Montana General Season Structure Proposal

[Jon Boy]

We can all argue about the “best” way to manage, but without good data that we all can access and trust, our best educated guesses about how hunters affect wildlife populations will always be less educated than they could be with better data.

Mandatory reporting isn’t going to to change the needs for area biologists to continue their biological surveys and monitoring of the health of habitat and resources. However, I think they’ll be even better able to make good management decisions if they have solid data on how hunters are interacting with and affecting wildlife.

I love this part of the proposal and couldn’t agree more. It would be an awesome resource for both managers and hunters to know exactly how many hunters are hunting a given unit and what they are harvesting.

 

[Sioux33]

Colorado is arguably the best mule deer state in the west and they have damn near the same exact season dates as us, this year it’s 10/26-11/24. The difference is they actually manage how many people can hunt at separate times during that stretch. Something like that seems a lot more realistic to pass, doesn’t change anything for elk annd doesn’t add any extra stress on landowners. Unless I’m really missing something, wouldn’t this be worth looking into?

Edit: I know CO isn’t OTC, but you could have a portion of the season before the rut be OTC to satisfy the opportunity requirements that FWP will demand.

 

[8andcounting]

Colorado is arguably the best mule deer state in the west and they have damn near the same exact season dates as us, this year it’s 10/26-11/24. The difference is they actually manage how many people can hunt at separate times during that stretch. Something like that seems a lot more realistic to pass, doesn’t change anything for elk annd doesn’t add any extra stress on landowners. Unless I’m really missing something, wouldn’t this be worth looking into?

Yup . I don’t think the rut hunt is all the problem it’s the # of people hunting the rut

 

[Forkyfinder]

Colorado is arguably the best mule deer state in the west and they have damn near the same exact season dates as us, this year it’s 10/26-11/24. The difference is they actually manage how many people can hunt at separate times during that stretch. Something like that seems a lot more realistic to pass, doesn’t change anything for elk annd doesn’t add any extra stress on landowners. Unless I’m really missing something, wouldn’t this be worth looking into?

Edit: I know CO isn’t OTC, but you could have a portion of the season before the rut be OTC to satisfy the opportunity requirements that FWP will demand.

This might not be the worst idea.

Last 2 weeks of season LE in every area?

 

[8andcounting]

Why not leave it as is. Cap NR at 17000 . Not 17001 . No b tags for NR . No b tags on public . For LE tags 5% to NR not up to 10

 

[rmyoung1]

Why not leave it as is. Cap NR at 17000 . Not 17001 . No b tags for NR . No b tags on public . For LE tags 5% to NR not up to 10

One of the primary goals was to distribute hunting pressure. A straight NR cap does nothing of the sort.

At this point, I think people should re-read post #1. We’re arguing over things that have been explained.

 

[8andcounting]

One of the primary goals was to distribute hunting pressure. A straight NR cap does nothing of the sort.

At this point, I think people should re-read post #1. We’re arguing over things that have been explained.

By hunting for 2 months straight that distributes the pressure ?

 

[8andcounting]

FWP is gonna slam this down quicker than it takes me to fall asleep tonight . And that’s quick lol

 

[rmyoung1]

By hunting for 2 months straight that distributes the pressure ?

Requiring hunters to pick a region in order to distribute deer hunting pressure was one of the central ideas.

 

[antlerradar]

Get on the @DFS @Shed God train and get another proposal going.

Id agree that true managed LE would be better in the existing arrangement.

I would be fine with LE. My biggest fear would be FWP would set the quotas so high that it would just be choose your unit.

 

[SwaggyD]

I would be fine with LE. My biggest fear would be FWP would set the quotas so high that it would just be choose your unit.

But even if they did that, they would then have the data for how many people were actually hunting a certain district. @Shed God isnt wrong imo, just zero chance the commission goes that route

 

[antlerradar]

Colorado is arguably the best mule deer state in the west and they have damn near the same exact season dates as us, this year it’s 10/26-11/24. The difference is they actually manage how many people can hunt at separate times during that stretch. Something like that seems a lot more realistic to pass, doesn’t change anything for elk annd doesn’t add any extra stress on landowners. Unless I’m really missing something, wouldn’t this be worth looking into?

Edit: I know CO isn’t OTC, but you could have a portion of the season before the rut be OTC to satisfy the opportunity requirements that FWP will demand.

Lots of differences between CO and MT. I would be fine with CO system , but I am betting that the short seasons and landowner tags would be a nonstarter for MT. Through in that the late seasons tags in the best units are getting close to once or twice in a lifetime even for residents, CO is a big drop in opportunity.

 

[antlerradar]

But even if they did that, they would then have the data for how many people were actually hunting a certain district. @Shed God isnt wrong imo, just zero chance the commission goes that route

I would like LE even more if you had to choose between mule deer and whitetails.

 

[Sioux33]

Lots of differences between CO and MT. I would be fine with CO system , but I am betting that the short seasons and landowner tags would be a nonstarter for MT. Through in that the late seasons tags in the best units are getting close to once or twice in a lifetime even for residents, CO is a big drop in opportunity.

I should clarify that I'm against landowner tags, didn't mean for that to be part of the CO conversation.

I think you could still have the whitetail/mule deer split that was proposed and pick your region, but then funnel down the numbers similar to CO. You could also take what ND does and have an archery only option if you really wanted opportunity. Maybe like a 900 tag for mule deer that lets you bow hunt through the rut if you really want options for people. (ND actually lets you bow hunt deer from Sept-Jan).

CO and ND are light years ahead of us in terms of age class/herd health and hunt the same time periods as us, they don't let it be a free-for-all. Like I've said before, I don't mind moving to October hunting, it's just the side effects of doing that I'm concerned about (hunter days/species & landowner stress).

 

[rogerthat]

Colorado is arguably the best mule deer state in the west and they have damn near the same exact season dates as us, this year it’s 10/26-11/24. The difference is they actually manage how many people can hunt at separate times during that stretch. Something like that seems a lot more realistic to pass, doesn’t change anything for elk annd doesn’t add any extra stress on landowners. Unless I’m really missing something, wouldn’t this be worth looking into?

Edit: I know CO isn’t OTC, but you could have a portion of the season before the rut be OTC to satisfy the opportunity requirements that FWP will demand.

As you know, Colorado is starkly different than Montana in terms of population, development, etc. they are tasked with spreading out a giant amount of hunters on the finite landscape. The do that with limited entry for deer that includes very short window rifle seasons. Currently a season structure like that is not really applicable to Montana nor could it even be considered due to the social acceptance. Can you imagine if the proposal was to go from current structure to proposing someone get 10 days in early November as their opportunity or 5 days in later November?

 

[Stifler]

It would keep people to a distinct unit, and I like that. Probably more personal preference then anything though. Between whitetail and muley if you had pick your tag pick your unit I think would be the best way. I think that the public would cry harder then a 2 year old leaving the park. “But Mom, I need just one more slide down the rut!”

 

[Sioux33]

As you know, Colorado is starkly different than Montana in terms of population, development, etc. they are tasked with spreading out a giant amount of hunters on the finite landscape. The do that with limited entry for deer that includes very short window rifle seasons. Currently a season structure like that is not really applicable to Montana nor could it even be considered due to the social acceptance. Can you imagine if the proposal was to go from current structure to proposing someone get 10 days in early November as their opportunity or 5 days in later November?

Doesn't have to be identical to CO's season dates, but I think social acceptance would be higher to be able to hunt a portion of late Oct/early November or a shorter window in late November than 31 days in October, especially social acceptance amongst landowners. And if hunters need more, maybe adopt the ND approach of a long archery season?

The survey that Ben posted a few pages ago had ~65-70% of the respondents in favor of the current season timing, so FWP is going to point right to that, not sure how you get around it without cutting opportunity.

 

[The Hedgehog]

The general season in November at all has got to eventually go. Social acceptance should be measured with statewide required and unbiased survey data.

 

[rogerthat]

Doesn't have to be identical to CO's season dates, but I think social acceptance would be higher to be able to hunt a portion of late Oct/early November or a shorter window in late November than 31 days in October, especially social acceptance amongst landowners. And if hunters need more, maybe adopt the ND approach of a long archery season?

The survey that Ben posted a few pages ago had ~65-70% of the respondents in favor of the current season timing, so FWP is going to point right to that, not sure how you get around it without cutting opportunity.

Yeah that’s the sticky wicket is some form of opportunity cut and decrease in harvest success is needed. What that exactly looks like that can garner the social acceptance needed to be implemented is key. I support any and all proposals and proposesrs if they think they can get anything donein that regards. I have only seen generally an expansion of opportunity in Montana in my lifetime.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Why not leave it as is. Cap NR at 17000 . Not 17001 . No b tags for NR . No b tags on public . For LE tags 5% to NR not up to 10

The statutory cap for non-resident antlered deer licenses is:
B10 (big Game Combo): 17,000
B11 (deer combo) 6600 (4600 general, plus 2000 landowner set asides).

If you want to eliminate the B11 entirely, you are looking at a revenue drop of approximately $9-10 million. So if that's your approach, have a budget cut ready. Also, be prepared to fight the vast majority of conservation groups who will oppose due to the loss of conservation funding.