer health in younger males due to a prolonged rut, etc. Fwp hasn’t cherry picked that science because it doesn’t support their management. They try to cancel anyone that says different but they cherry pick their science terribly. That’s very evident to me. It’s far from settled that current management isn’t having an impact.
rogerthat
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2015
- Messages
- 2,852
At the end of the day, more management is what’s needed. That’s all we are asking for. Fwp needs to know what and where harvests are occurring. Furthermore they need to know specifically where hunters are hunting. Land administration matters despite their total disregard for it in region 7. If 90% of the hunters are hunting less than 30% of the available lands, they should know that and come up with proposals to restore some hunt quality as well as harvest opportunity back to the hunt. Things are spiraling pretty quickly and it feels like a boat without a captain out here.
