Montana General Season Structure Proposal

[Shed God]

LE provides everything that would work for everyone. But would need to be looked at unit by unit. Basically

 

[SAJ-99]

Saj99 what compromise is there. With your proposal. We are giving non resident, landowners, outfitters the exact same thing with little benefit for mule deer on public land. And an October mule deer season greatly effects a Nov elk season.

Appreciate Ben and just don't agree with everything he stated. I fully understand this is politics. Money and landowners. 2024 hunting is $ and politicians. Regardless of state.

Yes archery season does push elk to private. Once again understand that is not managed by fwp as well. They sell tags opurtunity. Not for the public but for the landowners and non residents. But u are out of you God dam mind if u think General mule deer season will not have a huge impact on general Nov elk. It's $*)Q!#@$ unbelievable to me very few c this.

So basically do the proposal. Archery elk otc public land will be no secret best hunting a guy like me will get but it's cut short. Otc mule deer Oct. Fwp still selling a shit load of tags and not managing the mule deer anyway so the public will suck. Private manages so there loving it. A shit ton of elk, more than currently will be pressured onto private because a bunch of dipshits hunting 2 to 4 yr old bucks in October. SO otc elk comes around and less than half the elk currently I predict on public. But some land owners will allow massacres for cow elk. Disgusting. I think. But all those raghorns that Gerald brags about living with proposal will die on private otc hunts.

Hey let's do it because it's change. And it looks good. Sounds good. But most importantly it works for who will profit off it. They getting mule deer still and more elk. Public getting phucked

I agree that pressure has to be reduced, ultimately, but not changing anything doesn't change pressure at all. Any direct change to full LE across the state is dead on arrival. Period. End of story. I think this is what happens eventually, but it is not an option. Maybe only for NR? I'm an advocate for this, are you? MT is an opportunity state and while hating it for others, you clearly don't want to give up anything yourself and instead find some contrived negative scenario that hurts you ("the public") and not the "opponents" (apparently landowners, outfitters, and FWP). Any legit points you have are quickly being swamped by this position.

And I guess I'm out of my God damn mind because I doubt it will change the location of elk much. They are on private at the start of rifle anyway ($hit, they are on private 4 days into archery). Maybe elk that migrate from elevation (USFS) to winter range might be pushed? Maybe? Would be nice to find out. I think you are talking about a your very specific situation, that we don't have any info on because you won't share it because the unit is an NSA secret or something. This isn't about what benefits or harms any individual hunter. It is about a compromise on changes that helps mule deer. No one knows exactly what the result would be, but it doesn't mean something shouldn't be tried.

I congratulate you on finding the comma button on your computer. Use it more.

 

[cgasner1]

I only bring unlimited up for the landowners, outfitters, non resident.

I’d be willing to bet the entire group would be opposed to that. None of us want to see one group take precedence over another be it public-private r-nr archery-rifle the goal was to spread it across the board evenly

 

[Shed God]

No I think u have a variety of peers. But I don't think alot of things were seriously discust. It makes sense otc October mule deer. But in my opinion bad idea.

 

[Shed God]

Elk problems. Everywhere there is large private land. Compound that with Oct mule deer season.

Well private, outfitters, non resident have to get there's first. Then the public.

I want actually managed LE. Based off of science, herd numbers. But LE unlimited takes care of alot of things.

If you talking baby steps LE unlimited the way to go.

 

[Straight Arrow]

This thread is becoming confusingly redundant. How about circling back to the group's agreed upon proposal and revisiting its merits.

 

[Alabama]

Serious question: What the hell are you guys talking about limited entry unlimited?

That makes no sense. How can something be unlimited and limited at the same time?

 

[rogerthat]

Serious question: What the hell are you guys talking about limited entry unlimited?

That makes no sense. How can something be unlimited and limited at the same time?

In Montana we have unit permits for a critter but an unlimited quota of them are issued. So basically you get the permit if you apply for it.

 

[Rie Bread]

In Montana we have unit permits for a critter but an unlimited quota of them are issued. So basically you get the permit if you apply for it.

But you can ONLY hunt said unit. I think this would be more impactful than choose your region. Naturally though the units with crazy amounts of unlimited tag given out would most likely get a quota.

 

[Luis]

As a resident, I do not have a problem with increasing the fees for my hunting licenses and or tags.

What I don't think is fair, is the archery hunters. If they do not harvest during archery season, they hunt again during general season with a rifle. End that - make them chose their weapon. That would lessen pressure on the big game, if you really want to lessen pressure on the animals.

I chose to live in MT where I don't make high wages like people from some areas outside of Montana. Stop pandering to the nonresidents and reduce the number of NR licenses. NR choose to live outside of MT where they make higher wages, they need to understand they can't get everything they want in MT if they don't choose to live here. Reducing the NR tags would lessen pressure on the big game, if you really want to reduce the pressure on the animals.

 

[DFS]

In Montana we have unit permits for a critter but an unlimited quota of them are issued. So basically you get the permit if you apply for it.

It would be a good way for fwp to acknowledge where and how many people are hunting a unit or region.

 

[Forkyfinder]

As a resident, I do not have a problem with increasing the fees for my hunting licenses and or tags.

What I don't think is fair, is the archery hunters. If they do not harvest during archery season, they hunt again during general season with a rifle. End that - make them chose their weapon. That would lessen pressure on the big game, if you really want to lessen pressure on the animals.

I chose to live in MT where I don't make high wages like people from some areas outside of Montana. Stop pandering to the nonresidents and reduce the number of NR licenses. NR choose to live outside of MT where they make higher wages, they need to understand they can't get everything they want in MT if they don't choose to live here. Reducing the NR tags would lessen pressure on the big game, if you really want to reduce the pressure on the animals.

Sounds like you should just shoot a bow

 

[sclancy27]

For everyone saying MD season in October will ruin November elk hunting, I assume your mechanism is bumping elk while hunting deer. I guess I don't see that happening for a couple reasons, depending on the area.

1. Elk and mule deer have different habitat preferences. If you are hunting bucks in the first 15-20 days of October, they are going to be in different areas entirely than the majority of elk. As bulls pull off the cows, bulls and bucks may show more overlap, but still will not show much overlap as bucks move into the pre-rut and bulls move into their post rut hell holes

2. Direct vs indirect pressure makes a huge difference, ie getting shot at vs not.

3. Neighboring states that run similar season dates don't see the mass migration to private of elk, outside of areas without much public land, ie NE Wyoming.

I don't think you can get more elk moving to private than you already do with 12 weeks of straight hunting with a 5 day break at the midpoint plus multiple months of shoulder season on either side.

 

[sclancy27]

Elk problems. Everywhere there is large private land. Compound that with Oct mule deer season.

Well private, outfitters, non resident have to get there's first. Then the public.

I want actually managed LE. Based off of science, herd numbers. But LE unlimited takes care of alot of things.

If you talking baby steps LE unlimited the way to go.

I wouldn't say LE unlimited state wide is a baby step.

 

[sclancy27]

What I don't think is fair, is the archery hunters. If they do not harvest during archery season, they hunt again during general season with a rifle. End that - make them chose their weapon. That would lessen pressure on the big game, if you really want to lessen pressure on the animals.

Man, I think choose your weapon would not do what you think it would. All these "die hard" bow hikers would just all be crammed into rifle season. I think archery would see way less pressure, but it would make rifle that much worse.

There may be an argument that less pressure in archery would keep more elk on public, I could see that happening. Rifle season may be even crazier than it is now tho

 

[Forkyfinder]

Man, I think choose your weapon would not do what you think it would. All these "die hard" bow hikers would just all be crammed into rifle season. I think archery would see way less pressure, but it would make rifle that much worse.

There may be an argument that less pressure in archery would keep more elk on public, I could see that happening. Rifle season may be even crazier than it is now tho

For everyone saying MD season in October will ruin November elk hunting, I assume your mechanism is bumping elk while hunting deer. I guess I don't see that happening for a couple reasons, depending on the area.

1. Elk and mule deer have different habitat preferences. If you are hunting bucks in the first 15-20 days of October, they are going to be in different areas entirely than the majority of elk. As bulls pull off the cows, bulls and bucks may show more overlap, but still will not show much overlap as bucks move into the pre-rut and bulls move into their post rut hell holes

2. Direct vs indirect pressure makes a huge difference, ie getting shot at vs not.

3. Neighboring states that run similar season dates don't see the mass migration to private of elk, outside of areas without much public land, ie NE Wyoming.

I don't think you can get more elk moving to private than you already do with 12 weeks of straight hunting with a 5 day break at the midpoint plus multiple months of shoulder season on either side.

Damn. Both these takes are dead on imho.

 

[rmyoung1]

I chose to live in MT where I don't make high wages like people from some areas outside of Montana. Stop pandering to the nonresidents and reduce the number of NR licenses. NR choose to live outside of MT where they make higher wages, they need to understand they can't get everything they want in MT if they don't choose to live here. Reducing the NR tags would lessen pressure on the big game, if you really want to reduce the pressure on the animals.

As time goes on, though, these arguments don’t reflect reality. Perhaps it reflected economic realities 30 years ago, but doesn’t echo the truth in the 2020s as much. Many people now living in MT have kept their high-paying CA jobs. The paycheck moved with them. Those $750,000 homes in BZN aren’t being purchased by locals working the floor at Kenyon Noble. People (and their jobs) are much more mobile now. You can limit NR licenses, but what do you do with the hordes that have moved in and want to hunt? They’re now residents after all. What do you do with the ones who are coming? If long-term wildlife management success is the goal, something has to happen besides just putting tighter lids on NRs.

 

[xcskier_hunter]

Man, I think choose your weapon would not do what you think it would. All these "die hard" bow hikers would just all be crammed into rifle season. I think archery would see way less pressure, but it would make rifle that much worse.

There may be an argument that less pressure in archery would keep more elk on public, I could see that happening. Rifle season may be even crazier than it is now tho

I think you are correct about choose your weapon pushing more hunters to only rifle hunt although I'm not sure that is inherently a bad thing if it's outweighed by more elk on public land at the start of rifle season. If more elk are on public land and theoretically more evenly distributed due to low hunting pressure up to the start of rifle season then I could see both the satisfaction of bowhunters and rifle hunters increasing. As someone who both bowhunts and rifle hunts, my feeling is that serious bowhunters get more frustrated by dealing with other hunters whereas the satisfaction of rifle hunters is a bit more driven by filling a tag, not necessarily whether they saw other hunters, since seeing hunters during rifle seasons has pretty much always been an expectation whereas part of the historical appeal of archery seasons has been getting away from the crowds. Also, if elk are more evenly distributed on the landscape, it should naturally spread out hunters more.

I suspect that elk could be more effectively managed in a pick your weapon scenario also, since managing populations with bowhunting has never been that feasible, yet high bowhunting pressure leading into rifle season is probably counterproductive to achieving desired harvest levels in rifle season if elk have already been pushed to private land sanctuaries by bowhunters. Because I would choose to bowhunt and forgo rifle hunting in a pick your weapon scenario, I am probably a bit biased in this assessment though.

 

[Rie Bread]

I agree if they do choose your weapon MT will be a bow hunters paradise and make rifle hunting that much more of a zoo.

 

[Badlandcat]

As a resident, I do not have a problem with increasing the fees for my hunting licenses and or tags.

What I don't think is fair, is the archery hunters. If they do not harvest during archery season, they hunt again during general season with a rifle. End that - make them chose their weapon. That would lessen pressure on the big game, if you really want to lessen pressure on the animals.

I chose to live in MT where I don't make high wages like people from some areas outside of Montana. Stop pandering to the nonresidents and reduce the number of NR licenses. NR choose to live outside of MT where they make higher wages, they need to understand they can't get everything they want in MT if they don't choose to live here. Reducing the NR tags would lessen pressure on the big game, if you really want to reduce the pressure on the animals.

You left out muzzleloaders season on the choose your weapon statement.
Also why don't the muzzleloader hunters have to buy an extra tag like the archers have to?