Montana mule deer rant
- Thread starter brockel
- Start date
Schaaf
Well-known member
If I had to guess, I would say that for the last two springs in Montana, the lack of grass for cover and nutrients for the mom would be the biggest issues for fawn recruitment that certainly tilt the scales towards predators.
Unless you’re living on a wildlife refuge, the habitat conditions over the last two years are about the worst I’ve ever seen. Doesn’t seem like there’s hardly any grass left out there. We’ve obviously had droughts before but I don’t believe we maximized the grazing AUMs like we currently are. The data on numbers of cattle supports that.
Unless you’re living on a wildlife refuge, the habitat conditions over the last two years are about the worst I’ve ever seen. Doesn’t seem like there’s hardly any grass left out there. We’ve obviously had droughts before but I don’t believe we maximized the grazing AUMs like we currently are. The data on numbers of cattle supports that.
brocksw
Well-known member
Just to further build upon this sentiment. Our ND Game and Fish documented a noticeably lower fawn recruitment during last year's drought.
“This year’s count was the lowest fawn-to-doe ratio since 2011 and 2012, following the severe winters of 2008 through 2010,” said Bruce Stillings, big game management supervisor for Game and Fish. “Nutritional stress related to the drought was also apparent with considerably more yearling bucks observed as spikes rather than forked bucks.”
Drought hurts mule deer fawn production in North Dakota; bucks show nutritional distress
An optimistic spring survey of western North Dakota's mule deer population following a mild winter has given way to a discouraging fall survey after a summer of drought.
Last edited:
Utah started its bounty program on coyotes 10 years ago. Didn’t do a lot of digging but also didn’t turn up a ton of data on whether it’s helping or not. Did find this chart but there are other factors over a 4 year trend that could change things as well
Mtnhunter1
Well-known member
Bring the fur trade back from the 70's through the early 80's. $120 coyote average has a way of inducing predator control over a very large area.
The mule deer population of R-1's Backcountry have plummeted the last few decades and I can guarantee that they didn't disappear due to lead poisoning.
Good luck with the fur trade. Who is bringing that back? Is that a government subsidy?
Many mountain populations of mule deer have plummeted over the past few decades. No it’s not all lead poisoning. But it’s also more complex than predators.
DANGLER
Well-known member
Selfishly, I think it would be great to run the gun hunt the month of October and then fiip back to Archery only for the month of November. Motivated, multi-weapon hunters would still have a long season and tons of opportuntiy but the beat down on rutting bucks would be minimized.
Mtnhunter1
Well-known member
The question was about implementing predator control over a large swath of land like eastern MT. No way to realistically accomplish this in today's environment. The fur prices of the 70's through the early 80's accomplished this feat to the point that coyotes became dam hard to find.
Agree with the complexity of mountain mule deer population trends, there are many contributing factors. But I will say that the habitat of the R-1's backcountry has never looked better. Mother nature's fire has a way of doing that. Yet, even with the replenished environment mule deer and elk are almost removed from the landscape. No B-tags for either mule deer does or cows are effecting the population. So I stand by my statement that the population decline, in the backcountry that I grew up in, has not been caused by lead poisoning.
Yeah I think I agreed with you.
To you, or the deer? Something is missing.
Mtnhunter1
Well-known member
Well "ME" of course!
The something missing is the deer/elk and I'm guessing the ever expanding predator population might have a bit to do with that......and no, I'm not just talking about the woofs....
RobertD
Well-known member
Could do like some of the Midwestern states and have a long primitive season with short periods of general firearm or whatever
Maybe ease into Archery September, rifle October with limited doe tags being valid, November traditional muzzleloader buck only. Maybe residents wouldn’t lose their minds as much knowing they can still use their birthright of thanksgiving hunting it would just be with a muzzleloader (ya right).
Irrelevant
Well-known member
The idea that environmentalists (especially climate activists) prefer oil clothing vs renewable natural clothing is the very definition of #b@llsdeep hypocrisy.
Agreed. It’s endlessly frustrating to me that there isn’t more logical discussion about some of these conflicting ideologies.
brocksw
Well-known member
The Kardashians of course
brocksw
Well-known member
I agree, even if the FWP was willing, the general public of MT would erupt.
I firmly believe you could still hold a hunt or a portion of the season or a separate season in the rut for rifle hunters, but it would be extremely limited in tag availability. This is essentially what ND has done, 200-400 Mule deer buck tags per "badlands" unit, which has translated to about a 5 to 8 yr wait to draw a mule deer buck rifle tag. Tag allocation is completely dependent upon annual counts and other factors determined by the big game bios. Resident archery tags are any species from Sept to the first week in Jan (vs a 16.5 day rifle season in the middle of November) and the rifle hunters still out kill mule deer by a significant margin over the archery crowd. At least that's what current data from the NDGF shows.
