Montana FWP makes seismic shift in elk permits

[Straight Arrow]

Hunter harvest calls typically are what districts did you hunt, how many days, and did you get one, and did you see any wolves.

Agree. I've been answering those inquiries from FWP for years and that's typically what information is sought and given. Never more specific than HD regarding locations.

Unlucky, where are you from? How long have you hunted Montana?

And have you ever answered an FWP hunter harvest phone call yourself personally? ... or did all this perspective come from the corner adult beverage retailer?

 

[Irrelevant]

Just saying i know alot of hunters will not respond to there questions truthfully. U know that as well.

"a lot" in this case would be statistically insignificant if everyone had to report.

People generally choose to abide by the rules. That's how society works. I live in a state with mandatory reporting and everyone I know tells the truth.

 

[Unlucky]

Straight arrow. Born and raised southwest mt. Hunted montana all my life. Yes i truthfull answer the calls. Just saying alot will not. Unreliable info.

Since u checking me. My best bull and one of the trophy rooms. Bud

 

[TheTone]

Judging by Sitka social media they support shoulder seasons. I had to laugh reading the diatribe

 

[Straight Arrow]

Just saying alot will not. Unreliable info.

Obviously merely your opinion. I disagree.

Whatever is true, it's NOT a valid argument to NOT seek good data and information helpful to wildlife management.

 

[SAJ-99]

Not saying i dont do harvest reports accordingly. But i know how alot, most people are.

Any statistical collection (survey) is going to have correction factors for the a-holes. Some a-holes think they should say they didn’t get one, reasoning that the bios think the population remains high. Other a-holes think they should say they got one when they didn’t so the bios will think the population remains high even though there was harvest. The geniuses tend to cancel each other out to a large extent. Either way, seasons are set based on population trend counts anyway. I’m guessing the harvest data is just useful info on hunting pressure and specific herds.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

The data should be there counts on elk, deer herds. Tags based off of science.

Realistically not many people going to tell u where they killed there elk. Just being realistic. Iam going to tell them didnt c much in my fav unit and there were alot of predators.

Did you read the part where I said "Make location part of validating your tag."? That's just one factor to make it more reliable but probably not even necessary.

It's also becoming clear that you don't understand how mandatory harvest reporting works. It's not just the FWP calling every hunter instead of a sample. It's on you to report where and when you killed an animal typically either online, by calling it in, or going to a FWP authorized location to do it in person. Since it's a mandatory report, the penalty is the same as if you don't legally tag your animal if you are found to be lying.

 

[Unlucky]

Yep just my opinion

 

[Wind Gypsy]

Yep just my opionin

So if your tag had to be validated with which unit the animal was killed in the same time the dates are cut out and you were required to register the animal via phone/internet/FWP branch within say 5 days. You think people are going to risk losing their hunting rights, trophy, be labeled a poacher, etc over which hunting unit they were in?

Growing up in a state where harvest registration has been mandatory since birth and the resulting stats are readily available, I have never heard a second hand story of someone lying about what unit they harvested in. I've heard plenty of people who don't tag their animal but not falsely tagging it. Why the hell would you bother if the penalty is the same as not tagging it at all? It makes zero sense.

 

[Schaaf]

Presented without comment.

 

[Unlucky]

I just know the current system mt has is a joke. Hunter surveys.

 

[Spartan_Eric]

It is rather astounding to me that everyone can’t at least agree that mandatory reporting of hunter harvest/success as a prerequisite for issuing the following year’s applicable big game license/permit would be a good change for Montana (as opposed to continuing the current inaccurate and ineffective telephone survey methodology). Accurate harvest/success and hunter dispersion data is mandatory for effective big game management decisions going forward. Additionally, you are not reporting down to the GPS waypoint level or PLSS level, but rather just down to the Hunting District level.

I am adding the mandatory reporting of hunter harvest/success comment to every one of my individual Montana FWP 2022-2023 hunting regulation comments.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

I just know the current system mt has is a joke. Hunter surveys.

On that we can agree.

 

[mtmuley]

Iam just saying some will not be honest about there harvest data. Dont know why thats so hard to believe

I could tell you exactly where I hunt elk and you won't kill a bull there. I'm honest with the calls for data. mtmuley

 

[bigsky2]

Judging by Sitka social media they support shoulder seasons. I had to laugh reading the diatribe

If it’s like the other hunting companies in Bozeman, I’d venture to guess the majority of employees at Sitka are transplants that are more than happy to take advantage of any opportunity that is offered to them.

 

[The Hedgehog]

If it’s like the other hunting companies in Bozeman, I’d venture to guess the majority of employees at Sitka are transplants that are more than happy to take advantage of any opportunity that is offered to them.

I was told by an employee years ago they’d secured elk hunting on a posh private ranch. I heard they tiled their corporate HQ bathroom floors with unfilled Montana elk licenses .just heard that, wouldn’t know.

 

[Irrelevant]

Presented without comment. View attachment 208567

To say I was very surprised to get an email alert from them on my bear hunting seasons would be an understatement.

Real embarrassing that I haven't received one for MT elk reg revisions.

 

[Nameless Range]

Presented without comment. View attachment 208567

The RMEF sure is hyper aware of anything predator related.

It is often alluded to that they are doing things behind the scenes, and who knows maybe they are. But why can’t they do both? It would be a very powerful thing to be able to tell the commission and FWP that these actions are opposed by the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation. Being able to say that in regards to public land transfer was powerful in my opinion.

As TR would say, selfish men and greedy interests are on the verge skinning our country of its beauty, its riches and its romance.

Reach out to them and tell them, RMEF, we need you!!

 

[Ben Lamb]

To say I was very surprised to get an email alert from them on my bear hunting seasons would be an understatement.

Real embarrassing that I haven't received one for MT elk reg revisions.

They have sent an alert out to their members. Maybe it only went to MT members?

January 21st is the deadline for comments folks. As others have mentioned, be as specific as you can and don't just ask for a do over.

The Environmental Quality Council meets on January 24th & 25th. That's the legislative body that oversees FWP during the interim. You can join that meeting in person, or on zoom.

The Commission meeting for voting on Tentatives is the following week. They may try to limit public testimony again so as to avoid having to hear just how unpopular their decisions may be, but showing up & being counted is still incredibly important.

 

[bayoublaster7527]

Judging by Sitka social media they support shoulder seasons. I had to laugh reading the diatribe

Yeah that’s not shocking at all. They are a for-profit company and more tags/longer seasons equals more hunters and more sales/profit. The drivers for monetization of a public resource, like wildlife, also includes gear manufacturers and “the industry”. It is more than just outfitters, leases, and landowner tags.