sclancy27
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2022
- Messages
- 653
I don't hunt 410 anymore, that is jagaloon central.
Montana Mule Deer Mismanagement
- Thread starter rogerthat
- Start date
ShootsManyBullets
Well-known member
Learned a new term today thanks to you and urban dictionary. Thanks!
rogerthat
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2015
- Messages
- 2,977
Well finally got my phone survey call after a month or more of phone tag. The gal was really nice and actually left me a voicemail with a number to call back or no way was this going to happen.
Did you hunt deer? Yes
How many days? 30
Did you harvest a deer? No
Did you see any wolves or moose? No
Did you hunt antelope? No
Did you hunt turkeys? No
Did you hunt upland game birds? No
Ok Thanks. Have a great day.
People can defend FWP status quo all they want but no way that anyone can conclude that is great harvest data. They didn’t even ask where I put in those 30 waste of time days at.
Did you hunt deer? Yes
How many days? 30
Did you harvest a deer? No
Did you see any wolves or moose? No
Did you hunt antelope? No
Did you hunt turkeys? No
Did you hunt upland game birds? No
Ok Thanks. Have a great day.
People can defend FWP status quo all they want but no way that anyone can conclude that is great harvest data. They didn’t even ask where I put in those 30 waste of time days at.
I had almost the exact same questions a while back. Never asked the unit.
I took it to mean that they weren't actually interested in deer.
for people that live in colorado or many other western states, the concept of being able to hunt 30 days for deer or elk outside of archery is actually alien.
like hard to imagine.
rogerthat
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2015
- Messages
- 2,977
It could be described as heinous mismanagement disguised as opportunity.
Edit: Those were archery and rifle days combined yet still the survey doesn’t ferret that out.
Last year I tried to give them the districts that I hunted. They said we don’t need that info. Mandatory reporting would be good but it won’t fix anything. It would take a change in leadership and attitude of the fwp staff in how they address mule deer management. Mind numbing watching it happen year after year when it’s painfully obvious changes are needed.
The Hedgehog
Well-known member
I got the same phone call. Asked if I hunted my deer b and antelope and if I got one and where but no ask of general deer or elk, oh and did you see any wolves..
rogerthat
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2015
- Messages
- 2,977
I think it would/could clearly show some of the problems that FWP is willfully ignoring with their current mule deer management. Right now they don’t even think they have a problem. They cite “their” data for reference. Their data is crap. I would like to see them justify their management with actual accurate real world data. Anecdotally to hunters that spend a lot of time in the field, the decline has been super obvious. Good data would show this. This we would get to step #1 in solving a problem. Admit you have a problem.
I have a hard time believing they don’t know they have a problem. The public shouldn’t be having to convince our game managers and biologists that things aren’t good. They should know before we do. I suspect they have all the data they need to justify changes.
FI460
Well-known member
I wonder if they're extrapolating check station numbers? No idea, just a thought I had.
I work in plant physiology. Previously worked in pest entomology. In both labs the staff was always excited when a new tool came out that would make data collection easier or increase our resolution of a measurement.
It's wild that FWP isn't interested in improvement.
My favorite was a couple years ago and asked me if I saw any wolves and I said yes, 2 and I killed one of them, and they asked me if I killed it while I was elk hunting. I said no , I was sheep hunting.
She said okay, we’re only asking about wolves seen while elk hunting.
She said okay, we’re only asking about wolves seen while elk hunting.
I got my call yesterday and almost hung in protest to the shitty system, but showed minimal maturity and answered the questions.
Same question of for deer; how many days did you hunt with no follow up on where I hunted. Maybe if I would have answered "yes" for moose or wolf sightings they would have asked. Should have had some fun with it.
Did you hunt antelope (pronghorn I assumed
)? Yep.
How many days? One.
Did you kill an "antelope"? Yes
Was it a buck or a doe? Buck.
What hunting district? You mean the one that I applied for and the one that should be on the record instead of asking me the question? Yep, same one.
Same question of for deer; how many days did you hunt with no follow up on where I hunted. Maybe if I would have answered "yes" for moose or wolf sightings they would have asked. Should have had some fun with it.
Did you hunt antelope (pronghorn I assumed
)? Yep. How many days? One.
Did you kill an "antelope"? Yes
Was it a buck or a doe? Buck.
What hunting district? You mean the one that I applied for and the one that should be on the record instead of asking me the question? Yep, same one.
In contrast how Montana does things, this year in Arizona I had a multi unit muzzleloader tag. Before my season was even over, I received an email with a link to a survey.
did you hunt?
Which units did you hunt in?
How many days in said units?
Did you harvest?
If so, mule deer or coues deer?
How many points on the left antler? How many points on the right antler?
A few days later a hard copy of the same survey came in the mail, which I could fill out and return, or use the QR code to take me online to the same survey that was provided in the email.
Participation is not, but should be mandatory, but i bet participation is fairly high and the data they do get actually has enough specificity to be useful.
did you hunt?
Which units did you hunt in?
How many days in said units?
Did you harvest?
If so, mule deer or coues deer?
How many points on the left antler? How many points on the right antler?
A few days later a hard copy of the same survey came in the mail, which I could fill out and return, or use the QR code to take me online to the same survey that was provided in the email.
Participation is not, but should be mandatory, but i bet participation is fairly high and the data they do get actually has enough specificity to be useful.
They asked me the number of days deer hunting and if I saw wolves or moose while I was hunting deer. The only useful information that they collected from me was how many wolves or moose I saw per day of deer hunting. They were gathering wolf info and making sure that moose were still nearly extinct. It wasn't about deer. It can't be without the unit.
Irrelevant
Well-known member
Me? Idk so. I mean I have argued that most people don't lie on them but not that MT does an even remotely adequate job in surveys
Bambistew
Well-known member
My mistake, I thought it was you arguing that their methods for survey were sound and repeatable. While not inaccurate, the data they present is 100% misleading. IMO. They have zero clue how many hunters hunt or harvest in each unit.
There is no way in hell that calling thousands of hunters (and returning calls when not answered) and inputting data is less expensive than mandatory reporting online by the hunter. I wonder how many survey techs FWP employs for this survey.
