MT ELK, Changing it up?

[Straight Arrow]

So much to think about here.

First. This proposal through landowners that are not trying to profit from elk under the buss. This is how it works on our place. I love that I live in a place that is limited entry for bulls. I do not have to look at HT or the FWP web site to know when the drawing starts. My phone is ringing in the first hour, so is my brothers and fathers . for the most part we can work in everyone that asks into a hunt, just maybe not opening day or the first week or two. Some hunters end up taking a bull else where and we can take other hunters, sometimes even walking ins that we do not know. The only person I turned down this year was the Outfitter on the neighbors who had a friend and they spotted a big bull on our side of the fence.(nothing gets under my skin more than when someone that leases there property, then wants to hunt ours because it is not leased)
We can let most of the people that ask on to hunt bulls because the unit is limited entry and we are just not going to be over whelmed with hunters. For instance with the general deer we have to be very careful. Let someone on and you can count on them being back next year with a friend, in know time you have a friend of a friend of a friend. Soon things get political between family members and hunters and this is when you turn to a third party like an outfitter to manage the hunting for you or like us you cut way back on hunters and only close friends and family get to hunt and young kids of other friends. It is far nicer to have FWP decide who gets to hunt than for me to have to make a political decision on who gets to hunt. Most of the general public is going to lose out when I decide.

Thank-you for your great attitude. You are a refreshing holdover from yesteryear's wonderful hunter / landowner positive hunting legacy of good relationships and collaboration on behalf of wildlife that facilitated the "BACK FROM THE BRINK" era. I loudly applaud you!!!

 

[Treeshark]

Is the % of landowners that can and want to monetize hunting already set because they already do?

Yes- probably is, I agree. It will probably only increase if this passes IMO.

 

[The Hedgehog]

This will never fly and these a-holes know that. They’re trying to soften the blow for what they will likely get- some kind of landowner bull tag allocation. Greg made Hank take an online Karrass course to develop a skill far more important to his role than wildlife management and real leadership.

 

[Ben Lamb]

This will never fly and these a-holes know that. They’re trying to soften the blow for what they will likely get- some kind of landowner bull tag allocation. Greg made Hank take an online Karrass course to develop a skill far more important to his role than wildlife management and real leadership.

"We just brought this forward because someone was finally offering solutions instead of just saying no. We really need every one to bring solutions forward, because we're down 15 biologists & 15 wardens, as well as a handful of other staff, and for some reason, morale is so freaking low, even though we didn't stop the beatings, so we're just gonna ask Lyle down at the Knotty Pine WTF to do next."

 

[Ben Lamb]

So much to think about here.

First. This proposal through landowners that are not trying to profit from elk under the buss. This is how it works on our place. I love that I live in a place that is limited entry for bulls. I do not have to look at HT or the FWP web site to know when the drawing starts. My phone is ringing in the first hour, so is my brothers and fathers . for the most part we can work in everyone that asks into a hunt, just maybe not opening day or the first week or two. Some hunters end up taking a bull else where and we can take other hunters, sometimes even walking ins that we do not know. The only person I turned down this year was the Outfitter on the neighbors who had a friend and they spotted a big bull on our side of the fence.(nothing gets under my skin more than when someone that leases there property, then wants to hunt ours because it is not leased)
We can let most of the people that ask on to hunt bulls because the unit is limited entry and we are just not going to be over whelmed with hunters. For instance with the general deer we have to be very careful. Let someone on and you can count on them being back next year with a friend, in know time you have a friend of a friend of a friend. Soon things get political between family members and hunters and this is when you turn to a third party like an outfitter to manage the hunting for you or like us you cut way back on hunters and only close friends and family get to hunt and young kids of other friends. It is far nicer to have FWP decide who gets to hunt than for me to have to make a political decision on who gets to hunt. Most of the general public is going to lose out when I decide.

I really hope you attend the meeting on the 14th and represent this view. You can sign up and do it from home!

 

[rogerthat]

I really hope you attend the meeting on the 14th and represent this view. You can sign up and do it from home!

Ben how does attending at the regional headquarters work? Will you still be able to make a comment or do you have to do that via zoom?

 

[rogerthat]

This will never fly and these a-holes know that. They’re trying to soften the blow for what they will likely get- some kind of landowner bull tag allocation. Greg made Hank take an online Karrass course to develop a skill far more important to his role than wildlife management and real leadership.

I hope you are right. This seems like the "nuclear option". Anything sounds better than this at this point.

 

[Mtnhunter1]

This will never fly and these a-holes know that. They’re trying to soften the blow for what they will likely get- some kind of landowner bull tag allocation. Greg made Hank take an online Karrass course to develop a skill far more important to his role than wildlife management and real leadership.

I'll have to disagree GH. This is actually a genius play by the"other" side and I think that it will get implemented in one version or another.

We know that legal access to the bulls is the goal with the "over objective" ploy. This has not changed since implementation of the EMP. RFW and landowner tags has proven to be a fight that they have been loosing the last few decades. So they looked outside the box, so to speak, and came up with this proposal. Not RFW.....Not landowner tags.....open to the "general" everyday Joe or Jane hunter, reduces the public pressure on public land by 50%.....again, GENIUS move on their part as they have control of the access and this will give them the ability to increase their operations.

I'm guessing that this will pass with the whole archery season and the first 2-to-3 weeks of rifle season going to "GENERAL" on the private and privately controlled lands. This will be passed with the idea that this would open up additional public access to private lands for antlerless harvest the last few weeks of the season.

 

[antlerradar]

I have heard this from a couple landowners now and even some outfitters that used to let their guides hunt some. They are concerned how they are going to manage the social side of this in addition to the resource side. That being said I don’t feel that bad for them. The general public is getting the shaft for their benefit. Though I know you don’t want to Antlerradar but you could go shoot the biggest bull on the property next year if you wanted to. Lots of landowners and their family will

My brother and I will be shooting the best bull we can find next year it this goes through. Like my brother said, " the days of the big bulls will be gone soon and if we don't shoot one the outfitter on the neighbors will". In the past my brother and I put in for 900-20, he would shoot the first bull he had a shot at and I will hold out for a big one during archery and shoot a cow during rifle or eat the tag.

 

[SAJ-99]

This will never fly and these a-holes know that. They’re trying to soften the blow for what they will likely get- some kind of landowner bull tag allocation. Greg made Hank take an online Karrass course to develop a skill far more important to his role than wildlife management and real leadership.

Makes sense in a negotiation. You don't start with what you want, you start by asking for everything. Maybe you end up at landowner tags. Maybe hunters should ok limited landowner tags in exchange for an easement to landlocked public? You think the Wilks would create a public easement for Durfee Hills in exchange for a couple of landowner bull tags?

 

[Schaaf]

I have never meet ether of them but if there posts are any guide I prefer them over some of the other outfitters I know.

Agreed

 

[rogerthat]

My brother and I will be shooting the best bull we can find next year it this goes through. Like my brother said, " the days of the big bulls will be gone soon and if we don't shoot one the outfitter on the neighbors will". In the past my brother and I put in for 900-20, he would shoot the first bull he had a shot at and I will hold out for a big one during archery and shoot a cow during rifle or eat the tag.

I would do the exact same. Hopefully this doesn't go through but if it does, time for you to get scouting.

 

[8andcounting]

If the FWP wants to get rid of more elk, than they need to make it easier for the hunter to accomplish this. I harvested my first bull elk on public land on October 24th, the 2nd day of the firearm season, don't get me wrong, I was totally stoked to fill my tag on the second day of the season and being the second day hunting for elk in my life, I think someone should be able to get a second tag, if they want one, I feel a hunter that has harvested one has a better chance of harvesting another...

Umm . What ? Never say you seen(read) it all on the internet

 

[sacountry]

I'll have to disagree GH. This is actually a genius play by the"other" side and I think that it will get implemented in one version or another.

We know that legal access to the bulls is the goal with the "over objective" ploy. This has not changed since implementation of the EMP. RFW and landowner tags has proven to be a fight that they have been loosing the last few decades. So they looked outside the box, so to speak, and came up with this proposal. Not RFW.....Not landowner tags.....open to the "general" everyday Joe or Jane hunter, reduces the public pressure on public land by 50%.....again, GENIUS move on their part as they have control of the access and this will give them the ability to increase their operations.

I'm guessing that this will pass with the whole archery season and the first 2-to-3 weeks of rifle season going to "GENERAL" on the private and privately controlled lands. This will be passed with the idea that this would open up additional public access to private lands for antlerless harvest the last few weeks of the season.

What kills me is that effective biology demands the application of small, consistent, brush strokes over time. Hank is pouring 5 gallons of paint into his commercial spray gun as we speak.

 

[antlerradar]

First and foremost, thank you for allowing access. Don't know where you live and we'll likely never meet but thank you.

Second, I'm ardent believer in the BMA program and I believe it can be enhanced to be an even more effective tool. Would type 2 BMA with the current limited draw ever be of interest to you? You control the access and make some money at it. Stipulate bull harvest only if you like. Asking because I'm curious of where the line needs to be for a landowner to consider BMA instead of selling out to guides. I'm sure the financials have to be there, but at this point you've held out so is it more about the controlled access and picking the solution that does that best versus just the money? You might be in the minority of landowners in this regard, but I'm curious.

First, our property is far from wide open, and if someone bugs me about hunting their chances decrease the more they bug. That being said we had hunters just about every day from the first of Sept to the end of Nov. and somewhat north of 200 hunter days.
I am not interested in BM and it is likely I never will be.
I take your question as, What can we do to may landowners like me more interested in BM

Better law enforcement. Game wardens are underpaid and spread too thin in Montana. Last year the game warden near me moved on last spring and he still has not been replaced. Hard for FWP to convince landowners that they will take care of the slobs, trespassers and out right poachers when law enforcement is so lacking. On the other had the outfitter promises to handle all the unethical people and they are on your property almost every day.

Better management on public land. I take one look at what has happened to the deer herd and the damage to the roads on the Custer and say there is no way in hell that is happening on my place. I firmly believe that if hunters want better access to private land they are going to have to give up some opportunity.
I have had several outfitters solicit me for a lease, besides the the promise of better management is a selling point. If they are trying to sign me up with the promise of better management it has likely been a winner with other landowners.

 

[antlerradar]

I really hope you attend the meeting on the 14th and represent this view. You can sign up and do it from home!

Likely not going to make it but if someone wants to quote me go a head.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Likely not going to make it but if someone wants to quote me go a head.

PM incoming

 

[sacountry]

First, our property is far from wide open, and if someone bugs me about hunting their chances decrease the more they bug. That being said we had hunters just about every day from the first of Sept to the end of Nov. and somewhat north of 200 hunter days.
I am not interested in BM and it is likely I never will be.
I take your question as, What can we do to may landowners like me more interested in BM

Better law enforcement. Game wardens are underpaid and spread too thin in Montana. Last year the game warden near me moved on last spring and he still has not been replaced. Hard for FWP to convince landowners that they will take care of the slobs, trespassers and out right poachers when law enforcement is so lacking. On the other had the outfitter promises to handle all the unethical people and they are on your property almost every day.

Better management on public land. I take one look at what has happened to the deer herd and the damage to the roads on the Custer and say there is no way in hell that is happening on my place. I firmly believe that if hunters want better access to private land they are going to have to give up some opportunity.
I have had several outfitters solicit me for a lease, besides the the promise of better management is a selling point. If they are trying to sign me up with the promise of better management it has likely been a winner with other landowners

Very insightful Thanks for sharing. One more question, in your opinion, is there an elk overpopulation issue in your district? I know that's a subjective question, but I question whether this is a real problem or a smoke screen for someone's personal agenda.

 

[brocksw]

Umm . What ? Never say you seen(read) it all on the internet

Rod's not just on a different page...he's in a whole different book.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Sign the petition: https://www.change.org/p/montana-fi...ition&share_bandit_exp=initial-31619613-en-US