And also peoples definition of a good buck varies greatly
Montana Mule Deer Mismanagement
- Thread starter rogerthat
- Start date
And also peoples definition of a good buck varies greatly
sclancy27
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2022
- Messages
- 613
Honest question, does that even fulfill the requirements of "antlered buck"? Doesn't the spike have to be 4"?
sclancy27
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2022
- Messages
- 613
Anecdotal data also generally comes with heavy biases, at least in a statistical sense.This is primo. @Nameless Range
You hit it on the head. Anecdotal data is still data. It may not have unique identifiers and you may not find it on an interfaced query in a neat stack or bar graph, but it is raw data. So FWP is slow to respond and the changes don’t match what the majority of folks on here think needs to be done, that matters and it should be taken with a pound of salt. I can’t say much more than you did and certainly not with the weight that you didbut keep it up and maybe folks will start buying in. This isn’t a battle of words, it is a war of action.
BirdManMike
Well-known member
Shooting a small deer for some meat is one thing, but its absolutely mind boggling that someone would put a picture of this deer on Instagram (or Facebook or whatever that screenshots). Especially a guy that dubs himself 'The Mule Deer Hunter'.
Bambistew
Well-known member
Imagine if you will... opportunity to hunt every year, but the season date is changed to a time of the year when harvest success is lower, resulting in better quality deer hunting and opportunity to hunt every year.
IMO, there is absolutely zero chance of improving mule deer hunting in MT given the current mentality and knowledge. Cutting a few thousand doe tags isn't going to change anything. I have zero confidence in their population models. They are managing some areas to b:d ratios 5-8:100 range because access is too easy and there is nothing that can be done.
Like @Nameless Range, I watched the deer population in the area I grew up hunting in R3 go from great to nearly extinct. My dad and grandfather hunted the same areas starting in the 1930s and they saw more deer on a daily basis hunting than even I did as a kid and young adult, yet the deer population per FWP is remained more or less constant with a minor drop in the 90s.
I think they woefully underestimated populations previously, and as they use their "data" and models with better science and information, they are honing in on the actual population, but are still overestimating it. Deer hunting was much better in the past because we had a lot more deer, not 20-30% more, more like 2-3x as many more.
My anecdotal evidence of MD populations = 100s upon 100s of hours spotting winter ranges compared FWP model and their 2-3 day surveys a year? How could anyone with a brain think their "data" is better. There are winter ranges in the valley I grew up, you'd struggle to count 10% of the deer I did in the 90s. The deer are gone, and they aren't coming back, doe tags or not.
IMO, there is absolutely zero chance of improving mule deer hunting in MT given the current mentality and knowledge. Cutting a few thousand doe tags isn't going to change anything. I have zero confidence in their population models. They are managing some areas to b:d ratios 5-8:100 range because access is too easy and there is nothing that can be done.
Like @Nameless Range, I watched the deer population in the area I grew up hunting in R3 go from great to nearly extinct. My dad and grandfather hunted the same areas starting in the 1930s and they saw more deer on a daily basis hunting than even I did as a kid and young adult, yet the deer population per FWP is remained more or less constant with a minor drop in the 90s.
I think they woefully underestimated populations previously, and as they use their "data" and models with better science and information, they are honing in on the actual population, but are still overestimating it. Deer hunting was much better in the past because we had a lot more deer, not 20-30% more, more like 2-3x as many more.
My anecdotal evidence of MD populations = 100s upon 100s of hours spotting winter ranges compared FWP model and their 2-3 day surveys a year? How could anyone with a brain think their "data" is better. There are winter ranges in the valley I grew up, you'd struggle to count 10% of the deer I did in the 90s. The deer are gone, and they aren't coming back, doe tags or not.
Last edited:
Irrelevant
Well-known member
I submitted my 2 cents
Agree! Wyoming has a deer season outside of the rut in most areas, and it’s pretty amazing the amount of quality deer you can see around Thanksgiving. Montana has extensive agricultural production as compared to WY, CO, or UT, and we could establish quality mule deer hunting In probably 3-5 years by just limiting tags, and changing season dates.
On another note I talk to regional FWP biologist annually and it seems they are always right and have a quick comeback for anything that goes against their agenda.
I was in Glasgow this weekend and was blown away by the amount on nonresident hunters and the small quantity of bucks they were harvesting, it’s pretty sad the marketing campaign by the social media hunters.
what a jack wagon
cgasner1
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2016
- Messages
- 2,966
I’m impressed he has bullets left in that holder
There is nothing wrong with shooting a deer for meat. When everyone does it, and they are rutting it does become a problem. If there was a finite number of tags in an area blast away. We don’t have that. One of the only variables we as humans can control stays the same and that is infuriating as populations continue to decline. Hunting may not be causing the declines but we never try to figure that out.
Sioux33
Well-known member
There’s no way that deep down, the FWP thinks they’re doing a bang up job managing mule deer. The real problem is instead of doing what’s best for the resource, they’re doing what’s best for the agency. It’s a money issue. They’re restricted to 17k NR tags, but somehow they’ve used every loophole they can to squeeze out 59k tags. Now they’ve built up this business of selling opportunity to generate more money than ever before and any tag cut is a step backwards. IMO, that’s why they word their surveys in their favor, claim they’re knocking it out of the park, and blame it all on habitat conditions.
What we really need to look at is the total tag revenue created and figure out how to get a better product out of the same income level.
Or, you treat tags similar to a commodity. Set the revenue level, let the biologists determine the tag numbers based on actual population counts along with hunter satisfaction surveys. On down population years, there’s less tags available but cost a little more. On up years, there’s more tags at a lower cost. Either way, FWP’s getting its money and hunters are getting a quality product. I get it, probably would never happen, but until we solve the money issue, we’re gonna see the same old song and dance.
What we really need to look at is the total tag revenue created and figure out how to get a better product out of the same income level.
Or, you treat tags similar to a commodity. Set the revenue level, let the biologists determine the tag numbers based on actual population counts along with hunter satisfaction surveys. On down population years, there’s less tags available but cost a little more. On up years, there’s more tags at a lower cost. Either way, FWP’s getting its money and hunters are getting a quality product. I get it, probably would never happen, but until we solve the money issue, we’re gonna see the same old song and dance.
Last edited:
sclancy27
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2022
- Messages
- 613
So far I've averaged around 40 deer a day, not including the ones I see when driving to new spots. Definitely lower than 5 years ago, but not 1 or 2 deer a day I have heard from people.
Mature bucks have been few, I think I've seen 3 or 4. The forkie army is strong, tho his ranks thin daily. I've seen a number of what I think are 3.5 yr old bucks that I hope make another year. I've also been dusting a grouse or two, they are freaking everywhere.
I've also found a buck to hunt, I'm guessing a 170" ish 4x4. I tried to kill him yesterday and today, but failed. I'll keep after him until I run out of time or one of us dies.
Mature bucks have been few, I think I've seen 3 or 4. The forkie army is strong, tho his ranks thin daily. I've seen a number of what I think are 3.5 yr old bucks that I hope make another year. I've also been dusting a grouse or two, they are freaking everywhere.
I've also found a buck to hunt, I'm guessing a 170" ish 4x4. I tried to kill him yesterday and today, but failed. I'll keep after him until I run out of time or one of us dies.
Had a 3.5 hour drive Sunday evening, a good portion of it was next to a creek with ag fields along it. There were a fair number of doe groups along there but not a single buck was spotted. With the rut going, every one of those groups should have had a buck with it.
300stw
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2008
- Messages
- 862
maybe the deer migrated to APR, or the reservations,,,,
antlerradar
Well-known member
My wife vetoed the beard idea. I will just have to stick with my normal 1/8 inch of graying stubble look.
Back in the 70's and 80's the biologist would stop by and chat at least once a year. When he moved up to a new job in Helena his replacement stopped by quite a bit, but mostly he was looking for tips on where I had seen a good buck or two. Now I seldom see a biologist in the field and they never stop to chat. Not entirely the biologists fault. Tight budgets and mileage limits keep them in the office too much. Save a little in gas money and miss out on valuable public relations.
If old time ranchers had there way this season would be in October and likely shorter. I was in Miles City yesterday and ran into an old time rancher form the other side of Otter Creek. His opinion is we are hell bent on the extinction of mule deer on the Custer.
antlerradar
Well-known member
I see more deer driving on the highways on the Cheyenne than I do driving the main road on the Custer now days. Hard to say what you would turn up if you were in some of the roadless areas of the Cheyenne.
The Hedgehog
Well-known member
This is a bad sign. Let’s maybe show a jenga chart about how survival rates relate to numbers, and not what’s killing all the deer.
Roscoe P Coal
Active member
- Joined
- May 29, 2023
- Messages
- 37
ThAT’s a BUnCh oF SquiLLyWormEr!..!
antlerradar
Well-known member
There are some good hunters on the Cheyenne, they are taking some good bucks.
Twenty five years ago there was a line of Cheyenne hunters headed to the Custer daily. I would be surprised if I have seen a half dozen this year. If all the locals quit going to a restaurant there is a reason, the same logic applies to hunting.
