Extreme hunting pressure in region 7.

I don’t know anyone that goes to western Montana to hunt elk anymore.
Whether that is actual elk numbers or marketing, I am not sure.

I do think the current reliance and focus on spreadsheets and drawing odds are problematic. With those statistics, fwp should include access numbers along with public acres versus inaccessible private acres.

There is a segment of the hunting community that believe that the tag guarantees access and opportunity.

I think in the past more of the focus was on finding the access and the location to hunt, then people applied for the tag.

Even on this board I have seen people apply for areas that fwp warns has low public access only to have those people with the tag then come here to ask where to hunt.
 
WanderWoman said:
I’ve only read one of the two white papers about this on elk and imo it seemed dodgy at best. I haven’t seen it on white-tailed deer though it’s been inferred/referenced, and nothing on mule deer.

I remember reading that article and also struggling to find the connection specifically to rut hunting resulting in too many young bucks breeding, compared to other season types. If you want more older bucks the best bet is LE and LE only I think. Meanwhile, other states have an array of more restrictive season types but from a population dynamics (100,000’ view) standpoint, they still lost huge percentages of their deer a couple winters ago. Buck harvest restrictions don’t hold a candle to overall population dynamics that Mother Nature does.

In a wild population of mule deer, given buck survival across the age classes I don’t even know how you’d begin to approach relating buck age to timing of breeding to eventual fawn recruitment to ultimately population dynamics. Thinking mainly about overall effort and then what effect you may possibly be able to glean from that one variable compared to the effects of everything else going on in nature. Interesting for sure.
Click to expand...

Jon Horne's work in Idaho seems pretty solid on the elk front. I just don't think you can use that data for MD since they're quite different in a lot of aspects. I'm with you in that I don't know how you can quantify the issue of age class breeding in populations that aren't tightly stacked.
 
rogerthat said:
I’m curious why you think this? Idaho has older bucks in its general season units.
Click to expand...
Wyoming does too. I went down the rabbit hole of reading all the age class/recruitment studies. They are outdated and marginal at best IMO. A lot more quality research could be done on the topic. Game agencies seem to cherry pick these points on recruitment and age class from a handful of sub par studies and use them as gospel. There is so much more to the equation that needs to be considered.
 
Ben Lamb said:
Jon Horne's work in Idaho seems pretty solid on the elk front. I just don't think you can use that data for MD since they're quite different in a lot of aspects. I'm with you in that I don't know how you can quantify the issue of age class breeding in populations that aren't tightly stacked.
Click to expand...
I haven’t seen his; the papers I saw were from OR. Do you mind linking or sending?
 
shrapnel said:
From initially talking about hunting pressure to the economics and herd density, it is interesting to see topics morph into something else.

I have lived my entire life of 70 years in Montana and never missed a hunting season since I was 12. I never saw an elk as a kid and deer were plentiful, but not unlimited. Hunting both public and private land, I spent the best days of the year in September, October and November hunting big game and birds.

My father guided hunting in the 1940's, I still have his license and regulations from 1947.

I have seen lots of change, not all for the better, but not all bad either.

The relationship to hunting pressure and access has everything to do with "Social Media." The awareness of what Montana has and had to offer is greatley influenced by technology and sites such as this and others that contribute to that paradigm. Podcasts, advertising, videos and other forms of modern technology are the reason we see the impact of more hunters, at least in Montana.

Montana still provides the best hunting opportunities a person could hope for and I'm not leaving. Adapting to the change is what will add to your success, more than bitching about what is happening...



View attachment 345429View attachment 345430
Click to expand...
Not everyone is bitching about what is happening due to lack of success. I recognize the main reason why I've probably been more successful lately than my dad's circle of friends is because I've been willing to adapt from year to year. Those guys have slowly phased out of hunting because the places they hunted elk in the Breaks year after year have way less elk and way more hunting pressure than they used to. Just because I'm happy with the success I have most years doesn't mean I'm not unhappy about what I am seeing happening to the quality of the experience right before my eyes.
 
rogerthat said:
I’m curious why you think this? Idaho has older bucks in its general season units.
Click to expand...
I was thinking from other scenarios in MT like shorter season (3-weeks instead of 5) and unlimited permits. For shorter seasons you might get dropped off pressure at first but then you may eventually end up with the same number of people condensed into a shorter time period.

I’m not familiar enough with ID but is that an area with similar terrain, populations, access, and hunter numbers as R7? General it may be but how do the numbers compare?

(Completely ignorant on that, which is why I’m asking.. thanks!)
 
WanderWoman said:
I was thinking from other scenarios in MT like shorter season (3-weeks instead of 5) and unlimited permits. For shorter seasons you might get dropped off pressure at first but then you may eventually end up with the same number of people condensed into a shorter time period.

I’m not familiar enough with ID but is that an area with similar terrain, populations, access, and hunter numbers as R7? General it may be but how do the numbers compare?

(Completely ignorant on that, which is why I’m asking.. thanks!)
Click to expand...
I’ve never been to Region 7, but looking at pics, there are similarities and differences in the two areas.

First, forkies (2x2s) are still the most killed deer by most buck hunters. Idaho units are very rugged. Big deer can hide in hell holes.

I think the greatest difference is the rifle season dates. Rifle deer general season for mule deer ends October 31st or earlier. Idaho doesn’t rifle hunt its mule deer, generally, in the November rut. *** I know there are a few exceptions. The November hunts are going to be a lot easier than wary deer in October.
 
WanderWoman said:
I was thinking from other scenarios in MT like shorter season (3-weeks instead of 5) and unlimited permits. For shorter seasons you might get dropped off pressure at first but then you may eventually end up with the same number of people condensed into a shorter time period.

I’m not familiar enough with ID but is that an area with similar terrain, populations, access, and hunter numbers as R7? General it may be but how do the numbers compare?

(Completely ignorant on that, which is why I’m asking.. thanks!)
Click to expand...
The season ends well before the rut (Nov 3 this year) for the tag I got. Maybe that is his point. Not sure. This would support the proposal put forth to end MD buck hunting before they get stupid.
 
SAJ-99 said:
The season ends well before the rut (Nov 3 this year) for the tag I got. Maybe that is his point. Not sure. This would support the proposal put forth to end MD buck hunting before they get stupid.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the clarification. When I spoke of LE I was comparing it to current MT season options. With our current dates/options, LE is the more reliable way to increase buck age classes.

Sorry @rogerthat i should have been clearer on that.
 
Iv got enough pot that we can smoke to come up with a masters thesis on the subject. Then we can figure out how to pay for collage and we will be turning this ship around in no time.
 
SAJ-99 said:
The season ends well before the rut (Nov 3 this year) for the tag I got. Maybe that is his point. Not sure. This would support the proposal put forth to end MD buck hunting before they get stupid.
Click to expand...
I think we would all agree season dates have a big impact on age class. BUT, As @WanderWoman pointed out that is a different point than fawn recruitment. Most of the studies say your good on fawn recruitment if you meet the min buck/doe ratio. Montana being an opportunity state, it is more concerned about recruitment than age class.

I would argue that those units in Wyoming and Idaho have a higher buck/doe ratio than region 7 and a lot of it has to do with date setting/terrain. Weather fawn recruitment is higher or lower in those units would be interesting to know. The studies would suggest that with more bucks on the landscape they are competing for the same feed on the winter ranges resulting in a lower recruitment. I can't make sense of that logic. I'm hunting the most coveted tag in Montana right now and saw 30+ bucks in 2.5 days of hunting and we're a ways out from the rut. Lots of does and bucks. If the area has enough feed to support the recruitment, I think it's a moot point.

It boils down to this IMO. Will Montana ever want to give up opportunity for age class. I'd bet that's a no. At some point the resource gets diminished to the minimal viable buck/doe ratio for sustainment and stays that way till something in the regulations change. The only lever we have is hunting pressure.
 
FREAK said:
BUT, As @WanderWoman pointed out that is a different point than fawn recruitment.
Click to expand...
Oh yeah, totally different subjects. No way I'm jumping into a debate on whether a 4.5yo MD buck's sperm is better at impregnating a doe than a 2.5yo MD buck's. Seems like rabbit hole I don't want to go down and will let the internet experts take care of that. ;)
it doesn't seem to matter much with humans.
 
tystash said:
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.
Click to expand...
+1
It’s sad but true. One of the BMA I have previously hunted is not going to be available anymore due to hunters ruining things. It’s a shame but I understand the landowners frustration.
 
Can someone take a few minutes and explain to me how season dates/regs are set adjusted when the bar for harvest reporting is so low? Telephone random surveys...really?
I have hunted most western states and NM, IRRC is the only state that requires you fill out a harvest survey...
If you dont really know what the harvest is how do you go about management thru regs/seasons?

Most states you can get e tags...why isn't e harvest reporting also required. Seems like a step in the direction to provide real data to help with management.

It's required in my home state for deer and turkey...it literally take 30 seconds and the data provided is invaluable state biologists.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
Looking for some help in Region 700 Antelope
2
Replies
23
Views
2K
cgasner1
cgasner1
HOWL for Wildlife
ACTION: Protect Oregon’s Spring Bear Hunt!
Replies
1
Views
241
dan.kirkpatrick
dan.kirkpatrick
Pucky Freak
Corn and antlers
2
Replies
27
Views
1K
Steiny77
S
Gerald Martin
Montana General Season Structure Proposal
107 108 109
Replies
2K
Views
109K
Ought Six
O
atlas
Thank A BMA Landowner.
Replies
0
Views
982
atlas
atlas

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
114,019
Messages
2,041,409
Members
36,430
Latest member
SoDak24

Share this page

Back
Top