Montana season structure proposal 2.0

[Elktrack]

My ID deer survey is below. Not exactly a cornucopia of data.
Statistically speaking, the answer MT gave you is generally correct. I can speculate if my answer was YES to the ID harvest ? , ID would have given me more ?'s to answer. Maybe someone else can help on that. Mostly I think these things are an additional data point, not the end-all, be-all of data. But I also agree it should just be made online. I like that it was sent right after my season ended so I didn't have to think back and try to remember anything. That alone is a benefit. But also, they gave me a tag for a specific area, not half the state. Maybe that is something Montana should think about?

View attachment 349256

Correct. If you would have answered yes to the questions it would have prompted you to answer others.
I agree that it’s not the end all but it’s sure as hell better than what FWP is doing. At least they know how many hunters were out and if they harvested and what areas. FWP has no accurate data and isn’t interested in getting any. Here I again…
Anyway
I also like fact that it’s mandatory and you’re unable to get license next year until you complete it.
Could definitely be improved on but it’s a good tool.

 

[SAJ-99]

I agree that it’s not the end all but it’s sure as hell better than what FWP is doing.

Statistically, the methods are insignificantly different. It’s basically the same questions. Most of the benefit comes in my tag being unit specific. But on the other points, timing, ease, and being mandatory, I agree it is better.

 

[cgasner1]

Correct. If you would have answered yes to the questions it would have prompted you to answer others.
I agree that it’s not the end all but it’s sure as hell better than what FWP is doing. At least they know how many hunters were out and if they harvested and what areas. FWP has no accurate data and isn’t interested in getting any. Here I again…
Anyway
I also like fact that it’s mandatory and you’re unable to get license next year until you complete it.
Could definitely be improved on but it’s a good tool.

Im not sure why agencies with the e tags haven’t just rolled it all up into one when you punch your tag

 

[Elktrack]

Statistically, the methods are insignificantly different. It’s basically the same questions. Most of the benefit comes in my tag being unit specific. But on the other points, timing, ease, and being mandatory, I agree it is better.

One significant difference is that everyone is required to report.

I understand your point about your tag being unit specific. As a resident, mine isn’t unless it’s a limited entry tag. Without the report they have no idea where I harvest game.

 

[SAJ-99]

One significant difference is that everyone is required to report.

I understand your point about your tag being unit specific. As a resident, mine isn’t unless it’s a limited entry tag. Without the report they have no idea where I harvest game.

I don't mean to be argumentative, but the fact the everyone is required to report is the least important part of this whole thing. Sampling isn't the problem. MT uses a very large sample for the data. A VERY large sample. And the data isn't shit because they use phone calls for sampling. The data is shit for other reasons, mostly hunter-memory related - calls in February and March, tags that cover so many units people can't remember where they hunted, and tags that last so long that people can't remember how long they hunted. Even then, if that causes significant inaccuracies in the data it will be hard to see.

And I know this wasn't your point, but MT's mule deer problems are not because they use phone surveys to collect harvest data, or even harvest data at all. But yeah, we all agree, electronic harvest surveys are still a good idea and should be advocated for. They are cheaper, easier, more timely, blah blah blah. Just don't expect much change in the data.

 

[Elktrack]

I don't mean to be argumentative, but the fact the everyone is required to report is the least important part of this whole thing. Sampling isn't the problem. MT uses a very large sample for the data. A VERY large sample. And the data isn't shit because they use phone calls for sampling. The data is shit for other reasons, mostly hunter-memory related - calls in February and March, tags that cover so many units people can't remember where they hunted, and tags that last so long that people can't remember how long they hunted. Even then, if that causes significant inaccuracies in the data it will be hard to see.

And I know this wasn't your point, but MT's mule deer problems are not because they use phone surveys to collect harvest data, or even harvest data at all. But yeah, we all agree, electronic harvest surveys are still a good idea and should be advocated for. They are cheaper, easier, more timely, blah blah blah. Just don't expect much change in the data.

We’re pretty much on the same page. I disagree on the point that not everyone reporting gives them an accurate view. I could be wrong but after listening to the CAC committee and the lack of data that FWP has it is glaringly obvious that they need to do something different. I believe that they would have better data simply by making everyone report. Even the basic information would be better than what they have. I agree, 6 months after a 3 month season is not effective.

 

[SAJ-99]

I disagree on the point that not everyone reporting gives them an accurate view

I know, but it does. There is little difference between getting all 200,000 people to report and randomly calling 30,000. I know it may not seem that way, but it gets you close enough for government work.

 

[Elktrack]

close enough for government work.

Nailed it
Unfortunately
The wildlife of Montana deserve better

 

[SAJ-99]

Nailed it
Unfortunately
The wildlife of Montana deserve better

I agree. But “the data is bullshit” just distracts from the real work that is needed.

 

[DFS]

I agree. But “the data is bullshit” just distracts from the real work that is needed.

How does Washington get their data? Any movement on that front?

 

[SAJ-99]

How does Washington get their data? Any movement on that front?

All automated. And it doesn’t improve hunting at all.

 

[DFS]

All automated. And it doesn’t improve hunting at all.

they are probably funded well though. A glimpse to our future.

 

[Elktrack]

I agree. But “the data is bullshit” just distracts from the real work that is needed.

Well without good data they are one dimensional in the sense that they become completely reactionary. You and I can disagree on this point despite being pro change.
All good

 

[SAJ-99]

they are probably funded well though. A glimpse to our future.

I get a lot of these emails every season.
You want to apply for a NR razor clam tag.

 

[DFS]

Well without good data they are one dimensional in the sense that they become completely reactionary. You and I can disagree on this point despite being pro change.
All good

They don’t want the data.

 

[Elktrack]

they are probably funded well though. A glimpse to our future.

Washington is not the role model Montana needs!

 

[SAJ-99]

Well without good data they are one dimensional in the sense that they become completely reactionary. You and I can disagree on this point despite being pro change.
All good

Oh complete agree. But I think data about dead stuff is about as reactionary as it gets.

 

[Elktrack]

They don’t want the data.

I’ve been saying this very thing myself

 

[brockel]

All automated. And it doesn’t improve hunting at all.

Maybe it would be worse?

 

[SAJ-99]

Maybe it would be worse?

Maybe. But if you feel like progress is being made through counterfactual arguments you have set the bar pretty low.