MT FWP Tentative Season setting meetings

[mdunc8]

I'm not naive enough to think that creating a few limited units will solve the problem. However, I don't see Montanans shortening, or even altering, their seasons anytime soon, so creating a limited area or two seems like a decent option for providing additional opportunities than already exist. I don't buy the displacement argument. Based on some quick and dirty Google Earth work, Region 7 is approximately 30,000 square miles, give or take a couple thousand. Unit 652 is roughly 273. Creating one or two similar units in SE Montana would displace less than 2% of hunters assuming hunting pressure was evenly distributed (I realize it's not). Assuming those hunters don't quit hunting because "their" spot was no longer accessible every year, and evenly redistribute themselves (I realize they won't), I'd have to deal with seeing an additional hunter roughly every 20 years based on the numbers of deer hunters I've seen in the field the last three years. I think I could deal with that in exchange for the opportunity to possibly draw a limited tag that might provide me with an opportunity to hunt slightly larger, less pressured deer once or twice in my lifetime.

 

[BuzzH]

Buzz, if you're hunting on some of the better private land in some of the at or "over objective" units, the hunting is stunning today for elk, as in better now, than anywhere on earth in modern times. Probably some good deer and antelope on private too, but certainly not great since we can gun hunt them through November so many places. The hunting on public land in the majority of the state is in the toilet compared to 10 years ago, including elk, but deer especially. Last MT deer and elk I shot, I felt like I was shooting the last passenger pigeon.

I agree, on all counts...and know exactly how you feel about shooting the last passenger pigeon, I felt the same way the last few times I killed an elk in Montana.

Even starting to feel bad about shooting deer on public land these days too.

One thing I've noticed in my w-tail spot, the buck to doe ratio's are in the chit...see 35-40 deer a day, maybe 3-4 bucks. The most bucks I saw in one day this year was 9. Even more depressing was that I saw a total of 14 elk, 2 smallish 6 points, 2 raghorns during the week I hunted. Matt and I hiked 61 miles in the 7 days we hunted, mostly in the dark on the way in and out. Cut maybe an additional 4-5 elk tracks that weren't made by the elk we saw.

You're right, the public land hunting in Western Montana is really poor right now.

Its depressing too, when I read my journals...in November 2004, I shot the 21st 4x4 or better whitetail buck I'd seen THAT DAY BY 1 PM.

I wouldn't bet a $5 bill, that I would see 21 total bucks in 4-5 days now. Its sad.

 

[belly-deep]

I think a bigger reason that people go east for mule deer, is not because of a handful of areas in region 2 going draw, but because mule deer hunting sucks in Western Montana. I was looking over my journals a couple days ago. In a very large geographic area of a hunting unit I spend a lot of time in, I have not seen a mule deer in 7 years. Prior to that, I would see at least 30-40 a season. While never good mule deer hunting, there were at least some around. They are now extinct in a large portion of that hunting unit. Yet, there's still an 11 week season for antlered mule deer...could change to 52 week season and it wouldn't matter.

Buzz,

There’s no doubt mule deer numbers have been declining for years. I’m not against draw units, but I do believe there needs to be either only a relatively few draw units or a regulation change across the state. I don’t think that a region like 2 with a major population center can put most of the region on a draw for one species and not have it increase pressure elsewhere in the state.

 

[BuzzH]

Buzz,

There’s no doubt mule deer numbers have been declining for years. I’m not against draw units, but I do believe there needs to be either only a relatively few draw units or a regulation change across the state. I don’t think that a region like 2 with a major population center can put most of the region on a draw for one species and not have it increase pressure elsewhere in the state.

Totally agree, and for the record, I'm no fan of draw units.

I am a fan of short seasons...you can only kill so many deer in 10-14 days. That's what has really jacked up Montana hunting, 11 week seasons with only a 3 day break between archery and rifle. Wont mention the shoulder seasons on elk that create 6 month seasons.

Cant figure out why everything is gone off public lands??? Yeah, its a mystery.

 

[belly-deep]

Anyone ever wonder why Wyoming and Colorado have great high country mule deer hunting and Montana doesn't?

Well, for starters, they have great high country.

If Wyoming and Colorado are the yardstick we measure Montana by, there will always be complaints. Even back in the glory days of the 1960’s, Montana couldn’t keep up with Idaho, Colorado, and Wyoming. The seasons were fairly uniform across the West in those days (general tag hunting during the rut) so it’s a good era for comparison. Even then, Montana didn’t produce the overall quality of deer that other states did.

That doesn’t mean the hunting can’t get better in MT, just that it has never been and never will be Colorado. I killed a lab aged 7.5 year old buck last fall. Didn’t measure him but I know he doesn’t break 170. The buck before him was lab aged at 6.5 years. But I’d love to see more older age class deer running around. Had to look over quite few fork horns and 3 points before I found those two.

But then you take a unit like the Bridgers which used to hold some giant bucks, or so I’ve been told. It’s been on a draw for quite a while now with no real spectacular results. So it’s no nearly so simple as draw units.

 

[Eric Albus]

Buzz we agree again, a 10-14 day rifle season would help. And the hunting in Western Mt must suck, all I see is Western Mt rig after Western MT rig, followed by Wa. rig after Wa. rig pounding the Candadian border waiting for the next 200 inch buck to jump out of Sask. 39 different rigs we counted one day up on the border, hunting an area of about 8 sq. miles....ridiculous.

Were I king, here is how it would go... Archery season Sept. 1-Oct. 5, Rifle season Oct. 10-Oct. 25, muzzle-loader season Nov. 1-8(no scopes, no in-lines, primitive only), Nov. 10- Sunday after Turkey Day archery only(the fear of a bow hunter in camo will help keep poachers with rifles away)....Now we have more license sales for FWP, a still too long season filled w/ opportunity, and less impact on the resource... WIN-WIN

We will wind up at LE permits for hunting the most popular season, and eventually it will be all LE as the population of Mt continues to grow. But we must place a value on our resource and put it ahead of the wants of the people. The fact that people will not limit themselves is self-evident, so the Dept. is going to have to step in and place limits on the resource. I hope they do this ahead of a violent escalation. I know of 3 instances where conflict could have turned into a deadly confrontation in the field.

Someone in a prev. post said it is a good thing those Sask bucks do not need a passport...they are right on, were it not for Sask there would hardly be a decent buck in NE Mt..

 

[mdunc8]

Eric, what would it take for MOGA to support a few limited units? I’m guessing it/they would need to be in areas not heavily outfitted?

 

[Nameless Range]

Were I king, here is how it would go... Archery season Sept. 1-Oct. 5, Rifle season Oct. 10-Oct. 25, muzzle-loader season Nov. 1-8(no scopes, no in-lines, primitive only), Nov. 10- Sunday after Turkey Day archery only(the fear of a bow hunter in camo will help keep poachers with rifles away)....Now we have more license sales for FWP, a still too long season filled w/ opportunity, and less impact on the resource... WIN-WIN

I would much rather this, over more LE Units. LE Units are nice for those once or twice in a lifetime hunts, and are fuel for daydreaming year-round, but there is a beauty and virtue in having the opportunity to hunt every year that I think often goes understated in the name of antler-inches. If Montana went LE statewide or nearly statewide, the good-old-days would be back when finding a mature buck was near impossible, but everybody willing to work hard at least had a chance.

 

[Big Fin]

Were I king, here is how it would go... Archery season Sept. 1-Oct. 5, Rifle season Oct. 10-Oct. 25, muzzle-loader season Nov. 1-8(no scopes, no in-lines, primitive only), Nov. 10- Sunday after Turkey Day archery only(the fear of a bow hunter in camo will help keep poachers with rifles away)....Now we have more license sales for FWP, a still too long season filled w/ opportunity, and less impact on the resource... WIN-WIN

We will wind up at LE permits for hunting the most popular season, and eventually it will be all LE as the population of Mt continues to grow. But we must place a value on our resource and put it ahead of the wants of the people. The fact that people will not limit themselves is self-evident, so the Dept. is going to have to step in and place limits on the resource......

Unfortunately, you are correct Eric; LE permits are an eventuality and not for purposes of "trophy quality," but some day will be required as a mechanism to protect the resource in landscapes where private land ownership or extreme topography cannot provide some sanctuary. I wish it was different, but that is a reality. It will come down to "How do we retain as much opportunity as possible, while protecting the resource." Some will say we are past that point in some areas of Montana.

Five years ago when you, me, and a few others met to discuss this topic following the brutal winter kill, your observations of what goes on in NE MT were the same as you provided here. Given part of your income is from this resource, I appreciate your consistent willingness to speak about the resource in a long-term context. You see the impacts in the wide open country of NE Montana and the vulnerability of young rutting bucks with little escape cover. An unfortunate outcome of having the huge amount of opportunity MT deer hunters have is that if not for private land in some parts of Montana, deer would be even harder to find.

The question becomes, when will hunters/outfitters/others demand the Department start thinking of new management ideas that reflect that each region in MT is almost like a different state in terms of topography and population-induced hunting pressure, rather than continuing with the much easier "one-size fits all" management philosophy that has been employed for decades. Not going to be an easy process and not sure what the solutions are. We have a diverse state, two deer resources (whitetail and mule deer) that each occupy different habitats and can withstand different levels of pressure at different times of the year, with large differences in land ownership as one goes from east to west. One doesn't have to think for long about that diversity to realize that more Regional input is probably a better long-term solution than a centralized solution.

Another reality is that once changes are made, there will be heated debates over who gives up what and how the remaining opportunity gets allocated. Those are not pretty discussions.

 

[Nameless Range]

The thing is, we don't have to go LE. We could protect the resource by limiting technology in ways that at first glance would seem extreme to folks, but in the long run could produce an amazing and unique hunting environment.

I've proposed this as a thought experiment before and I know it sounds crazy:

5 week archery season - no compound bows.

5 week muzzleloader season - no scopes, no inline, primitive.

Opportunity would not be affected, success rates would plummet, critters would grow older and bigger, and it will never happen because of momentum. But I would rather that than the bleak future of less opportunity. I think there are creative solutions, I just don't think folks have the stomach for them.

 

[joelweb]

I think the presence of CWD is going to make it harder to convince FWP that less hunting pressure is what's needed for mule deer, given that older bucks are more likely to carry the disease. If anything, we might see a push in the other direction.

 

[BuzzH]

Randy,

I think a lot of hunters have been making demands of the Department about deer for a very long time, and it falls on deaf ears.

Do you remember when you had to validate your A-tag for mule deer for either east or west of the divide? That was a good first step for helping to spread pressure out and force hunters to make a choice on where they hunted. IIRC, it was done for 3 years. In no surprise, the area I hunt on the west side, I saw a noticeable uptick in mule deer bucks. I believe it was because saving even a handful of mule deer that were targets of opportunity for either w-tail hunters or elk hunters that had validated for East of the divide. made a difference.

From conversations I had with the Department, apparently they were getting complaints from hunters that the regulation was "too confusing". My response was, give them a ticket if they shoot a mule deer without the proper validation, I bet they get unconfused in a hurry.

Which also validates your point about the woes of a one-size-fits all management style that essentially has remained unchanged since 1954 (11+ weeks of brown its down). It doesn't take more than casual observations to understand why this management style is a joke in 2017. What's changed since 1954 that may impact game in Montana? Well, according to the FWP, not one damn thing. Business as usual.

I used to blame hunters for taking advantage of this situation, hammering 6 mule deer does, shoulder seasons for 6 months. But, not anymore. We all rely on the MTFWP to manage the state resources in a responsible manner, that's their job, that's why we buy licenses, why we pay them. Sure, we should provide input and over-sight, but at the end of the day, they're supposed to be the professionals. The average hunter in Montana probably hasn't taken more than a basic HS biology class, and is under the assumption that if you can whack 6 mule deer does in region 7, and the FWP has signed off on it, then it must be ok. I cant blame them for killing 6 does, the FWP is endorsing and encouraging it.

What I'm seeing more and more is that the hunters that actually give a shit about game in Montana are self regulating by either not buying tags at all, or are applying for and buying doe/cow tags and throwing them away. Pretty sad when self-regulation is the only option some Montana hunters feel they have to do the right thing.

The saddest part of this season for me, was a text I got from Kurt about the bull he killed this year. I asked if there was much else around where he shot that bull. His response was "Nothing. I killed the last one." Yet, I can assure you, NOTHING will change for the next 10 years where he hunts. Still be OTC elk tags, 17k NR elk tags, and 11 week seasons. How does that even resemble management?

IMO/E, hunters can make all the demands they want of the department, but they aren't going to get anything changed. I have tried for 25 years and if I'm not stone-walled by the local biologists, the next level of FWP management wont allow the bio's to change anything.

The funny thing is, I get personal phone calls from WY biologists in the early stages of any changes they want to make on all kinds of things. From AccessYes, to changes in regulations, changing season dates, changing elk objectives, helping with deer captures, migration issues, fencing...and the list goes on and on and on. The level of collaboration here is really a 180 from anything I ever experienced in Montana.

Of course it does make a difference when the local bio's have the support of their supervisors and aren't being managed by crusty old fools like Mike Thompson, John Vore, Quentin Kujala, who all should have been fired a longgg time ago.

I don't see anything changing in Montana until the entire FWP leadership is sent packing, they're absolutely worthless and view wildlife as a noxious weed that needs to be killed.

 

[BuzzH]

I think the presence of CWD is going to make it harder to convince FWP that less hunting pressure is what's needed for mule deer, given that older bucks are more likely to carry the disease. If anything, we might see a push in the other direction.

I'm sure FWP leadership will use this an excuse to kill even more deer, and also to provide themselves cover for their shit management practices for the last 30 years.

I can hear it now, "we knew this all along, our strategy was perfect, if we have no deer, then cwd cant spread".

What a joke.

 

[mdunc8]

The thing is, we don't have to go LE. We could protect the resource by limiting technology in ways that at first glance would seem extreme to folks, but in the long run could produce an amazing and unique hunting environment.

I've proposed this as a thought experiment before and I know it sounds crazy:

5 week archery season - no compound bows.

5 week muzzleloader season - no scopes, no inline, primitive.

Opportunity would not be affected, success rates would plummet, critters would grow older and bigger, and it will never happen because of momentum. But I would rather that than the bleak future of less opportunity. I think there are creative solutions, I just don't think folks have the stomach for them.

Changing the season structure even a little or creating a few limited units are a long shot. Do you really think what you've proposed is feasible in Montana? I'm all for creative solutions, but they need to be remotely attainable.

 

[The Hedgehog]

Were I king, here is how it would go... Archery season Sept. 1-Oct. 5, Rifle season Oct. 10-Oct. 25, muzzle-loader season Nov. 1-8(no scopes, no in-lines, primitive only), Nov. 10- Sunday after Turkey Day archery only(the fear of a bow hunter in camo will help keep poachers with rifles away)....Now we have more license sales for FWP, a still too long season filled w/ opportunity, and less impact on the resource... WIN-WIN

We will wind up at LE permits for hunting the most popular season, and eventually it will be all LE as the population of Mt continues to grow. But we must place a value on our resource and put it ahead of the wants of the people.

That's a pretty good idea. I'd have told you to take a hike, 10 and maybe even 5 years ago. A lot of the public stuff is so horribly managed. As much as I hate to admit it, if it weren't for some of the restrictive hunting on private, there wouldn't be an animal alive on public. I read through the agenda of these public comment meetings, and don't see they are doing anything that makes much of a difference.

 

[JLS]

Simply shortening the seasons is much easier than changing season structure based on weapon technology. If you're going to do archery only, do archery only without worrying whether it's a long bow or a Hoyt Defiant.

I remember the mule deer validation Buzz. Not saying it was the best solution, but it was SOME solution.

Shifting the entire deer season forward two weeks would have a profound impact. Shortening it by a couple of weeks would do even more.

As Randy pointed out, there is a very fine balance at times between maximizing opportunity while providing appropriate protection to the resource. It's a moving target that probably isn't best served by an across the board 11 week season (save for a handful of districts) and hunting past Thanksgiving.

 

[JLS]

That's a pretty good idea. I'd have told you to take a hike, 10 and maybe even 5 years ago. A lot of the public stuff is so horribly managed. As much as I hate to admit it, if it weren't for some of the restrictive hunting on private, there wouldn't be an animal alive on public. I read through the agenda of these public comment meetings, and don't see they are doing anything that makes much of a difference.

As long as there are healthy deer herds on these private sanctuaries, you won't see anything change.

 

[Nameless Range]

Changing the season structure even a little or creating a few limited units are a long shot. Do you really think what you've proposed is feasible in Montana? I'm all for creative solutions, but they need to be remotely attainable.

Feasible as in likely, easy, or convenient? Nope, I don't. Something like this will never happen. This is my "If I were king" solution. You would also all be able to buy beer before 8:00 a.m. once I have my crown.

 

[The Hedgehog]

The saddest part of this season for me, was a text I got from Kurt about the bull he killed this year. I asked if there was much else around where he shot that bull. His response was "Nothing. I killed the last one." Yet, I can assure you, NOTHING will change for the next 10 years where he hunts.

Buzz, you are WRONG. FWP DID do something this year. They extended the season for antlerless to February 15th and are now allocating 1000 elk b tags. At the end of the last FWP discussion around this plan I approached the regional wildlife biologist after the presentation and recommended just getting wildlife services involved with a helicopter to eliminate all of them. I doubt I'll be at any of the future meetings. Too frustrating.

Will say that particular unit has some huge private land complexities, and wolves that are very difficult to manage due to access.

 

[u1299]

I can't speak for Steve, but I've said the same thing. I won't be applying for a grizzly tag, even though I spent three years on the Governors' Grizzly Bear Roundtable advocating that hunting of grizzly bears be an expected management tool under state management guidelines.

A few reasons why I won't be applying.
H
>- I shot a grizzly bear in Alaska when my grandpa was alive and he was able to be my "next of kin guide." Personally, shooting another one really doesn't get me that fired up, though I think it would be a ton of fun to pursue them.

>- I think the tags should go to people who have a real passion for the idea of a Montana grizzly hunt. I know guys far more fired up about it than I would be and I would prefer they get the tags. It is for that reason that I have advocated for some higher thresholds of what it takes to apply and how the hunts should unfold, rather than someone who doesn't have a lot of passion for the idea.

>- It seems the states are inclined to bow to the pressure that will make these grizzly bear tags more of a shoot than a hunt, if/when tags are finally issued. Making these hunts easy, where some bear that is named/numbered and graced the cover of magazines gets toasted in front of an audience near a road or viewing area, is going to be some serious PR problem for the states when they could have made these more of a backcountry hunt and away from the public eye. I don't want any part of that.

>- This is probably the biggest reason I won't apply. The profile that comes with my platforms also brings with it a lot of focus on things I might say or do. These platforms can be very useful in the debate on public lands and public access. Me shooting a Montana grizzly would do nothing but muddy those waters and create more hurdles for our public land advocacy in places/arenas where most people don't have a clue of the grizzly bear conservation story. Reality is, that distraction would make it harder to do public land advocacy. Given my high interest in continuing to use our platforms for public land issues and my lower interest in shooting a Montana grizzly, I don't want to get distracted and pulled into the ditch in a way that reduces our effectiveness in other issues I have spent years working on.

Not sure if any of that makes sense, but that is where it is for me.

Makes sense to me. I know the first time I heard of Randy Newberg there was something different and refreshing in your approach to hunting and conservation that I appreciated. As I’ve gotten older I know my approach to hunting and the outdoors has evolved for the better over what it was when I was younger.