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

[Gerald Martin]

Maybe @Schaaf is born with it,

Maybe it's Maybelline.

Actually, what does @Ben Lamb know about Maybelline? I thought that was a lipstick company?

Maybe @Schaaf should have left him on the shore of Ft. Peck.

 

[Sytes]

Managing Montana's elk wealth is causing heartburn for landowners, FWP and hunters

The recovery of elk populations in Montana has now led many of the state’s hunters and landowners to a crossroads, a divisive debate over how best to manage this wildlife

billingsgazette.com

Politics.

Other news - Amazing the power of the public voice!

A ‘firestorm’ of public comment leads FWP to rethink elk management proposal

About 40 people commented on FWP’s plans for elk management.

montanafreepress.org

 

[Sytes]

Thought I would add a quote from the article that directly reflects comments by Greenhorn, Randy, MTMistress, and considered by many (including myself) that have agreed with the content shared here and at the meeting(s)...

"Like many commenters, Ballard said the commission should focus on harvesting cow elk if it’s serious about reducing population numbers. He also said he’d like to see more emphasis on incentivizing landowners to open their land to public hunters, particularly during the general season when hunter participation is highest.

Other commenters expressed a desire to hear more from FWP biologists in the field rather than department heads in Helena, and expressed skepticism about the incorporation of cultural preferences into game management.

“My suggestion would be to stick with biological data that is quantifiable and consistent, [since] social sciences are always muddier than biological sciences. Feelings change, as do tolerances, due to uncontrollable circumstances,” Stephan Weber said in his remarks.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Actually, what does @Ben Lamb know about Maybelline? I thought that was a lipstick company?

Maybe @Schaaf should have left him on the shore of Ft. Peck.

Come at me bro

 

[antlerradar]

@antlerradar - As a landowner impacted by the proposed changes, and someone who probably sees an increase in fall traffic year after year, what's the general feeling of where FWP wants to head between you and your neighbors? I'm perhaps being presumptuous that you've spoken with them about this or that it is a topic of discussion at all, but I'd just be curious as any of these changes would impact your family and your neighbors more than a guy like me who passes through on occasion. Positives and negatives would be nice to hear.

With out fail, if I am talking to a landowner within 3 weeks of the end of the season at some time during the conversation I am going to hear "I am sure glad hunting season is over". Doesn't matter if the landowner is leased, or allows some form of access. The one quot that I will not forget was from a now departed old timer. " I use to look forward to hunting season, now I hate it as much as winter and hunting season lasts longer". The truth is after 12 weeks of hunting landowners are just worn out from dealing with hunters. The result is many landowners turn the management of hunting over to a third party so they can get back to the management of the ranch. Stuffing more and more hunters into a unit is not going to help.
The landowners that stand to gain from the current proposal are the big ranches that lease or have owners that currently have a hard time getting tags.
The smaller landowners are going to lose, They will still have to deal with elk issues, but because elk are mobile and there is no guarantee that there will be elk on any given day the lease value will be much lower.
Ranchers that depend on public land grazing leases have the most to lose. For the most part these landowners are land poor and cattle rich. There are of course exceptions. Take for example Otter creek in the middle of the Custer, Most of those ranches own the creek bottom and graze on the Custer, The value of the elk hunting on the ranch is low when compared to someone that owns 20 sections of elk habitat. They are also the ones that will see the most impact from the increase in hunters. For example no hunters were complaining about over grazing in the droughts of the late 80's and early 90's. It wasn't because there were fewer cows, there was more. It was because in the 80's and 90's you could hunt the Custer and see lots of deer and if you put any effort in you would find a nice one. Now that deer are few and nice ones are all but gone hunters are complaining. The same thing is happening with elk. Stuffing more and more hunters onto the Custer is not going to help. I firmly believe that there is room for both a healthy population of elk and cattle grazing on the Custer. Keep loading up the forest with people we could end up with nether.

 

[YoungGun]

With out fail, if I am talking to a landowner within 3 weeks of the end of the season at some time during the conversation I am going to hear "I am sure glad hunting season is over". Doesn't matter if the landowner is leased, or allows some form of access. The one quot that I will not forget was from a now departed old timer. " I use to look forward to hunting season, now I hate it as much as winter and hunting season lasts longer". The truth is after 12 weeks of hunting landowners are just worn out from dealing with hunters. The result is many landowners turn the management of hunting over to a third party so they can get back to the management of the ranch. Stuffing more and more hunters into a unit is not going to help.
The landowners that stand to gain from the current proposal are the big ranches that lease or have owners that currently have a hard time getting tags.
The smaller landowners are going to lose, They will still have to deal with elk issues, but because elk are mobile and there is no guarantee that there will be elk on any given day the lease value will be much lower.
Ranchers that depend on public land grazing leases have the most to lose. For the most part these landowners are land poor and cattle rich. There are of course exceptions. Take for example Otter creek in the middle of the Custer, Most of those ranches own the creek bottom and graze on the Custer, The value of the elk hunting on the ranch is low when compared to someone that owns 20 sections of elk habitat. They are also the ones that will see the most impact from the increase in hunters. For example no hunters were complaining about over grazing in the droughts of the late 80's and early 90's. It wasn't because there were fewer cows, there was more. It was because in the 80's and 90's you could hunt the Custer and see lots of deer and if you put any effort in you would find a nice one. Now that deer are few and nice ones are all but gone hunters are complaining. The same thing is happening with elk. Stuffing more and more hunters onto the Custer is not going to help. I firmly believe that there is room for both a healthy population of elk and cattle grazing on the Custer. Keep loading up the forest with people we could end up with nether.

Thank you for the honest feedback, @antlerradar. That was my expectation as well. Regardless of how polite, sincere, or respectful any of us are in our engagement with ranchers, you can sense the "fatigue" from a lot of them.
I would hope to see those smaller ranches share their voice in this process, as they will feel the impacts more than perhaps any other group, to include us hunters. The public outcry from hunters to the proposal by FWP is one thing, but to have landowners share their voice is equally important, and may ring louder. We, as sportsmen, may be frustrated by what we see, but at the end of the day it doesn't impact my livelihood. I would sincerely like to believe that the state legislatures and commission will keep that fact in mind and work to set a sustainable elk management plan that is honest with what the goals are/should be in regards to the family ranches instead of just the big money properties, and then work with those stakeholders to find solutions. But time has shown again and again that money talks much louder.

 

[MTLivin]

I also liked the idea of restricting people to hunt only the unit the permit is good for like mule deer permits. If you draw a limited permit for an archery only season for unit X, you have to hunt that unit only. How many resident bowhunters get a breaks archery tag, hunt it for a week, then every weekend they're hunting their home units.

A ton of us do just that, I can’t reasonably hunt the breaks every weekend and I enjoy hunting out my back door with an open evening or weekend. What do you think would be accomplished by not allowing me to do just that? If the breaks are overcrowded I leave early and hunt somewhere that isn’t overcrowded, making me stay in the breaks doesn’t allow us to spread out and not crowd fellow hunters. No way in hell can anyone spread out hunters better than we can spread out ourselves.

 

[rogerthat]

A ton of us do just that, I can’t reasonably hunt the breaks every weekend and I enjoy hunting out my back door with an open evening or weekend. What do you think would be accomplished by not allowing me to do just that? If the breaks are overcrowded I leave early and hunt somewhere that isn’t overcrowded, making me stay in the breaks doesn’t allow us to spread out and not crowd fellow hunters. No way in hell can anyone spread out hunters better than we can spread out ourselves.

Your right a ton of you do do this exact thing and it is one of the major problems contributing to the overcrowding and over subscription of these hunts in the East. Sportsman like yourself have to realize this ain’t the same old Montana it used to be. Demand and population are increasing at a rapid pace. Some opportunity is going to have to be given up if we want to maintain some semblance of hunt quality. It’s time to decide if you are going to go have a destination hunt or are you going to hunt at home. Everyone’s not going to be able to do both and maintain any level of hunt quality on the limited public lands that exist in the East. Redside is spot on and you are the problem. Look in the mirror

 

[JLS]

No way in hell can anyone spread out hunters better than we can spread out ourselves.

That’s the same line FWP has been peddling for decades and it’s bullshit. The only way you can effectively manage many hunting districts in a way that makes sense biologically is to limit people to a district or group of districts.

 

[mtmiller]

That’s the same line FWP has been peddling for decades and it’s bullshit. The only way you can effectively manage many hunting districts in a way that makes sense biologically is to limit people to a district or group districts.

Did say manage?

 

[JLS]

Did say manage?
i-like-you-youre-crazy.gif

I’m not even drinking tonight.

 

[Sytes]

​

​ ​ ​ ​ Fish and Wildlife Commission approves regulations proposals for public comment​ Season-setting meetings scheduled around the state The Fish and Wildlife Commission approved 2022/2023 hunting regulations proposals for public comment at its meeting Tuesday, Dec. 14. The draft proposals are being compiled and will be available online at fwp.mt.gov/regproposals as soon as possible. Public comment on the 2022/2023 hunting regulation proposals will be taken through Jan. 14. Comments can be submitted online at fwp.mt.gov/regproposals or by email to [email protected]. This is a second opportunity for the public to provide input on 2022/2023 draft hunting regulation proposals. Earlier this fall in an effort of simplify the regulations, Fish, Wildlife & Parks biologists offered regulations proposals that combine some hunting districts, reduce some license and permit types, and eliminate hunting district portions. FWP staff held informational meetings around the state, and the public was invited to submit comments on those initial proposals. FWP adjusted proposals based on public comment and presented them to the commission. The commission approved the draft regulations for public comment at the Tuesday meeting. During December and early January, FWP will hold season-setting meetings around the state to discuss the draft hunting regulations with interested members of the public. At the meetings, biologists will present information on the draft hunting regulations approved by the commission. Following the presentations, there will be time for questions and answers. Each of FWP’s regions will hold a virtual season-setting meeting as well as part of their January Citizen Advisory Committee meetings. The commission will make a final decision on the 2022/2023 hunting regulations at its meeting in February. Season setting meeting schedule: Region 1​ Jan. 3, Zoom CAC meeting, 6 p.m. Jan. 5, Thompson Falls Elementary School, 6 p.m. Jan. 6, Libby, City Hall – Ponderosa Room, 6 p.m. Eureka, TBD Region 2​ Jan. 4, Drummond, Community Hall, 6 p.m. Jan. 5, Lincoln, Lambkins Café, 460 Main St., 6 p.m. Jan. 6, Hamilton, Bitterroot River Inn, 139 Bitterroot Plaza Dr., 6 p.m. Jan. 10, Ovando, Ovando School gym, 108 Birch St., 6 p.m. Jan. 11, Superior, Superior High School Multi-purpose room, 410 Arizona Ave., 7 p.m. Jan. 12, Anaconda, Metcalf Center, 115 Pennsylvania, 6 p.m. Jan. 13: Zoom CAC meeting, Region 2, time and details TBD Region 3​ Dec. 20, Dillon, Beaverhead Search and Rescue, 1000 MT Hwy. 41, 6 to 8 p.m. Dec. 20, Helena, Helena Middle School auditorium, 6 to 8 p.m. Dec. 21, Butte, United Congregational Church, 2945 Bayard St., 6 to 8 p.m. Dec. 21, Livingston, Livingston Civic Center, 229 River Dr., 6 to 8 p.m. Dec. 22, Whitehall, Whitehall Community Center, 11 N. Division St., 6 to 8 p.m. Jan. 12, Zoom CAC meeting, Region 3, 6 to 8 p.m. Region 4: ​ Dec. 20, Great Falls, Paris Gibson Education Center, 2400 Central Ave., 7 p.m. Dec. 21, Lewistown, Yogo Inn, 211 E Main St, 7 to 9 p.m. Dec. 22, Choteau, Choteau Public Library, 7 p.m. Dec. 27, Wolf Creek, Wolf Creek School, 7 p.m. Dec. 28, Chester, Chester-Joplin-Inverness High School, 7 p.m. Dec. 29, Fort Benton, Fort Benton Ambulance Station, 810 15th St., 7 p.m. Dec. 30, Stanford, Stanford City Hall, 7 p.m. Jan. 11, Zoom CAC meeting, Region 4 Region 5​ Dec. 28, elk only, Zoom, 6:30 to 9 p.m. Dec. 29, all other species, Zoom, 6:30 to 9 p.m. Jan. 6, Zoom CAC meeting, Region 5, 6:30 to 9 p.m. Region 6:​ Jan. 4, Havre, Great Northern Inn, 6 to 8 p.m. Jan. 5, Zoom CAC meeting, Region 6, 6 to 8 p.m. Jan. 10, Plentywood, Sheridan County Library - Jubilee Room, 6 to 8 p.m. Jan. 11, Glasgow, Cottonwood Inn, 6 to 8 p.m. Jan 12, Malta, Malta High School Cafeteria, 6 to 8 p.m. Region 7​ Jan. 3, Glendive, Dawson Community College, 6 to 8 p.m. Jan. 4, Zoom CAC meeting, Miles City/Region 7, 6 to 8 p.m.

 

[mtmiller]

I’m not even drinking tonight.

Another win for me.

 

[LostinOregon1]

With out fail, if I am talking to a landowner within 3 weeks of the end of the season at some time during the conversation I am going to hear "I am sure glad hunting season is over". Doesn't matter if the landowner is leased, or allows some form of access. The one quot that I will not forget was from a now departed old timer. " I use to look forward to hunting season, now I hate it as much as winter and hunting season lasts longer". The truth is after 12 weeks of hunting landowners are just worn out from dealing with hunters. The result is many landowners turn the management of hunting over to a third party so they can get back to the management of the ranch. Stuffing more and more hunters into a unit is not going to help.
The landowners that stand to gain from the current proposal are the big ranches that lease or have owners that currently have a hard time getting tags.
The smaller landowners are going to lose, They will still have to deal with elk issues, but because elk are mobile and there is no guarantee that there will be elk on any given day the lease value will be much lower.
Ranchers that depend on public land grazing leases have the most to lose. For the most part these landowners are land poor and cattle rich. There are of course exceptions. Take for example Otter creek in the middle of the Custer, Most of those ranches own the creek bottom and graze on the Custer, The value of the elk hunting on the ranch is low when compared to someone that owns 20 sections of elk habitat. They are also the ones that will see the most impact from the increase in hunters. For example no hunters were complaining about over grazing in the droughts of the late 80's and early 90's. It wasn't because there were fewer cows, there was more. It was because in the 80's and 90's you could hunt the Custer and see lots of deer and if you put any effort in you would find a nice one. Now that deer are few and nice ones are all but gone hunters are complaining. The same thing is happening with elk. Stuffing more and more hunters onto the Custer is not going to help. I firmly believe that there is room for both a healthy population of elk and cattle grazing on the Custer. Keep loading up the forest with people we could end up with nether.

This is about as spot on as you come for the area. I have flown the area during hunting season and the elk are always in the same places, large ranches.

 

[bigsky2]

Your right a ton of you do do this exact thing and it is one of the major problems contributing to the overcrowding and over subscription of these hunts in the East. Sportsman like yourself have to realize this ain’t the same old Montana it used to be. Demand and population are increasing at a rapid pace. Some opportunity is going to have to be given up if we want to maintain some semblance of hunt quality. It’s time to decide if you are going to go have a destination hunt or are you going to hunt at home. Everyone’s not going to be able to do both and maintain any level of hunt quality on the limited public lands that exist in the East. Redside is spot on and you are the problem. Look in the mirror

I see where you’re coming from, but I disagree about these people contributing to overcrowding. The locals in my area complain about overcrowding on one hand, and on the other hand they complain about western Montanans drawing permits in our area. The person from western Montana that comes and hunts for a long weekend contributes to crowding a lot less than the local that can hunt every weekend.

 

[rogerthat]

I see where you’re coming from, but I disagree about these people contributing to overcrowding. The locals in my area complain about overcrowding on one hand, and on the other hand they complain about western Montanans drawing permits in our area. The person from western Montana that comes and hunts for a long weekend contributes to crowding a lot less than the local that can hunt every weekend.

Most of the locals that hunted my area on public quit. The quality of the hunt is honestly that bad. Furthermore a big group of the “destination” crowd comes at the start of the season and leaves when they kill an elk or at the end of the season. Those are the big changes I have observed.

Honestly there is nothing productive for sportsman to argue about tit for tat on who is crowding who. I will never fault someone for hunting within the rules and regs in place but my point is this attitude that we are going to keep all this opportunity and even expand it while our population explodes and the resource diminishes is a major problem.

Making a limited draw permit your “bull” elk hunt for the year is a great start to offset this decline. Lots of other states do this and this attitude that “I should be able to hunt wherever I want” needs to take a dirt nap.

 

[Stone_Ice_1]

It says you can comment until Jan 14. How is that considered 30 days when their actual proposal isn't even available yet on their website?

I see the in person meeting in Helena is only 3 days off. We don't even have the full proposed regulations in our hands yet and the meeting is on Monday. Is this a hurry up and sweep this under the rug operation before too many people notice?

 

[Ben Lamb]

It says you can comment until Jan 14. How is that considered 30 days when their actual proposal isn't even available yet on their website?

I see the in person meeting in Helena is only 3 days off. We don't even have the full proposed regulations in our hands yet and the meeting is on Monday. Is this a hurry up and sweep this under the rug operation before too many people notice?

I think it's important to show up and say this out loud at the closest meeting to you.

 

[4ohSick]

I think it's important to show up and say this out loud at the closest meeting to you.

Is the 30-day comment period statutorily required or is it just a department policy?

 

[Ben Lamb]

Is the 30-day comment period statutorily required or is it just a department policy?

That's a question we're going to be running by some lawyers.