Montana - Time to Shake it Up?

[FREAK]

I think we could all argue till we're blue in the face about regulations and what we could implement to fix the issues we're seeing. I'm sure for every great point made there will be a few good counter points and we'll go in circles. I think the organizations that are making the most impact are the ones that come to the commissioners with a unified message (MOGA, BHA, Etc.). Someone correct me if i'm wrong as i'm no expert in this area.

I feel like it is hard to make an impact by just emailing commissioner, biologists, and attending meetings but maybe I'm wrong there as well? Or maybe there is a different/more impactful thing I could be doing that I don't know about.

Is this model of organizations like BHA the moset effective approach? Forming a organization, appointing leaders, and comming up with a unified message that represents a subset of hunters? Maybe it's a regional organization that has a leader and is made up of private land owners, outfitters, and average joe hunters. They would feel more comfortable presenting their ideas and not always have to feel like their fighting commisioners just to keep things status quo.

I guess my point is, I think we're putting the cart before the horse when we default to arguing about what specific regs need changed rather than spending our energy on discussing if the mechanism for change works or needs to be fixed. Also, are there currently groups or organizations that are making significant changes within the constraints of the current system and how are they doing it? The 313 boundry change is a good example of some group having the ear of the commisioner to the point they implemented a change disregarding the input from the regional biologist. Seems like that group is doing something better than most when it comes to effecting change.

 

[SAJ-99]

Also, are there currently groups or organizations that are making significant changes within the constraints of the current system and how are they doing it?

Montana Wildlife Federal and BHA are the two I noticed the most. But to be honest, even with reasonable and logical arguments, I don't think they are listened to either. It's almost like the entire structure of the process is begging to be corrupted.

 

[antlerradar]

Told a local guy who’s family kills double digit does and his jaw about hit the floor. He was pissed

And now we know why the Passenger Pigeon went extinct.

 

[mtmuley]

Told a local guy who’s family kills double digit does and his jaw about hit the floor. He was pissed

Hope his family doesn't starve to death. mtmuley

 

[Nameless Range]

The 313 boundry change is a good example of some group having the ear of the commisioner to the point they implemented a change disregarding the input from the regional biologist. Seems like that group is doing something better than most when it comes to effecting change.

It sure looks like Favoritism to specific interest groups, and a function of who is chosen as commissioner, not the quality of the arguments nor how those groups engage. It's preferential treatment, which I suppose one could always argue has existed (thinking of nonhunters), but it seems the preference increasingly favors a smaller and smaller subset of the Trust Beneficiaries who generate revenue off of our wildlife.

I suppose this is something lacking utility for folks who are genuinely trying to work within the system to say aloud. And on some level what's the point and that's maturity - keeping your mouth shut even if it's true, in the spirit of working with what you've got. I think that is what we should do, but don't think we can look to those groups who have been disproportionally successful as models for how to be.

 

[mtmiller]

Went down a rabbit hole yesterday. If you are bored, and want to shake your head, look at a few emails.

Fish And Wildlife Commission Meeting: December 14, 2023 | Montana FWP

Fish and Wildlife Commission Meeting: December 14, 2023

fwp.mt.gov

Scroll down to "Commissioner Emails toward the bottom. Sorry, direct link didn't work.

One that made me laugh out loud,
"what is the blue area that is include on the map in section 18?"

"The blue area depicts Montana State DNRC lands"

 

[KB_]

I would personally like to see Regions regulating their own wildlife. Not even just try it out. Just do it. Stop letting people shoot whatever they want. 4pts to a side on bucks, X number of bucks can be taken from X unit. The age quality of deer specifically across the state does not look good.

IMO, there are zero units in Montana that should have a general tag for deer anymore.

Buddy of mine hunts his family's ranch on the highline. He has Walls of mounts of mule deer he has taken off that property that are absolutely incredible. They are very careful about what bucks they shoot, and they have not taken a mule deer buck on that property in 3 years simply because they are not seeing bucks. Read that again, they are not seeing bucks anymore. Why is that happening. Well they have a bunch of public surrounding them, and every tom dick and harry shoot every dink they see. Its pretty sad honestly, its not an infinite resource and people keep treating it like an infinite resource.

 

[bigsky2]

One thing I took away from last week's commission meeting, is that e-mailing commissioners and commenting on Zoom during the meeting doesn't seem to do any good. It's pretty disheartening when you present your case with good facts to back your argument (like saying all the public comments on removing quota ranges were against it, with none supporting it) , and literally two minutes later the commission unanimously votes the other way without even having a discussion. It seems they for the most part have their minds made up ahead of time. I think the only way they might decide to change their mind on the spot is if hunters were literally lining up at the door to testify in person. I'll admit, in the past I haven't made an effort to call my commissioner on the phone. Going forward, I plan to relentlessly call my commissioner well ahead of time when there's issues I feel strongly about. For example, if someone feels strongly about Cebull's black bear season proposal, the time to start contacting your commissioner is probably right now. It might not work either, but I feel like that's the next option I have to try.

 

[Labman]

For example, if someone feels strongly about Cebull's black bear season proposal, the time to start contacting your commissioner is probably right now. It might not work either, but I feel like that's the next option I have to try.

I believe that ship sailed. If it is like any other proposal the decision is a formality, which I’m good with in this case anyways.

 

[bigsky2]

I believe that ship sailed. If it is like any other proposal the decision is a formality, which I’m good with in this case anyways.

Public comment period is over, doesn't mean you can't still contact your commissioner.

 

[MTelkHuntress]

As I read this discussion, I think a lot about messaging. It can be a challenge get a clear unifying message with so many different interests but I think there's a lot of common ground to be had in thinking about the resource and sustainability. Folks also have to put in the leg work to educate others on the issue, I feel we sometimes lag there at times. It's easy to preach to the choir but sometimes you need to have hard discussions too. Real discussions, not dismissing folks when you get frustrated.

One comment that I made notes on from the recent commission meeting was from a gentleman giving comment over Zoom. I don't remember his background but his comment was: we shouldn't sacrifice full freezers for a handful of hunters to harvest trophy bucks.
Full freezers are great but that isn't going to work in the long run with populations going down. If we just keeping taking, there will be nothing left in the future.

Region 2 has been trying some new stuff with our mule deer but I'm not sure how success is measured. It would definitely be nice to see more changes at the regional level though...even if it does complicate the regulations

 

[cgasner1]

Pretty bad when a bunch of people from the internet are willing to go beg moga to ask for a change because fwp won’t nut up and do it. Hopefully it can result in another step forward the current landscape is bad enough for business for them.

 

[Sioux33]

A good first step would be to clearly define what opportunity means. Every time they get challenged to change anything they hang their hat on a survey they put together, chose how to word, and make it sound like it’s an all or nothing change. Like either keep it status quo and let folks stack up animals like cordwood or go to an all-out trophy hunting program like NV or UT. Of course when they put it like that, 95% folks are going to want opportunity, but the vast majority want something in the middle. They wanna get out and hunt but also want to see robust, healthy herds on the landscape. What if sportsman groups create the survey, ask realistic questions and I bet that changes what opportunity means and makes any change much more acceptable.

I also agree that local input that carries some weight is much needed. The current approach is like the business that makes all decisions from upper management and ignores the hard work, knowledge, and effort put in by the team closest to the action. The only caveat to that, and others have mentioned it here, is that changes need to be in concert because folks now days have no problem traveling all the way across the state to an open unit.

Randy had a guy on his podcast last year that I believe was on the elk management plan committee from NW MT that was very eye opening. He talked about how the elk hunting used to be world class up there, but because of habitat and predator issues, it’s been circling the drain for the last 20 years and led to overcrowding throughout the rest of the state. This matches my own observations as my brother used to guide up there and it wasn’t uncommon to have 8-10 bulls bugling in a basin, and legit monsters as well, but those days are long gone. He also said the early rifle hunts in the Bob were originally intended to reduce an overpopulated herd multiple decades ago, but now have some of the lowest elk density in the state and they’re still gunning away because it’s just always been done that way. No biology involved, just keep chugging along the opportunity train.

If that’s not a good example of how a one size fits all approach needs to be scrapped, I don’t know what is. If we had groups from all stakeholders with some authority, forced to work on these regional issues, maybe we’d avoid these issues we’re dealing with now.

 

[mtmuley]

Region by region is needed. As is unit by unit. It's time. mtmuley

 

[DFS]

Region by region is needed. As is unit by unit. It's time. mtmuley

how do you get local staff to acknowledge changes are needed. They truly believe they are “knocking it out of the park” Big changes will never happen when the staff is telling commissioners nothing has changed over the last 30 years and everything looks great.

 

[SAJ-99]

Pretty bad when a bunch of people from the internet are willing to go beg moga to ask for a change because fwp won’t nut up and do it. Hopefully it can result in another step forward the current landscape is bad enough for business for them.

It's that bad. The Commissioners are NOT LISTENING TO YOU. People can cite the constitutional responsibilities and NAM and trustee duty all they want, but it isn't going to make them listen. Most Montana hunters won't "nut up" and pay more for permits, and they won't "nut up" and endure any change to seasons. You are too busy fighting with each other to realize what you all value is being lost. BTW, the changes for 410 deer were from the FWP biologist that "nutted up" and wrote up the recommendation. And there were comments against it.

 

[8andcounting]

How about we start with spreading out the non resident pressure and make their tag valid for one week of the 5 week general season. Split the non resident quota evenly through the 5 week general season. Have them apply for one of the five weeks they want to hunt. Make it valid from Saturday to the following Sunday. Make it so if they draw they can buy an archery permit that makes their tag valid for archery season. In the past opening day was packed around here with the pressure bleeding off until the end of the season. Now from second week in November to thanksgiving weekend it is packed. Would help spread out the pressure I think.

I that’s a great idea but I’d like to see it for R too .

 

[Sioux33]

how do you get local staff to acknowledge changes are needed. They truly believe they are “knocking it out of the park” Big changes will never happen when the staff is telling commissioners nothing has changed over the last 30 years and everything looks great.

That’s where we need a group of stakeholders with teeth. Sportsmen, landowners, biologists, outfitters, wardens, etc. Can’t just be FWP for the reasons you just stated.

 

[GigiBobert]

Full disclosure.

I hunted unit 700 and unit 410 for the general deer a few years back. That was the weirdest trip I have ever been on. I saw Hundreds of does. I saw about a dozen bucks the entire time I was there (9 full days), but I was seeing a minimum of 100 does per day. One day I saw close to 300 does and not a single buck. This was "peak Rut” BTW. The Buck to doe ratio IMHO was about 3:98 and in most areas, it was MUCH lower than that.

I won't likely be going back to Montana until they fix the issue of the M:F imbalance because IMHO (at least for those two areas) it is EXTREMELY out of balance. Thats too much money to pay to hunt a place that is that void of bucks.

Most interesting to me was that it was mostly residents driving around with fork horns in the back of their trucks. So, I would say that residents are for the most part happy just shooting them a meat buck and calling it a day and going home. I glassed up a small fork horn that was about 300 yards off the road one morning on my way in and had a couple residents pull up and ask what I was looking at. I told them a small fork horn and they asked if I was going to shoot it and I said I wasn't. They drove off and when my dad came driving by, they were in that same spot leaning across the truck hood on sandbags. lol When my friend came driving by later that morning, they were tossing that fork horn into the bed of the truck. Legal is legal, I guess and if you’re looking for meat, then a fork horn eats. I don't know why they weren't just shooting a doe though as there were TONS of those to be had in much easier places.

Those two units would benefit a LOT by limiting the buck harvest at least for a few years IMHO.

I drove 36 hours to Montana and passed on everything until the last day. I shot a doe with ~15 minutes of my hunt left.

So, ya, I say go ahead and shake things up.

View attachment 306648

Sounds just like hunting in Nevada about 45 years ago.......

 

[BuzzH]

One thing I haven't seen addressed is the huge increase in pressure and impact archery hunters have had on elk in Montana. Six weeks of archery pressure is ridiculous. Elk archery season needs to be the month of September and that's it.

Also, I like the idea of hunters becoming more engaged and demanding change, but the realistic side of me knows that's not going to happen.

Hunters are the most apathetic group of people I've ever seen. They never show up for anything, including things that will impact them and the wildlife they pursue.

I tend to want to blame them for their lack of action, but on the other hand, I kind of get why they don't show up more. Their efforts rarely pan out when the Commissions, Legislators, and even the Departments just ignore them anyway.

I'm not one to wave a white flag, but a person can only tolerate being ignored for so long.

Not to derail, but Wyoming is starting to slip into the Montana model and I hate it.