That is the states decision to make. NR hunting is a privilege not a right.
More Discounted Non-residents licenses for Montana
- Thread starter Big Fin
- Start date
antlerradar
Well-known member
Nothing wrong with a little debate, I could be all wrong.
brocksw
Well-known member
I'm debated out.... But I do appreciate you sharing your thoughts. It is an interesting perspective that I had not considered regarding MT CWD management.
BuzzH
Well-known member
I don't think the biologists are thinking CWD management through either.
The private land owners are not going to allow unfettered buck harvest and probably won't be too keen on letting John Q kill a pile of does either in high concentration areas. The Departments are not going to allow public land deer numbers to get very high...first bad winter will polish off what's left.
Their plan is also to kill "older bucks" via having rut hunting. As @antlerradar suggests, hunters that time of year are NOT going to focus on older age class animals. They're going to focus on what they always have, clean 4 points. Lots of smaller framed and odd-ball rack configured bucks are still going to be living to be old.
Most hunters couldn't tell an old buck from a young one if their birthday was stamped on their hide.
Its a nightmare scenario that will result in nothing good for mule deer either way. Either die from CWD or die from a bullet in November...take your pick.
Mule deer hunting is going to be an endeavor for 1.5-3.5 year old bucks with a small handful of older bucks slipping through the cracks via luck or having a less desirable rack configuration. Probably be some depopulation "opportunity" as well in some places. There is no path forward other than that.
I talked with another GF employee last week who said all they're trying to do is slow the spread so it takes longer to impact the Wyoming Range...its already there.
Its over...just best to accept it and move on. Apply for the late tags, shoot what's left and call it good.
Last edited:
Mtnhunter1
Well-known member
So adding additional discounted MT NR tags will be good for the opportunity to manage CWD .... correct?
rogerthat
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2015
- Messages
- 2,982
This sounds like exactly what we are already doing in Montana. So no changes needed here.
. The other states like Wyoming and Colorado that flat out sucks though.brocksw
Well-known member
I'm glad all the wildlife folks that worked so hard to bring our wildlife back a century ago didnt share this same attitude.
He’s not wrong. That’s the science we are following. What’s your plan to “manage” cwd?
brocksw
Well-known member
Could you cite your sources that have come to the conclusion that it's "over" and we should throw in the towel, "shoot what's left" and move on. I'd be very curious to read that "science".
BuzzH
Well-known member
I asked for a specific long term plan, the answer I got was exactly what they are planning. Keeping low total populations, reducing animals at congregated areas either by reducing populations or reasons why they congregate, and killing off older bucks.
THAT is their plan, not mine.
I think its probably time you accept the mule deer management moving forward, I have.
May as well throw in for the late hunts and get mine while the getting is somewhat good.
What's the "plan" you're hearing to manage CWD?
brocksw
Well-known member
Where in Wyomings CWD plan does it say "it's over" and "shoot what's left"?
I can't find those statements in the WAFWA or AFWA plans either? Did you get a special, simplified "Buzz's translation" that no one else saw?
As I'm pretty sure "Keeping low total populations, reducing animals at congregated areas either by reducing populations or reasons why they congregate, and killing off older bucks." Is a far cry from shoot em all and make sure I "get mine".
BuzzH
Well-known member
First off, you weren't at the 1.5 hour meeting that I was in with those recommending the plan, lets get that straight right off. Being's how you just want to be an ass...I'll spell it out in detail.
The plan that was drafted last year was to have November seasons with 25 tags per unit in the Snowies...total of 100 additional buck tags on top of the general season.
MINIMUM of 5 years implemenation...so 500 buck deer tags in the next 5 years for November season to concentrate on killing older/oldest age class bucks.
Current buck to doe ratio's of 40-100.
The goal is to hunt them to the lower end of recreation management which is 18-20 per 100 does. I know they would like to go lower, probably around 10 bucks per 100 does. That means a lot of bucks have to die to get there.
There was also discussion of either removing deer in areas they concentrate by either killing them, or removing whatever is causing them to concentrate (food, minerals, water, etc.) There's more on that but I don't want your hair on fire...so wont tell you much except depopulation is NOT off the table.
So, just like I said, the goal is to have wayyyy younger age classes of mule deer, kill off a majority of the bucks over 4 with November seasons, and perhaps even reducing the populations to a lower number (again don't want your hair on fire).
If that's the management strategy, the only way to get there is to cut the buck to doe ratio in HALF or more and likely kill off deer in areas they concentrate (my assumption is private land that they harbor on).
I also asked what the long term plan was, and they have no idea other than to keep the above strategy in place to hopefully keep prevalence from increasing (I was told it likely wouldn't reduce it). Another thing I asked if this was a way to buy some time until other management could be looked at...nobody in the room would answer.
All meaning that, yes, the best course of action for a person that wants a mule deer buck older than 3.5 is to apply for the late tags, shoot the best buck you can find, and call it good. Its not going to be better hunting in 5 years, 10 years, or 20 years down the line. They have no long-term solutions in mind, I asked. This is the future and it sucks, but a reality non the less.
My ask of them was to be honest with the public that their management plans going forward are going to be hunts for 1.5-3.5 year old bucks with significantly lower post harvest buck to doe ratio's and likely way fewer deer....just a fact. If you're going to implement that kind of management, be honest with what its going to create.
I've accepted it and it is time to move on...get what you can, while you can and its still available. Things will be way different in 5-10-20 years and its not going to be better, another fact I've accepted.
I don't give a chit what WAFWA or AFWA plans call for and if you want to call and talk directly to the biologists I'm more than happy to give you their numbers.
8andcounting
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2013
- Messages
- 3,404
Dude … you gotta give this cwd thing of yours a rest . You know what does the most damage to deer herds ? Lead poisoning and arrows .
@brocksw we get it you are passionate about CWD. But you even said in your SD post that " Dr Deer" (biggest joke and waste of WI tax money in along time but thats a different story) said CWD is like prostate cancer, something else will kill deer before CWD does. Move on you aren't going to stop CWD sorry not going to happen. Now go ahead and post several "studies" that suggest this is what we should do. Nobody knows what to do it's all conjecture. As I've told you many times CWD is self limiting its on the landscape and is not going anyplace so like @BuzzH Said "accept it and move on" nothing you are going to do is going to stop its spread sorry.
Hunting Wife
Well-known member
After a couple decades @brocksw perhaps you can see why I now find myself firmly in the “Let them all die. It’s what people want” camp.
I don't think anyone on here myself included is saying let them all die. I have watched first hand for the last 22 years WI try all these ways to stop/slow CWD they don't work period. Find me one piece of evidence that shows CWD is decimating deer herds, you won't because it doesn't. Dane, Portage, Sauk, Richland counties in WI are the heart of WI CWD with highest concentrations of positive cases. The herds in those areas are still producing the biggest and most deer.
It's almost comical watching other states try these "new" management plans. They all seem to start where WI did and that is with eradication of deer. In the early 2000s we had earn a buck which meant you get a doe tag for $5 and for every doe you shot you got a free buck tag, unlimited doe tags could be bought, sharp shooters where brought in, seasons extended, weapon restrictions removed. CWD is still firmly there and the deer herds are thriving.
rogerthat
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2015
- Messages
- 2,982
As opposed to let’s kill them to save them? You imply hunters are too dumb to get it. Explain the long term plan please? Lots of smart hunters on here. I can clearly follow @BuzzH and his points so why can’t you guys lay out your plan clearly. I’m all for science but so far nothing I have seen makes a lick of sense. They are NOT all going to die anyway. Why is that? Why not answer that question before implementing sweeping policy with low confidence for success.
Hunting Wife
Well-known member
I’ve explained for years. Not worth my time or keystrokes anymore. Glad that job is behind me now.
Because there is not long term plan that has proven to work, yet the long term outlook of CWD is it WONT decimate deer herds, not even close.
Hunting Wife
Well-known member
Nevermind. Not worth it
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
NFL Weeks 15-17 Ongoing Tournament.- Latest: Forkyfinder
