Montana Mule Deer Mismanagement

[R.K.]

I also pulled the last 17 years of harvest data. Looks like we've stayed consistent with a slight decrease about when the wolves were introduced. Looks like a couple mild winters starting around 15 have helped the numbers come back. It looks like we've maintained a steady 4pt or higher ration compared to total harvest over the 14 yr. period of hunter surveys.

-ELKdeerMT

View attachment 242162

The concerning thing I see is 2014 saw HALF the harvest of 8-10 years earlier. And I’m fairly certain the 90s had higher populations than the 00’s, but I need to find that study again.

Question- is this a measure of all mule deer taken, or just bucks? Because variations between 1/3 and 1/2 of harvest being four point bucks (noted, this is not mature deer, just an easily measurable metric) seems pretty atrocious if it’s bucks- that’s a boatload of forkies.

 

[FREAK]

The concerning thing I see is 2014 saw HALF the harvest of 8-10 years earlier. And I’m fairly certain the 90s had higher populations than the 00’s, but I need to find that study again.

Question- is this a measure of all mule deer taken, or just bucks? Because variations between 1/3 and 1/2 of harvest being four point bucks (noted, this is not mature deer, just an easily measurable metric) seems pretty atrocious if it’s bucks- that’s a boatload of forkies.

R.K. - It's total deer harvested of the MD species (not including whitetail). So it would include bucks and does. And I would agree, it would be nice to see earlier data but that's as far as their reporting goes.

-ELKdeerMT

 

[FREAK]

One last piece of info i'd like to add is the winter paterns over the same period for the month of Jan along with the wolf re-introduction information. The chart above for deer harvest numbers takes a significant dip from 2009-2014 and I think it's a double whammy from the harsh winters (05, 07 and 11) along with wolf population starting to increase (de-listed in 2008). I probably should of included FEB weather but I think the chart below paints a good picture of the conftribuitng factors for the steep decline in harvest numbers from 09-14. Maybe I'm optomistic, but I'm hoping the 2012-19 mild weather, and the number guys have been doing on the wolves will help improve the quality of animals we're seeing in the field.

 

[YukonGold]

Their Data suggests things are improving...I would consider an average age of 5-6 to be a mature deer. Seems like a lot of deer in the 19-22" range which would suggest the numbers are reasonable but the genetics aren't great in the area.

I know the areas I've hunted over the years are migration corridors and the largest impact to quality is how hard the winter is and the wolf populations. I'm planning to try and do my part and will try and get a wolf this year to help with this issue.

I know personally, I've harvested a number of these bucks listed below, I'm haven't punched a tag in two years but I've passed a handful in the 150-160" range, Hopefully i can find them again and see if they've made it to the next level. It's a tough dilemma, guys have limited time and seeing a 150" buck on the hoof is hard for a lot of weekend warriors to pass up. If you're concerned like me about the numbers and quality my recommendation is you lay off the trigger this November when that 4 yr old 150" walks in front of you and save your bullet for a wolf.




View attachment 242156

I'm not familiar with HD652 but based on this data it looks like it's a permit area. Can't really compare that with general areas. If only 50-100 people are given the chance to shoot a buck every year you're gonna get older deer.

 

[The Hedgehog]

I'm not familiar with HD652 but based on this data it looks like it's a permit area. Can't really compare that with general areas. If only 50-100 people are given the chance to shoot a buck every year you're gonna get older deer.

I could be mistaken but I think FWP gives out more permits than there are deer in 652.

 

[tjones]

Has there ever been a wolf killed in 652?

 

[FREAK]

I'm not familiar with HD652 but based on this data it looks like it's a permit area. Can't really compare that with general areas. If only 50-100 people are given the chance to shoot a buck every year you're gonna get older deer.

It's hard to sort it all out, I think i'll plan to just load up a cooler of bush light and pound some roads next fall, find me a 19" 4.5 year old 145 inch deer, hold em up close to the camera and tell my buddies he's at least a 165".

 

[The Hedgehog]

It's hard to sort it all out, I think i'll plan to just load up a cooler of bush light and pound some roads next fall, find me a 19" 4.5 year old 145 inch deer, hold em up close to the camera and tell my buddies he's at least a 165".

if you take better beer, you're more likely to find smaller deer.

 

[FREAK]

if you take better beer, you're more likely to find smaller deer.

I'm still assimilating to the BozAngles ways....My redneck ways run deep. A few cold smokes and those forks really start to develop some character

 

[YukonGold]

I could be mistaken but I think FWP gives out more permits than there are deer in 652.

I googled "fwp hunt district 652" and this came up: https://fwp.mt.gov/binaries/content...-652-50-permit-quota-range-change_final-1.pdf

looks like it's also a CWD area. could help explain recent increases in permit numbers.

 

[YukonGold]

Has there ever been a wolf killed in 652?

was wondering this as well. don't think wolves are much of a factor in region 6...or 7... funny how quick people are to blame them for everything.

 

[FREAK]

was wondering this as well. don't think wolves are much of a factor in region 6...or 7... funny how quick people are to blame them for everything.

Goldy, the title of the thread is "Montana Mule Deer Mismanagement" not Unit 625....But yeah, I'll definitely continue to blame them for everything.

​

 

[YukonGold]

Goldy, the title of the thread is "Montana Mule Deer Mismanagement" not Unit 625....But yeah, I'll definitely continue to blame them for everything.

​

you do you. but you brought up 652, not me. have a nice day.

 

[tjones]

One last piece of info i'd like to add is the winter paterns over the same period for the month of Jan along with the wolf re-introduction information. The chart above for deer harvest numbers takes a significant dip from 2009-2014 and I think it's a double whammy from the harsh winters (05, 07 and 11) along with wolf population starting to increase (de-listed in 2008). I probably should of included FEB weather but I think the chart below paints a good picture of the conftribuitng factors for the steep decline in harvest numbers from 09-14. Maybe I'm optomistic, but I'm hoping the 2012-19 mild weather, and the number guys have been doing on the wolves will help improve the quality of animals we're seeing in the field.
View attachment 242175

Billings weather and wolves prolly had me confused.

 

[YukonGold]

Billings weather and wolves prolly had me confused.

don't you know that severe winters are caused by wolves?

 

[Eric Albus]

I could be mistaken but I think FWP gives out more permits than there are deer in 652.

Yes.
200 buck tags for 652, I’d bet there are less than 200 deer in all of 652.

 

[The Hedgehog]

"limited" quota of 200.

Yes.
200 buck tags for 652, I’d bet there are less than 200 deer in all of 652.

can you imagine being the lucky recipient of this prize permit? Here you go - you have to hunt here, and cannot hunt anywhere else this year. Just like the Bridgers nowadays.

 

[FREAK]

"limited" quota of 200.

can you imagine being the lucky recipient of this prize permit? Here you go - you have to hunt here, and cannot hunt anywhere else this year. Just like the Bridgers nowadays.

Serious question: when’s the last time the Bridger tag was worth applying for?

 

[MTTW]

Serious question: when’s the last time the Bridger tag was worth applying for?

It never was.

 

[The Hedgehog]

Serious question: when’s the last time the Bridger tag was worth applying for?

In the 80s when it was general. Likely better than anything in MT now, private or public.