Montana mule deer Expectations.

Jpopejoy1980 said:
Hello, I am new to the forum. My dad is a Midwest whitetail hunter. His dream hunt has always been mule deer. So I have a few points bought for him and I am looking at unit 705 in eastern Montana. I have focused on this part of the state because I have heard there are decent numbers of deer, decent public access, and the terrain is a little easier to navigate. That last One is of particular concern for my aging father. Anyone have experience in this unit? It doesn’t need to be a record book buck, heck any mule deer is like to look like a giant compared to the white tails we are used to hunting.
Click to expand...
Wrong thread friend
 
OntarioHunter said:
This is so much like the Quality Deer [horns] Management back east. All about artificially making big antlers because that's what sells. $$$
Click to expand...
If you think QDMA is "horns management" then you're entirely uninformed about QDMA and their principles.

QDMA (now NDA) and their principles are also a big part of why hunters in my part of "back east" have the kind of hunting we do, as compared to what we had in the 90s or before.

Also, I don't know of any way to "artificially" make big antlers besides breeding deer behind a high fence. And Montana having more big mule deer doesn't make it "unspecial" to kill a big mule deer. It makes it where more people can have that special experience.
 
I keep saying I have no dog in this fight, so why am I getting so annoyed with the "we don't need to manage for bigger deer" crowd?

Is the new generation of hunters so afraid of being labeled a trophy hunter that they quietly deny how absolutely awesome it is to see a truly big mule deer buck on the hoof? And I don't mean a buck that looks big because you're used to looking at whitetails, or a buck in some picture next to a damn saguaro cactus that claims to be in Montana, but a true monster mule deer.

I saw one once, in New Mexico actually, a nontypical that I would bet my life on grossing over 200 inches. I want everyone to experience seeing a buck like that at least once in their life. It's not just about the killing. Big herds or lots of deer aren't the only indicators of good stewardship; big old well-developed bucks are their own indicator of the same.

We already know mule deer are more sensitive a species than whitetails or elk. We know that anyone who wants meat can kill a cow elk damn near out to St Patricks day. I don't see why there are some who want to keep handwaving at the idea of restricting some access and letting the landscape, letting Montana, show what she can do when it comes to growing mule deer.

Sorry if this is a bit rambling, I am just feeling passionate towards some of these arguments.
 
nick87 said:
I'd take the hunting in the 90's all day and twice on sunday.
Click to expand...
Fair, I hunted your state as a little boy circa 2000-2003 and my dad started there every year back around 89-90, so I know what the glory days looked like. And the friends I still have up there would say the same as you. Heck I hunted there one more time in 2012 and could see the changes myself.

I'm down south though, our deer hunting is probably as good now as it's ever been or ever will be.
 
antlerradar said:
You got me thinking about the hunting pressure back then. I really can not say for the late eighty's as I was out of SE Montana for all of the season but Thanksgiving week.
There was quite a few hunters around in the early ninety's, there might have even been more hunters targeting mule deer buck than there is today. What is different today is now we have 225 hunters with bull elk tags and most of them have a buddy or two helping them find a bull. They all have a buck tag in there pocket and if a nice buck is spotted, they turn into deer hunters. The Custer has 600 cow elk tags available and those hunters also have buck tags. There are now thousands of doe tags available. Most the resident doe hunters also have a buck tag and if they don't they have a buddy that does. Soon as they get to a phone they are telling them about any nice buck that is spotted. It all adds up to a lot more hunters than in the past and this increase in pressure pushes deer to private and also makes hunters spread out more. In the ninety's there was places that didn't see many hunters all season, not so much any more. For example in the 90's there was one creek on the east side of Otter that had a reputation as a good spot for a quality buck. Now that creek is full of elk hunter so hunters with just a buck tag go else were and the buck that live there still get shot because all of the elk hunters have a deer tag too.
The hunters have also changed. In the past there was a lot of day hunters form near by towns and the Cheyenne and Crow reservations. Hunters from west Billings were rare. Now there are more people coming from the west and staying a week or two. Opening weekend is busy, but most of those hunters are after elk unless they happen to see a nice buck. Most of the deer hunters are hunting the two weeks centered around peak rut. You still see quite a few locals from the eastern part of the state on a day hunt, but the Cheyenne and Crow are hunting mostly on the reservations because quite frankly the hunting is better there.
Click to expand...
I called FWP and left a message with their stats guy. Hoping we can get a picture of license numbers in the late 80s. I'll let ya know what I find out.
 
antlerradar said:
That is the million dollar question. I do not support adding a few limited entry units. Even if we cut tags in a few units to say even 20% of current hunters, those units would draw the dedicated hunters that would target the top 20% of bucks in the unit and the meat hunter would just hunt a general unit. Bucks like the ones I posted are likely in the top 20% of bucks at age three. Maybe in the limited units a slightly larger parentage of the top end buck would live to see four, but close to zero would live past age five. It may even be that a top end buck would have a better chance of living to old age in a general unit.
This is also what is happening on many private ranches. The number of hunters may be few, but the hunters that are hunting the ranch are targeting the top end bucks. The result is the top end bucks die young and the 130 inch three by three dies of old age.
State wide limited entry might be a different story as now all hunters would have to pick a unit and there would be just fewer hunters killing deer. How much different for the top end bucks is hard to say. I think it would help, but there is no easy way to grow truly giant deer.
Click to expand...
I’m not saying we need to or should go to all limited entry in any way. Speaking strictly from a quality and age standpoint, there is a very clear example of limited vs. general on the northern border of our state. You can literally get on a high point and see the difference by looking up into Saskatchewan and on our side. These deer are eating the same food and to a degree have the same genetics(although deep forked classic looking muleys have been mostly killed off on the MT side in many places). Again, not saying we should go that route, but the evidence is there for what we could potentially have.
 
Jpopejoy1980 said:
Hello, I am new to the forum. My dad is a Midwest whitetail hunter. His dream hunt has always been mule deer. So I have a few points bought for him and I am looking at unit 705 in eastern Montana. I have focused on this part of the state because I have heard there are decent numbers of deer, decent public access, and the terrain is a little easier to navigate. That last One is of particular concern for my aging father. Anyone have experience in this unit? It doesn’t need to be a record book buck, heck any mule deer is like to look like a giant compared to the white tails we are used to hunting.
Click to expand...


Strap your boots up REALLY tight and you should be able to kill a slob easily. Just have to get away from the roads. Hunters have become so lazy anymore that they just road hunt. Locals are probably the laziest as they never seem to find the booners
 
brockel said:
Strap your boots up REALLY tight and you should be able to kill a slob easily. Just have to get away from the roads. Hunters have become so lazy anymore that they just road hunt. Locals are probably the laziest as they never seem to find the booners
Click to expand...
Also just drive highway 2. You’ll probably run over at least 3 slammer bucks.
 
brockel said:
Strap your boots up REALLY tight and you should be able to kill a slob easily. Just have to get away from the roads. Hunters have become so lazy anymore that they just road hunt. Locals are probably the laziest as they never seem to find the booners
Click to expand...
You can walk in Crocs between roads in E MT and not even get cactus in your socks. Lazy SOBS.
 
brocksw said:
I called FWP and left a message with their stats guy. Hoping we can get a picture of license numbers in the late 80s. I'll let ya know what I find out.
Click to expand...
It is not just about the number of licenses sold, but where the hunters are hunting. Prior to 1990, you almost never saw some one form west of Billings in SE Montana and very few Washington and Oregon hunters would drive an extra 500 miles to hunt Montana.
 
Last edited:
antlerradar said:
It is not just about the number of licenses sold, but where the hunters are hunting. Prior to 1990, you almost never saw some one form west of Billings and very few Washington and Oregon would drive an extra 500 miles to hunt Montana.
Click to expand...
Understood. Curiosity still has the best of me, I'd really like to know where license numbers stood 30 years ago compared to now.

Dr. Kaufman and Dr. Monteith discuss this notion about the "good ol days" of mule deer (they figure it was around the 1960s/70s). But essentially, they propose the idea that in order for things to be like they were back then, the environment and most, if not all variables need to be the same as they were back then. Which when you go back towards that time period, the list of differences is not insignificant.

When they discuss those variables, they get into eruptive dynamics, growing elk populations affect on MD populations, growth of row crops, less predators, the effect of the 30s on land development practices.

Its a great podcast, one of the best I've heard on Mule deer.
www.themeateater.com

Ep. 162: Landscape of Fear | MeatEater Podcasts

Steven Rinella talks with Dr. Kevin Monteith, Dr. Matt Kaufmann, Jared Oakleaf, and Janis Putelis.Subjects discussed: genetics that rewrite our understanding of animals; big game guts; learning how to migrate; who pays for wildlife research?; brain scrambling, extreme sports, and wildlife capture...
www.themeateater.com www.themeateater.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Teach me about Wyoming mule deer
Replies
6
Views
817
dodgermax
D
S
Mule deer in montana
2
Replies
29
Views
3K
Shed God
S
S
First Western Mule Deer Hunt
Replies
15
Views
1K
vanish
vanish
Elky Welky
Montana Mule Deer Raffle
12 13 14
Replies
275
Views
18K
SwaggyD
SwaggyD
B
New Mexico 5B mule deer
Replies
3
Views
462
Westelker
Westelker

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
113,578
Messages
2,025,667
Members
36,237
Latest member
SCOOTER848

Share this page

Back
Top