Montana on the Upswing?

[huntin24/7]

Those random hunters that used to shoot the first forky or scrubby three point, but are now passing on them to shoot a two year old 4x4 have made the transition from random hunter to selective hunter. MTTW is right in that if we want more big deer we need more people shooting the first buck they see.

I might not have worded that very well, but that’s exactly what I was getting at in regards to the issue. Guys being more selective but still not very selective at all is definitely a negative in regards to older age class animals.

 

[Irrelevant]

That's what I suspected. Thanks for looking it up.

total tangent that I'll apologize in advance for. Paid license sales
1984:

2021:


it's hard for me to reconcile that fact. @JLS

 

[huntin24/7]

And you’re both 100% right in that more guys shooting the first buck would help with more older age class bucks.

 

[BlakeA]

Judging by the amount of 20 inch or less bucks you will see on IG from so called influencers and and/or guys that do it for 30% off vortex optics, I'd say this year it was pretty bad. Definitely not trending favorably. Gotta whack something though because tagging vortex, sitka, and peak refuel doesn't look as good on a photo with just a sunset rather than a 1.5 year old with milk on his lips and gear spread out all over. And hey, it was a long range shot AND he was big bodied. #Fullsend

 

[ZMT588]

Late to this thread but just wanted to chime in that fwp is all for filling b tags. I shot my buck opening morning and stopped at the check station. Had a quick chat and said "yeah I'm just bummed I blew my load this early. Its a long season and I'm already benched." To which the bios response was, "Well don't you have any b tags? Go get a couple does!!"

 

[TOGIE]

i know we may already be trending away from it - but i've been surprised, and don't really see why there is any relevance to this discussion, about it being so unpalpable and unimaginable to shoot a younger smaller deer.

?

the only relevance to this discussion could be how few mature deer are being seen now. but even then, you're supposed to be mad at FWP, not hunters necessarily. it's a management issue, not a hunter preference issue.

i will probably always be someone who at the very least considers shooting the first legal deer i see. be it 5.1" forky or monster 5.5 year old slammer. i may trend away from that over the years, but it will depend on things, the freezer being a big one.

there are a lot of hunters like that who couldn't really care less the size of the deer they bring home as long as they had a good time and filled the freezer a little more.

i've just been suprised to see on HT, of all forums, so much negative attitude towards that.

 

[MNElkNut]

I don't approach it with a trophy hunter's mindset. The way I look at it is the mule deer herd should be managed to appropriate age structure throughout the herd. Right now, the balance is grossly out of whack in many places from a buck:doe ratio and the age breakdown of bucks. Fix that and many people will be happy. Will that put more trophy bucks on the landscape? Sure, and that is not a bad thing! But focus management on overall herd health and dynamics. The rest will follow.

Managing a deer herd by politics or by special interests is fraught with problems from the get-go. It would be nice to see management for the health of the herd be the #1 priority. I am betting that there are a lot of FWP Biologists that would love the opportunity to manage the resource like that and would do a good job if given the opportunity to do it correctly!

 

[vanish]

Guys being more selective but still not very selective at all is definitely a negative in regards to older age class animals.

Oooh, that's me! 2.5yr old bucks every day!

Sorry.

( Also don't hunt Montana, so not really sorry, but wouldn't be sorry anyway )


...


Ok, I guess I should put something of substance here. Can you please explain to me how it makes a difference in older age class bucks whether I shoot a 1.5yr old buck or a 2.5yr old buck? I end up shooting fewer deer, and the deer I pass on continue to age, so I don't get your logic.

 

[mtmiller]

If we were to put the whole state on permits the vast majority of permits would be in the east.
Bottom line, Mule deer hunters who want older age class bucks are screwed no matter what. Merry Christmas

Regulate permits and manage districts.

 

[YoungGun]

Oooh, that's me! 2.5yr old bucks every day!

Sorry.

( Also don't hunt Montana, so not really sorry, but wouldn't be sorry anyway )


...


Ok, I guess I should put something of substance here. Can you please explain to me how it makes a difference in older age class bucks whether I shoot a 1.5yr old buck or a 2.5yr old buck? I end up shooting fewer deer, and the deer I pass on continue to age, so I don't get your logic.

Because everyone slamming 1.5 or 2.5 year old deer in the third week of the rut off of the road with rifles in Montana means that the said 1.5 year old will never make it to 2.5, and the 2.5 year old will never make it to 3.5.... so on and so forth. Think of "slot limits" with fishing- not perfect, but they certainly aid in getting that selected fish species into a larger, older, size class before they are breaded in shore-lunch.

But really the issue is that the overall take is probably not sustainable nor conducive to seeing the numbers of mature bucks that most hunters would like to see. Montana Mule Deer and Colorado Elk have that much in common- opportunity for all to fill the freezer, but a "mature" animal of the respective species in that state is younger and smaller in general than other states who manage their critters with a bit more precision. I'm not looking for FWP to use a scalpel, but I sure wish they wouldn't go in and operate game management with a chainsaw either.

 

[Bambistew]

@Oak or others from CO... how bad did it get before they changed the deer hunting from OTC to what we have today? Wasn't it in the mid/early 90s? How has it improved, or has it? My understanding was, it was pretty bad, but I didn't experience it.

 

[YoungGun]

By my guestimation there would be so few permits in some of the units in the west that the east would carry the load for the state at least as far as public land is concerned. To the point where we hunt once in 5 to 10 years.
As an example look at what is proposed for 312, which is that it will include 393 and 390. The proposal I read recommended the same number of permits that existed in 312 previously. I would argue that this permit number is appropriate since in my opinion 393 and 390 should be closed to MD hunting on public land, and essentially would be with no more permits issued.
I believe that this situation would not be unusual in the west.
Game over for a guy that likes to hunt mule deer.

Even a 50% reduction in tags after November 10th would make a massive difference. Everyone could still hunt them until the rut went full swing, then it could be an "every other year" type thing, and you would still see a much better experience.

 

[BenInMT]

I did not punch a deer A tag nor did I punch the mule deer doe tag that they never should have given me in the first place. Take that FWP I’ll just keep applying for tags I have no intention of filling.

 

[huntin24/7]

Oooh, that's me! 2.5yr old bucks every day!

Sorry.

( Also don't hunt Montana, so not really sorry, but wouldn't be sorry anyway )


...


Ok, I guess I should put something of substance here. Can you please explain to me how it makes a difference in older age class bucks whether I shoot a 1.5yr old buck or a 2.5yr old buck? I end up shooting fewer deer, and the deer I pass on continue to age, so I don't get your logic.

First off, to clarify, I’m not judging anyone for what they shoot. If you have the tag and are happy with whatever buck you shoot, I’ll shake your hand and be genuinely happy for you. And I don’t care how old you are either. It also doesn’t matter whether you shoot buck A when he’s 1.5 years old or 2.5 years old. What I’m saying is specifically in regard to MT that with such a long season encompassing the rut, no one needs to shoot a little young buck for meat right away because they can wait shoot a pretty young 4x4 that’s bigger and slightly smarter. My post was not meant to be judgy and I hope you don’t take it that way. There’s nothing wrong with shooting a nice healthy 2 year old or whatever age. The problem is when seasons are set up so that a huge % of those bucks can be easily taken.

 

[Oak]

@Oak or others from CO... how bad did it get before they changed the deer hunting from OTC to what we have today? Wasn't it in the mid/early 90s? How has it improved, or has it? My understanding was, it was pretty bad, but I didn't experience it.

The first year of totally limited deer licenses was 1999. There were about 150,000 deer hunters in 1998 and 81,000 the following year. These numbers are from the CPW big game manager when I asked this question back in 2017 or so.

Deer hunting certainly improved after going limited, both from a quality standpoint and crowding. It has slipped considerably in the last 5 years, though, for a variety of reasons. Probably the two biggest factors in my mind are the ongoing drought and the new CWD management strategy to reduce the number of mature bucks. We continue to lose hunting opportunity as the desired population goalposts are moved each time a new herd management plan is approved by CPW.

As an example, CPW approved a new herd management plan for the White River herd (units 11, 211, 12, 13, 131, 231, 22, 23, 24) a year ago. The old population objective for this herd was 67,500 deer. At the time of plan approval last year the population was estimated at 36,000. The new objective in the approved plan is 25,000-35,000. The modeled buck:doe ratio was 30:100 when the plan was approved, and the new objective is 18-25:100. In 2003, there were 1,386 2nd season buck tags and 1,264 3rd season buck tags leftover after the first draw for units 12, 13, 23 and 24. In 2021 there were only 950 and 800 tags available respectively for those hunts.

I guess the moral of the CO story for you in MT is that going totally limited isn't necessarily going to fix all of your woes. As @Ben Lamb would probably say, "it's the habitat, stupid."

*Edit: I just looked up the 2004 post-hunt population estimate for the White River herd (the oldest I could find) and it was estimated to be 93,670.

 

[Irrelevant]

The first year of totally limited deer licenses was 1999. There were about 150,000 deer hunters in 1998 and 81,000 the following year. These numbers are from the CPW big game manager when I asked this question back in 2017 or so.

Deer hunting certainly improved after going limited, both from a quality standpoint and crowding. It has slipped considerably in the last 5 years, though, for a variety of reasons. Probably the two biggest factors in my mind are the ongoing drought and the new CWD management strategy to reduce the number of mature bucks. We continue to lose hunting opportunity as the desired population goalposts are moved each time a new herd management plan is approved by CPW.

As an example, CPW approved a new herd management plan for the White River herd (units 11, 211, 12, 13, 131, 231, 22, 23, 24) a year ago. The old population objective for this herd was 67,500 deer. At the time of plan approval last year the population was estimated at 36,000. The new objective in the approved plan is 25,000-35,000. The modeled buck:doe ratio was 30:100 when the plan was approved, and the new objective is 18-25:100. In 2003, there were 1,386 2nd season buck tags and 1,264 3rd season buck tags leftover after the first draw for units 12, 13, 23 and 24. In 2021 there were only 950 and 800 tags available respectively for those hunts.

I guess the moral of the CO story for you in MT is that going totally limited isn't necessarily going to fix all of your woes. As @Ben Lamb would probably say, "it's the habitat, stupid."

*Edit: I just looked up the 2004 post-hunt population estimate for the White River herd (the oldest I could find) and it was estimated to be 93,670.

94k deer to 36k deer in less than 20 years! WTF is going on?

 

[Oak]

94k deer to 36k deer in less than 20 years! WTF is going on?

Read the executive summary of the herd management plan I linked.

 

[Irrelevant]

Read the executive summary of the herd management plan I linked.

Ah...

Frickin' C. W. D.

Oh and litany of other issues too

 

[antlerradar]

By my guestimation there would be so few permits in some of the units in the west that the east would carry the load for the state at least as far as public land is concerned. To the point where we hunt once in 5 to 10 years.
As an example look at what is proposed for 312, which is that it will include 393 and 390. The proposal I read recommended the same number of permits that existed in 312 previously. I would argue that this permit number is appropriate since in my opinion 393 and 390 should be closed to MD hunting on public land, and essentially would be with no more permits issued.
I believe that this situation would not be unusual in the west.
Game over for a guy that likes to hunt mule deer.

Many of us in the east are of the mindset that the east is currently carrying the load for the state. Every time a western unit goes to limited entry pressure shifts east. Only a matter of time until we need state wide limited entry. If that is what we need for a healthier mule deer herd, I say better sooner than latter.

 

[tjones]

Many of us in the east are of the mindset that the east is currently carrying the load for the state. Every time a western unit goes to limited entry pressure shifts east. Only a matter of time until we need state wide limited entry. If that is what we need for a healthier mule deer herd, I say better sooner than latter.

Has there been any western MT HD’s go LE recently? I know of one up the Flathead. Say in the last 5 years?