Montana - Time to Shake it Up?

[ismith]

No adjustment necessary, the whole thing will sort itself out.

 

[cgasner1]

I’m not limiting them to an outfitted hunt. I am just saying as a NR you pick the 5 day window you hunt OUR state. None of us living here want to see NR come here set up camp for 2-3-4-5 weeks and compete with R hunters, most of whom only have Saturday and Sunday to recreate.

This will most like never fly, as a lot of absentee landowners have mighty deep pockets. For which reason I’d like to see them either hunt their trophy ranch for 5 days and go home, or establish residency and pay taxes, just like a real Montanan.

I feel like the 5 day window leans us to much towards a Colorado type system that no one would want. If I was coming over for a 5 day season would probably stagger hunts with my buddy and still be here 2 weeks between scouting and hunting 2 different 5 days seasons but at least only one gun is on the landscape I guess

 

[Eric Albus]

I feel like the 5 day window leans us to much towards a Colorado type system that no one would want. If I was coming over for a 5 day season would probably stagger hunts with my buddy and still be here 2 weeks between scouting and hunting 2 different 5 days seasons but at least only one gun is on the landscape I guess

I’m not hard and fast on the 5 day deal, can be talked into more days, bad thing is I can be talked into less days as well. I also think that NR bird license should be good for 3 days, can buy up to 3 per year.

 

[Eric Albus]

Bird license good only on week days, except the opener.

 

[noisy]

As far as I can tell, based on the laws they have passed the current administration and supermajority do not believe in local control, and in fact have us headed in the opposite direction.

 

[Pagosa]

With the increase in people hunting every season, we need to implement pick your weapon and/or choose your season. And possibly break up the rifle season into two 10-12 days seasons and you have to choose one or the other. I had no idea how much pressure there on public wildlife with all the various seasons. I can normally only hunt maybe max 7-10 days, some years even less due to family/work. I imagine a lot of landowners would be in favor of shortening the seasons to reduce their headaches.
All the ideas/proposals put forth by Eric and others seem like great ideas. How do we begin discussions with the FWP/Director/Commission/Stakeholders to get some of these ideas implemented? I’m ignorant of the process. Thanks

 

[Straight Arrow]

How about break it up into shorter seasons on public land and keep long season for private?

 

[Forkyfinder]

I'd like to see all areas be limited entry for mule deer, after the first or second week of November. Basically a 2 week general season and an extended limited season during the rut all over the place. It's now just too easy to knock all of the bucks down when they get rifle hunted during the rut with modern long range rifles.

 

[cgasner1]

With the increase in people hunting every season, we need to implement pick your weapon and/or choose your season. And possibly break up the rifle season into two 10-12 days seasons and you have to choose one or the other. I had no idea how much pressure there on public wildlife with all the various seasons. I can normally only hunt maybe max 7-10 days, some years even less due to family/work. I imagine a lot of landowners would be in favor of shortening the seasons to reduce their headaches.
All the ideas/proposals put forth by Eric and others seem like great ideas. How do we begin discussions with the FWP/Director/Commission/Stakeholders to get some of these ideas implemented? I’m ignorant of the process. Thanks

I think a pick your weapon would be best but idk if it would pass the goal line right now could do that and make last 2 weeks a draw for mule deer that would be really cool

 

[atlas]

I'd like to see all areas be limited entry for mule deer, after the first or second week of November. Basically a 2 week general season and an extended limited season during the rut all over the place. It's now just too easy to knock all of the bucks down when they get rifle hunted during the rut with modern long range rifles.

I found something to agree with you on

 

[Forkyfinder]

I found something to agree with you on

I'm surprised you could look past that I am not a Mattard, your religion doesn't seem open minded.

 

[WanderWoman]

I think a pick your weapon would be best but idk if it would pass the goal line right now could do that and make last 2 weeks a draw for mule deer that would be really cool

It would be an interesting and worthwhile exercise to go through old data from other states around the time they “became” pick your weapon, or shortened seasons, etc. See how those changes affected hunter numbers, pressure, etc. at the time and compare to now. We can speculate all we want about this or that but looking at other western state’s experiences might be a better way to get a little more informed on the potential consequences of any particular change. Won’t be the same of course but might shed a little insight.

 

[SAJ-99]

How about break it up into shorter seasons on public land and keep long season for private?

Not sure how that would go over with the average hunter and enforcement would be a mess. It think there are mechanisms in place to deal with landowners that have deer/elk problems. It is called game damage hunts. The fact that damage hunts have generally declined from when they were first started, it becomes hard to trust the stated intentions of most landowners when they say they have problems particularly when they say they need bull/buck tags.

 

[Straight Arrow]

Not sure how that would go over with the average hunter

Likely not good, but this thread is all about how it's not good currently.

enforcement would be a mess

How's it going now?

there are mechanisms in place to deal with landowners that have deer/elk problems.

Conversely, I'm concerned about average hunters not finding deer/elk on public land as they are hoarded/herded or whichever on private for most of the year.

he fact that damage hunts have generally declined from when they were first started, it becomes hard to trust the stated intentions of most landowners when they say they have problems particularly when they say they need bull/buck tags.

That is factual; you nailed it!

 

[TOGIE]

It would be an interesting and worthwhile exercise to go through old data from other states around the time they “became” pick your weapon, or shortened seasons, etc. See how those changes affected hunter numbers, pressure, etc. at the time and compare to now. We can speculate all we want about this or that but looking at other western state’s experiences might be a better way to get a little more informed on the potential consequences of any particular change. Won’t be the same of course but might shed a little insight.

it would be a big task to compile everything on that change for colorado, but when you read the HMPs and some of CPWs brochures, you can find lot's of snippets of data here and there from when the change was made.

here's one:

"In 1999, CPW responded to concerns about low buck numbers and fewer fawns by eliminating over-the-counter buck licenses. The number of bucks to does increased dramatically from an average of 17 bucks to 100 does to 32 bucks per 100 does."

it remains a fact today, that if you want a buck license, you can still get one every year, somewhere. and almost definitely get a buck every year.

 

[Sioux33]

It would be an interesting and worthwhile exercise to go through old data from other states around the time they “became” pick your weapon, or shortened seasons, etc. See how those changes affected hunter numbers, pressure, etc. at the time and compare to now. We can speculate all we want about this or that but looking at other western state’s experiences might be a better way to get a little more informed on the potential consequences of any particular change. Won’t be the same of course but might shed a little insight.

I would agree with this, analyzing whatever data’s available would be very interesting. Although I think we’re on the extreme end of the opportunity scale, I don’t think we want to wind up on the other end of it and forseeing any unintended consequences is very important.

What comes to mind here is the limited entry elk permits requiring you to only hunt that unit. When you have units that are primarily private land, like most of central and eastern MT, coupled with extremely liberal tag quotas, and no other place to go, it results in more overcrowding and elk distribution problems. I was one who thought it’d be a good idea, but from what I’ve seen it’s way worse than before. Not only that, but it eliminated one of the funnest tags to have, the 900-20. And along with that, some of those 900 units I’d love to hunt again, but refuse to because the tag quota to public access is so lopsided.

So, although I agree we should be cutting back a bit, we should also put the same amount of effort into thinking about unintended consequences.

 

[SAJ-99]

Likely not good, but this thread is all about how it's not good currently.

How's it going now?

Conversely, I'm concerned about average hunters not finding deer/elk on public land as they are hoarded/herded or whichever on private for most of the year.

That is factual; you nailed it!

I guess the main problem is you are inching toward public tags and private tags. Do you really want to do that?

 

[Straight Arrow]

you are inching toward public tags and private tags

Disagree. That "inch" is a big leap from our discussion.

 

[SAJ-99]

Disagree. That "inch" is a big leap from our discussion.

Then I completely misunderstand your idea.

 

[Straight Arrow]

Then I completely misunderstand your idea.

Different season structure for public versus private lands for hunting doesn't require a change in licensing and issuing of deer/elk tags or permits. It's simply differences in when and where you may hunt them. As you pointed out the limiting of hunting on public land would not be well received by the average hunter. However, it potentially would reduce pressure on public, with the continued long hunting pressure on private, perhaps moving deer and elk to public. A potential change in access to private is also possible, particularly with the reduction in damage hunts to which you referred.

Who knows? But the discussion is about "time to shake it up" and some good ideas are being tossed around in this thread, with the theme of radical changes.