Montana FWP makes seismic shift in elk permits

I deleted my question since I thought it was answered elsewhere but couldn't find it.
Why was 270 the exception? I missed that part.

Sounded like because it is a weather dependent hunt and they wanted the people who drew the tag to be able to hunt a general tag if the weather didn't push the elk down.
 
I liked all the things brought forward and approved as far as 1st and only.

The 270 thing did bother me however, people know what they are getting when they apply for the tag, if you don't want that risk don't apply. Seems like a hear have your cake and eat it too scenario. This is more frustrating because the whole state went to permit specific except for 270, seems like as Ben said a way to put a crack in it, so when we are right back here in 2 years they have precedent to "unlock" other units.

Edit: as @mtmuley said argument for a different time sorry to post here shouldve waited.
 
I would say that this commission just saved the Governor from some really problematic issues. We get on the Gov for making the appointment of the director, so we should thank him for the appointment of Walsh, Waller, Lane and Cebull, and recommit ourselves to working with the commission as best as we can. Lesley Robinson ran a hell of a good meeting that could have easily ran off the rails, and she kept it out of the ditch all day.
I would say Hank and the FWP Helena leadership have WAY more to be concerned about than the commission.
 
I liked all the things brought forward and approved as far as 1st and only.

The 270 thing did bother me however, people know what they are getting when they apply for the tag, if you don't want that risk don't apply. Seems like a hear have your cake and eat it too scenario. This is more frustrating because the whole state went to permit specific except for 270, seems like as Ben said a way to put a crack in it, so when we are right back here in 2 years they have precedent to "unlock" other units.

Edit: as @mtmuley said argument for a different time sorry to post here shouldve waited.
The whole state did not go to permit.

270 has been unlimited 1st choice since 2012
 
If your permit is for archery season only, you’ll be limited to hunting bulls in that HD during archery, but during rifle and muzzy, you can hunt bulls in any HD that allows bull harvest with a general tag.
Is this 100% true?? I listened to the entire meeting and it even sounded like half the commission didn't understand this, even after the motion had unanimous ballot. With the 1st and only choice I believe that voids the tag for either sex in general season. Hence the 270 exemption in Region 2. Maybe I am wrong.
 
The whole state did not go to permit.

270 has been unlimited 1st choice since 2012
I realize that sorry should've wrote it differently, my understanding was that all other LE permits where first and only choice except for 270.
 
Is this 100% true?? I listened to the entire meeting and it even sounded like half the commission didn't understand this, even after the motion had unanimous ballot. With the 1st and only choice I believe that voids the tag for either sex in general season. Hence the 270 exemption in Region 2. Maybe I am wrong.
I’m fairly sure your wrong. All I got to say is hope Hank enjoyed his beating. The commission bailing him out doesn’t mean he should keep his job.
 
I'm writing this knowing my opinion on this matter is not popular amongst the Hunttalk faithful. I'm expecting abuse, but at least try and keep it a little civil this time. I don't like permits that limit you to hunting only one unit, and I don't understand why so many people on this site think it's such a great idea.

In the past I've drawn permits and never hunted the unit, or hunted just a few days. Now if I draw a permit, I will bowhunt it for 6 weeks, making it a lot more likely I kill one. Also everyone who draws a unit will hunt every day they can hunt, guaranteeing the unit sees more hunter days each season.

So is the goal to ensure more bulls get killed in these units? Is it to make sure there are more people hunting on any given day? Or what is the goal?
 
I'm writing this knowing my opinion on this matter is not popular amongst the Hunttalk faithful. I'm expecting abuse, but at least try and keep it a little civil this time. I don't like permits that limit you to hunting only one unit, and I don't understand why so many people on this site think it's such a great idea.

In the past I've drawn permits and never hunted the unit, or hunted just a few days. Now if I draw a permit, I will bowhunt it for 6 weeks, making it a lot more likely I kill one. Also everyone who draws a unit will hunt every day they can hunt, guaranteeing the unit sees more hunter days each season.

So is the goal to ensure more bulls get killed in these units? Is it to make sure there are more people hunting on any given day? Or what is the goal?
Why would you apply for, and get a permit and then not hunt the area?
 
So all there proposals passed, that were on the masters list. Hm.

And u can can get an unlimited archery bull tag but still hunt general elk season if unsuccessful. Wow terrible idea.
 
Because I like to hunt and see different areas, and getting the permit gives you the option to do so.
I think the point behind the proposal and why people on here support it is because if you choose to apply for and get a permit then you’re committing to hunting that area. If you want to hunt general areas, then don’t get a permit and you can hunt all the general areas you want. If I decide to put in for 380 elk and get it, you won’t find me hunting elk across Canyon Ferry in a general district. It’s us hunters being accountable saying if I am successful in drawing this permit, I will commit to only hunting this district. If someone from Libby wants to hunt SE MT in archery then they should commit to doing so. If they want to hunt closer to home, which is understandable, then they shouldn’t put in for the permit.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
113,602
Messages
2,026,413
Members
36,241
Latest member
JL Hunt
Back
Top