MT - Changes in Hunting Regs/Units/Seasons coming this month

[TheTone]

Nice recap. The did you hear it on hunt talk, oh well yeah that’s true and from my office with regards to making breaks archery OTC is some interesting reading. I wish Montanans good luck with the political football hunting is being treated as

 

[Gerald Martin]

Glasgow Regional Meeting was last night and was attended by about 25 citizens with about 15 employees. From the Director's Office was Hank Worsech, Dustin Temple, Quentin Kujala, Deb O'Neill. and 8-10 of R6 Employees. Chairwoman Leslie Robinson was in attendance as well as Senator Mike Lang.

Hank started off with addressing the Crossbow Issue and stated what we all knew, Senator Molnar and 3 others sued Montana FWP. Worsech stated that he will be opposing crossbows during the archery season, he is not opposed to crossbow use during other times of the year but he feels that they add an advantage during the archery season. He made reference to possibly including them in the muzzleloader season or keeping them in the rifle season as is. Albus spoke up that he had no problem with either crossbow or muzzleloader and that he wished we would swap the last two weeks of the General Rifle season for a primitive season of Muzzleloader/Crossbow. There was widespread agreement with that sentiment throughout the crowd. Hank also talked about possibly involving the social media and digital relations team to highlight the avenues disabled people already have in the Permit to Modify Archery Equipment.

Worsech then moved to the regulation simplification and talked about how he views the process going, he said there have been many rumors floating around on Hunt Talk tried his best to convey that it was a regional approach and not a top down approach. He moved into talking about getting rid of Cow Permits, Region 6 has a cow permit, 698-00, that is very popular and many citizens spoke up against getting rid of that due to the draw odds and harvest rates compared to the draw Elk B licenses.

There was some discussion about too many nonresidents and Hank brought up that any decrease to nonresidents would mean an increase in resident license prices. Most in the group supported Resident price increases.

I asked Worsech if he could speak to the rumor of a push from the Director's office to move limited entry elk permits to OTC General. He asked if I read that on Hunt Talk. I responded that it was a well traveled rumor that was confirmed to me in the R6 Missouri Breaks Elk Working Group by the staff that stated unprovoked they were not going to be moving over the objective units towards over the counter. Worsech said it was something that was brought up from his office, to look at these units that are over the objective and see if there is a biological reason that they are limited entry and if not possibly move them to general. He asked about the issues hunters would have with that. I informed him that is a wildly unpopular idea with hunters because limited draw units provide the only decent elk hunting in the state, I referenced our harvest rate in general units vs Wyoming and attributed the contrast due to our liberal season structures pushing elk off public and that moving this direction in these areas would further create an environment of public lands void of elk.

Worsech brought up HB505 on his own and stated that it was something he thought was a good idea to help alleviate some elk issues. He went on to say that it was something that he was going to continue to push forward with as a tool to help get units that are over objective down to the objective number. Quentin spoke up and said that some of these units are 800% over objective. I added that it was worth noting that the objective numbers were not biologically based and based off of social figures set nearly two decades ago, I referenced some of the breaks units around Glasgow that had objective numbers that were roughly 300 animals in Unit 700 with roughly 700,000 acres of public land. Hank continued on that when HB505 was introduced they didn't have a lot of time to vet the bill and did the best with what they had and that his main concern was that people were going to call it Ranching For Wildlife. I asked him to elaborate on why he thought it was different from RFW because from my perspective the only difference was that in RFW the landowner is required to provide access to hunters, which 505 didn't. Hank let Quentin speak up that the main difference in their opinion is it encouraged cooperation between hunters and landowners to work together to get units to objective. I said it 's hard to take their word of cooperation and not to see an obvious double standard when the sponsor of the bill said the quiet part out loud and had a direct quote of "if these objective numbers are too low and if landowners want to participate than landowners can get together and get the objective raised." Quentin responded with that he understood where I was coming from but if we wanted to see objectives higher, wouldn't that be a silver lining to get the objectives increased? I stated that hunters are "exhausted of being treated like peasants and not being allowed to access land in supposed elk distribution issue units during the general season while bull hunts are being sold and then expected to come in and mop up cows during January and February." The discussion on 505 seemed to end after that with mutual disagreements.

Hank then talked a little bit about the Pheasant release program ahead of the youth hunt this fall. He said it was an opportunity to use legislatively mandated pheasant release dollars (I don't know if this is correct?) and use it towards their R3 efforts for youth. They had multiple employees speak up about how these pheasants are more wild than regular pen-reared pheasants and that they don't know how they will do in the wild but they have higher hopes. One local spoke up and said that everyone that raises pheasants says theirs behave like wild pheasants and that you can't distinguish between the two. He said when he raised pheasants years ago, he'd release them and about 3 days later you'd see pheasant feather bombs all over. Overall there was general feeling of apathy towards the pheasant release with most people accepting it for what it was, an attempt to get a bird in a youth hunter's pocket. One hunter wanted to know how they were going to measure whether or not the program was a success by tracking the youth hunters as they grow older. McKean spoke up and cautioned that as a hunting instructor the most dangerous first experience can be an upland bird hunt with inexperienced hunters and he was curious if they were going to be distributed widely or if there was going to be a hunt roster type of format to make certain there wouldn't be too many people in one area. Worsech stated he wants to implement a hunt roster for it because of the perceived interest from the public.

It was winding down but I brought up how we seem to prioritize taking more from the well but eventually you have to give back to the well, I asked Hank if he could speak to how Habitat Montana fared through the legislature and what the Director's Office and Gianforte's position was going forward on conservation easements, highlighting the success of the last few years of easements in our area including Whiskey Ridge, Ash Coulee, Horse Creek, and many others. Hank let Dustin Temple answer and Dustin said that Habitat Montana came through the legislature beautifully and that they were also going to get a huge revenue increase from the Marijuana legalization. He went on to say that the director's office is continuing to push forward with easements and that the Governor and the Director's Office was fully on board with the potential Big Snowy WMA and that they hope to push it through. Temple listed off the easements currently moving forward, I asked him about the Lost in Time Easement in Eastern Montana. Dustin said it was currently at a hang up and it's future was unknown because the Gianforte Administration does not want to move forward on easements in counties without county commissioner and local support. I told Dustin to not confuse county commissioner support with local support and that the Lost in Time Complex was the largest Block Management Area in a 4 county area during the 90's and up to about 2008, it was where I shot my first deer and hunters from Glendive, Baker, Wibaux, and Terry spent a ton of time hunting and that particular easement has overwhelming local support.

I know someone was recording audio of the entire meeting, if I missed anything or I find any relevant quotes I will add them back in here.


From my perspective, Hank seems to be fully on board with a few issues that I think would be beneficial to the state 10 years from now and I think these are attainable in this years season setting.

• Mandatory harvest reporting
• Making hunters pick a region to hunt
  • I got the impression that would begin as Nonresidents but potentially expand to Residents
• Making hunters that draw a limited permit, hunt only that area
  • Similar to how it is done with some Mule Deer permits

Well done Justin. I can only hope that we can be as eloquent for hunter’s interests in the region 3 meeting.

 

[Nameless Range]

Thanks @Schaaf . For speaking up and for the good info and gives those awaiting their meetings something to chew on.

Sounds like FWP needs to create a HuntTalk account to line us out when it comes to misinformation.

 

[Gerald Martin]

Nice recap. The did you hear it on hunt talk, oh well yeah that’s true and from my office with regards to making breaks archery OTC is some interesting reading. I wish Montanans good luck with the political football hunting is being treated as

The great thing about political football as opposed to the NFL is that sometimes the team carrying the ball can be convinced it is in their best interests politically to turn around and run the other way when they find out the path of least resistance isn’t running over hunters but running with hunters.

I hope there’s people in the political arena smart enough to realize that being part of the solution is a better path to becoming the GOAT rather than being the cause of the problems and being the goat.

 

[Gerald Martin]

Thanks @Schaaf . For speaking up and for the good info and gives those awaiting their meetings something to chew on.

Sounds like FWP needs to create a HuntTalk account to line us out when it comes to misinformation.

Ha! I bet Buzz would have a ball with that opportunity.

That would be a two bags of popcorn extravaganza.

 

[Hunting Wife]

Thanks for the summary @Schaaf .

 

[Straight Arrow]

Schaaf, your due diligence and willingness to stand up and address the issues in a candid and articulate manner is much appreciated. Kudos to you!
Thank-you!

 

[Schaaf]

Guys, you’re welcome, but I was really only there for the free burger.

 

[Gerald Martin]

Guys, you’re welcome, but I was really only there for the free burger.

Did they serve Oly’s as well?

 

[Schaaf]

Did they serve Oly’s as well?

No it was BYOB.

Negative yelp review on the way for FWP.

 

[Gerald Martin]

No it was BYOB.

Negative yelp review on the way for FWP.

“Lame meeting. Not only did you have to bring your own solutions, you had to bring your own beverages. Would not recommend.”

 

[Wind Gypsy]

Thanks for sharing the conversations Shaaf.

There was some discussion about too many nonresidents and Hank brought up that any decrease to nonresidents would mean an increase in resident license prices. Most in the group supported Resident price increases.

[sarcasm font] Hell you don't even need to increase resident license costs. Just give out some more outfitter welfare and add additional charges to NR taking advantage of the outfitter welfare. [/sarcasm]

 

[Nameless Range]

Worsech brought up HB505 on his own and stated that it was something he thought was a good idea to help alleviate some elk issues. He went on to say that it was something that he was going to continue to push forward with as a tool to help get units that are over objective down to the objective number. Quentin spoke up and said that some of these units are 800% over objective. I added that it was worth noting that the objective numbers were not biologically based and based off of social figures set nearly two decades ago, I referenced some of the breaks units around Glasgow that had objective numbers that were roughly 300 animals in Unit 700 with roughly 700,000 acres of public land.

A different way of looking at it:

That would be one elk for nearly every 4 square miles of public land. Or one elk for every 9 square miles of land in the district.

One damn elk for every 5,700 acres.

 

[warmer]

A different way of looking at it:

That would be one elk for nearly every 4 square miles of public land. Or one elk for every 9 square miles of land in the district.

One damn elk for every 5,700 acres.

That's a pretty low “social tolerance”!

 

[Gerald Martin]

A different way of looking at it:

That would be one elk for nearly every 4 square miles of public land. Or one elk for every 9 square miles of land in the district.

One damn elk for every 5,700 acres.

One elk eats 10,000 acres worth of grass every year. Fact. Too many elk.
#science #needmorewolves

 

[Sytes]

#Noneedwolvesgoodtofreehomes

 

[Buffs35]

We need a sarcasm font, can't tell if I should laugh or shake my head at the stupidity.

 

[Nameless Range]

I don't want to get too far in the weeds, but as I wait for the bus to come so I can drop my kids off on my way to chase birds, I have been exploring a line of thinking and some resources that may be useful as the discussion of elk continues.

A rejoinder I often hear as it pertains to our low elk objectives is the limitation of wintering ground. I think this is a fair consideration. One of Montana's great limitations that I wonder if other states deal with in the magnitude we do, particularly in western MT, is where wintering ground chiefly is, and often times that is private land.

It should be known that FWP offers wintering distribution datasets to the public, which can be found here:https://gis-mtfwp.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/04297cd92395469eb76dac99c1175074_0/about In some ways, I question its accuracy.

That said, when we take a unit like HD 700, which I think is a good one to focus on as a fine example of argumentum ad absurdum, we can explore a bit.

According to FWP, over 1 million acres of HD 700 is Wintering Distribution for elk. Of that 1 million, 480,000 acres is public land. 480,000/300(The objective number) = 1,600.

There are nearly 3 sq miles of public land wintering ground per desired elk, according to FWP's own data, in HD 700.

I know this data is less than accurate, and doesn't tell the whole tale, but it is worth being aware of this angle.

 

[SAJ-99]

Hank continued on that when HB505 was introduced they didn't have a lot of time to vet the bill and did the best with what they had and that his main concern was that people were going to call it Ranching For Wildlife.

Why is he supporting bulls he didn’t have time to vet?

 

[Ben Lamb]

Why is he supporting bulls he didn’t have time to vet?

Because he has a mandate to do this, and he's been a supporter of this since Kelly Flynn introduced the idea back in 2013 or 2015. None of the "solutions" being presented are new, they're just being passed without public support because of who the Governor is, and how he won't veto legislation that privatizes wildlife.