MTNTOUGH - Use promo code RANDY for 30 days free

Montana General Season Structure Proposal

I can tell you for a fact that most of the elk in the ruby, blacktail, and Jefferson river drainages that live in private are showing up long before hunting season even starts. There are large herds of elk that chase grass down onto private in June and then don’t leave until they get pressure in hunting season. Archery season isn’t pushing them down in this area. These elk have decided to live down there for most of the year.
 
Currently, there are significant areas of the state where 6 weeks of archery pressure moves elk from public to private. Those elk are generally still on private when general rifle opens.

Currently, in the areas where a significant portion elk elk are in relatively inaccessible properties, a significant portion of a units population reduction to meet unit objectives takes place on public rather than private. It results in the “wrong” elk getting harvested and exacerbates the difficulty of keeping units within objective.

Based on the effects of current season structure I see far more potential for positive change for public hunters with our proposed early private antlerless cow harvest than I do negatives. Some folks may not see it that way. If our projections are incorrect then folks can certainly point out the reasons why our proposed structure would be worse than the current structure. However, keep in mind the comparison is between what is currently and our proposed changes. Not between our proposal and what folks want to see in their envisaged perfect scenario.
Most important piece right here...in particular the bolded part. That is precisely what has happened since the early 1990's in most of the state. The GF response was to just increase the cow tags in any given unit when landowners complained. The elk that primarily were accessible (those on public) got the snot shot out of them. The elk found in the hayfields, they didn't get killed. We removed the elk we shouldn't have and allowed the elk that were a problem to thrive. About like changing the tire on the passenger side because the tire is flat on the drivers side...makes ZERO sense.

Elk learn behaviors from each other, and IMO/E, that's why the problem has only gotten worse.
 
I can tell you for a fact that most of the elk in the ruby, blacktail, and Jefferson river drainages that live in private are showing up long before hunting season even starts. There are large herds of elk that chase grass down onto private in June and then don’t leave until they get pressure in hunting season. Archery season isn’t pushing them down in this area. These elk have decided to live down there for most of the year.
But, what caused the shift to begin with? It's a learned behavior from pressure, no different than a migration corridor or does and their female fawns returning to nearly the same places to have their fawns.
 
But, what caused the shift to begin with? It's a learned behavior from pressure, no different than a migration corridor or does and their female fawns returning to nearly the same places to have their fawns.
100%. How long does it take for them to change this behavior? These elk get hunted on private consistently. They try to move to the public and get ran back most of the time before anyone even shoots at them.
 
100%. How long does it take for them to change this behavior? These elk get hunted on private consistently. They try to move to the public and get ran back most of the time before anyone even shoots at them.
It's incredible how fast animals learn to avoid pressure. Like @BuzzH They don't forget either. It's interesting to watch every year.
 
Most important piece right here...in particular the bolded part. That is precisely what has happened since the early 1990's in most of the state. The GF response was to just increase the cow tags in any given unit when landowners complained. The elk that primarily were accessible (those on public) got the snot shot out of them. The elk found in the hayfields, they didn't get killed. We removed the elk we shouldn't have and allowed the elk that were a problem to thrive. About like changing the tire on the passenger side because the tire is flat on the drivers side...makes ZERO sense.

Elk learn behaviors from each other, and IMO/E, that's why the problem has only gotten worse.
Exactly. These learned behaviors may have resulted in pressure applied to the wrong places (public lands), but it’s going to take more than just easing public land pressure to unlearn these behaviors. On top of the non-pressure-related incentives elk have to be on private lands.
 
100%. How long does it take for them to change this behavior? These elk get hunted on private consistently. They try to move to the public and get ran back most of the time before anyone even shoots at them.
In the case of migration corridors a long time. I asked that question to Kauffman at a presentation on migration, he said generations of animals up to 100+ years in the case of transplanted animals having to learn from scratch.

Why it's so damaging to pound on mature bull elk in areas where they go after the rut and on their winter ranges.
 
But, what caused the shift to begin with? It's a learned behavior from pressure, no different than a migration corridor or does and their female fawns returning to nearly the same places to have their fawns.
This. Especially in my area if Montana. I haven't seen a cow elk on public land in a long, long time. And scratching out a bull is a bitch too. Learned behavior keeps them where they are. And no amount if pressure will move them. Some will argue with me, but around here the shift started when the wolves got here.. mtmuley
 
Last edited:
The other thing I’m not sure how it would shake out is, yes there’s a lot of public land hunters hunting cow elk, but also a lot of public land hunters hunting bull elk (mainly speaking to general areas). Will those public land cow hunters make the effort to get access to private lands, or will they hold off and just hunt bull elk on public lands in the general season? Maybe they’ll try to get access on private in October but for those that don’t or are unsuccessful they may also just switch and be in the woods in November chasing bulls.

Could result in more public land pressure because of more bull hunters. Could result in more bulls killed in general season if that’s the only thing valid/open on public. Could result in more people in the woods, longer, if they’re sticking out trying to get a bull. Could make not a bit of difference if the elk have already long moved to private. Could be like everything else and the answer is “it depends.”

Something might work one way in a given state that’s already been a certain way for ages, evolving with hunter behavior and access for years, but how will a statewide overhaul from one system to another be? Could we expect to immediately go to however it is in Wyoming or are there things in Montana, as a result of years in the current structure, that would set us on a path to a different result? Who knows, I sure don’t. One way to find out I guess.

I do think that however someone feels about this proposal, love, hate, or neutral, it represents a very thoughtful effort in trying to solve a complex problem. More importantly, it represents people filling their roles as beneficiaries and advocating for their public trust resource. Just like those who may not agree with the proposal could argue for the status quo or a different means to an end. On a broader scale the conversation and engagement is a win.

Please don’t take any of this as opposition or support for one thing or another; just trying to ponder how all of it will shake out across the spectrum of human hunter and landowner behaviors coupled with the spectrum of critter biology, behavior, and habitats.
 
Please don’t take any of this as opposition or support for one thing or another; just trying to ponder how all of it will shake out across the spectrum of human hunter and landowner behaviors coupled with the spectrum of critter biology, behavior, and habitats
Echo'ing this. The proposal seems to trigger a "response" more and more - and not a conversation. Its not really even worth engaging some at this point.

If honest questions from someone who's generally for the proposal cause a reaction, it will be a very uphill battle to get it done. Questions from those who are politically motivated against this or from people, for their own legitimate reasons, think its a bad idea it will be very difficult to answer in a convincing manner if this is the rapport.

The proposals got a long road, with a lot harsher and harder questions coming from the public i am sure.
 
You might be talking about the graph on page 24 of the link? I think it is just region 7, if I read it correctly.

I recall seeing that as well, but there was also a population estimate- broken down by region and statewide- that went back to the ‘50s. I understand the 50s was an unsustainably high population, but the decades that followed were not. And the population trend was showing significant decline every year.

My problem with showing harvest like this is that it doesn’t reflect that harvest declined with: increasing hunter numbers and hunter days afield, as well as a decline in age of harvested animals. So more people are hunting more days each to kill fewer and smaller bucks. I’m reminded of Mark Twain’s quote, “Three kinds of lies- lies, damned lies, and statistics.” Having the correct statistic is paramount to management.

I know there are a lot of challenges on the landscape- CWD, predators, access, tolerance of wildlife, cranky hunters. But doing the same old thing and claiming everything is fine in the face of contradictory facts is borderline negligent. And that’s why people get heated on this- the facts of a declining public resource are visible, yet we are told to not believe our own eyes.

So back to my main point- something needs to be done, and this proposal is a good step. It may be imperfect, but at least it’s a step. And any progress is better than staying where we were.
 
This is the main reason why I have remained engaged in this thread. I’d be curious to see if someone can ask a question that hasn’t been beat to death yet in these threads about our idea.
I can honestly say that I am willing to bet the vast majority of Montana hunters have no idea of this proposal and might not even care if they did. Just based off of people I talk to in my travels that are "hunters". It's really frustrating but it is what it is. And the non resident give a shit is even lower. Not sure how to change that. Maybe by eliminating the word opportunity. mtmuley
 
I can honestly say that I am willing to bet the vast majority of Montana hunters have no idea of this proposal and might not even care if they did. Just based off of people I talk to in my travels that are "hunters". It's really frustrating but it is what it is. And the non resident give a shit is even lower. Not sure how to change that. Maybe by eliminating the word opportunity. mtmuley
It’s funny to me because all the people I look in the eye and have a face to face conversation with I’ve only had like 2 get all huffy about it. Most people ask how they can help and think something needs to change. We are doing what we can to get out and spread information but there is some places we don’t care to go onto such as Facebook because that’s just a megaphone for stupidity go check out montamerica if you need proof of it.
 
It’s funny to me because all the people I look in the eye and have a face to face conversation with I’ve only had like 2 get all huffy about it. Most people ask how they can help and think something needs to change. We are doing what we can to get out and spread information but there is some places we don’t care to go onto such as Facebook because that’s just a megaphone for stupidity go check out montamerica if you need proof of it.
I don't FB. Never will. Just pointing out the ignorance of the average hunter and their understanding of the issues at hand. I run into guys that don't even understand the regulations. It's an uphill battle. mtmuley
 
The other thing I’m not sure how it would shake out is, yes there’s a lot of public land hunters hunting cow elk, but also a lot of public land hunters hunting bull elk (mainly speaking to general areas). Will those public land cow hunters make the effort to get access to private lands, or will they hold off and just hunt bull elk on public lands in the general season? Maybe they’ll try to get access on private in October but for those that don’t or are unsuccessful they may also just switch and be in the woods in November chasing bulls.

Could result in more public land pressure because of more bull hunters. Could result in more bulls killed in general season if that’s the only thing valid/open on public. Could result in more people in the woods, longer, if they’re sticking out trying to get a bull. Could make not a bit of difference if the elk have already long moved to private. Could be like everything else and the answer is “it depends.”

Something might work one way in a given state that’s already been a certain way for ages, evolving with hunter behavior and access for years, but how will a statewide overhaul from one system to another be? Could we expect to immediately go to however it is in Wyoming or are there things in Montana, as a result of years in the current structure, that would set us on a path to a different result? Who knows, I sure don’t. One way to find out I guess.

I do think that however someone feels about this proposal, love, hate, or neutral, it represents a very thoughtful effort in trying to solve a complex problem. More importantly, it represents people filling their roles as beneficiaries and advocating for their public trust resource. Just like those who may not agree with the proposal could argue for the status quo or a different means to an end. On a broader scale the conversation and engagement is a win.

Please don’t take any of this as opposition or support for one thing or another; just trying to ponder how all of it will shake out across the spectrum of human hunter and landowner behaviors coupled with the spectrum of critter biology, behavior, and habitats.
I've thought about the bull hunting portion as well. In a lot areas in NW Montana, there are so few bull elk, hardly anyone is hunting them now. I mean pretty tough to hunt what's not there. Plus, hunting bulls that time of year is a way different deal than hunting cows. The bulls are usually alone or in smaller groups, way away from the herds of cows. Sure, sometimes a raghorn or something will be with cows still, but for the most part you're hunting 2 different animals almost. Point being, if the cows on public land that time of year aren't being shot at, they have no real reason to leave. The only pressure that cows that time of year in many areas are getting is youth hunters (I think that should be looked at and probably stopped in many areas).

I think your point that blanket changes could be less than ideal on a State as large as Montana holds merit for sure, but not many of the issues I'm seeing with the overall proposal leads me to believe that they couldn't be addressed within the current regulation framework. Season length, separating cow hunting on private VS public, etc. are all very doable.
 
I've thought about the bull hunting portion as well. In a lot areas in NW Montana, there are so few bull elk, hardly anyone is hunting them now. I mean pretty tough to hunt what's not there. Plus, hunting bulls that time of year is a way different deal than hunting cows. The bulls are usually alone or in smaller groups, way away from the herds of cows. Sure, sometimes a raghorn or something will be with cows still, but for the most part you're hunting 2 different animals almost. Point being, if the cows on public land that time of year aren't being shot at, they have no real reason to leave. The only pressure that cows that time of year in many areas are getting is youth hunters (I think that should be looked at and probably stopped in many areas).

I think your point that blanket changes could be less than ideal on a State as large as Montana holds merit for sure, but not many of the issues I'm seeing with the overall proposal leads me to believe that they couldn't be addressed within the current regulation framework. Season length, separating cow hunting on private VS public, etc. are all very doable.
Fwp would have the power to make those tweaks this is just an idea they can take as much of it as they want add whatever they want. They make the rules we are just making a suggestion
 
Leupold Banner

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
115,217
Messages
2,088,067
Members
36,980
Latest member
Deeds92
Back
Top