MT Mule Deer Symposium

[The Hedgehog]

The crybaby bitch is back!

 

[JLS]

sillybilly...I think that there were many other sportsmen's group who supported 161.
The other thing you have stated that is a little mis-leading is that outfitters clients could only hunt private lands...this is simply not true, if the outfitter is/was licensed and pays fees they are allowed to hunt their clients on BLM, FS, CMR, ect....

Eric,

Reading broadly between the lines (a potentially dangerous thing), I think what Billy Headbanger was trying to say was that in the past a hunter with an OSL could only hunt with the outfitter. Now, they have a general license so they are not limited to just hunting with the outfitter. They can go hunt whereever they want before or after their outfitted hunt, which they couldn't do before.

I could be wrong.

 

[muleguy]

Could this be true?

Now let’s talk about how the MWF has supported the reintroduction of the wolf to Montana. Through their parent organization (and funding source), the National Wildlife Federation lead the charge to reintroduce wolves to Montana and everyone knows how that has turned out. Recently, MWF members of the FWP Commission closed 2 hunting districts to wolf hunting. The FWP Commission sided with the Defenders of Wildlife, Footloose and the Greater Yellowstone Coalition in making their decision. So this is further proof that the MWF continues to support wolves in Montana, costing the resident hunter even more!

Hopefully Ream and Moody are done - they have done enough.

 

[Eric Albus]

You are correct in that JLS.

I do not know if I agree the MWF is deserving "fringe" status...but I think that they do not represent the true core beliefs of most Montana sportsmen. The pro-bison, pro-predator leanings, and the fact the are just a branch of the National Wildlife Federation(who is in cahoots w/ Defenders of Wildlife) certainly hurts whatever credibility they may have had. That and the fact that their membership touted is mainly through "affiliated membership", not actual paid members.

One thing billy-beater is right on is that there have been a lot of ranches closed in Northern Mt. to the bison debacle and the "milk river ranch purchase"....I do not know much about the Milk River purchase, other than it looks like the return of a political favor by former Gov. B.S....it certainly has the locals stirred to a frenzy in that part of the world though.

 

[Ben Lamb]

You are correct in that JLS.

I do not know if I agree the MWF is deserving "fringe" status...but I think that they do not represent the true core beliefs of most Montana sportsmen. The pro-bison, pro-predator leanings, and the fact the are just a branch of the National Wildlife Federation(who is in cahoots w/ Defenders of Wildlife) certainly hurts whatever credibility they may have had. That and the fact that their membership touted is mainly through "affiliated membership", not actual paid members.

One thing billy-beater is right on is that there have been a lot of ranches closed in Northern Mt. to the bison debacle and the "milk river ranch purchase"....I do not know much about the Milk River purchase, other than it looks like the return of a political favor by former Gov. B.S....it certainly has the locals stirred to a frenzy in that part of the world though.

Rather than relying on the Internet for facts, you could actually look at the record when it comes to MWF and large carnivores:

MWF worked with Senator Tester to get a bill passed that delisted wolves while a lot of other groups tried to kill it in favor of a bill that has 0 chance of passing. It was MWF that was recognized by both Tester and Bucus for their heavy lifting on the issue.

On Grizzly Bears, MWF along with NWF were the lead intervenors on the side of the USFWS regarding the litigation fighting relisting of the Yellowstone Grizz populations.
On bison, I suppose they might be guilty of daring to think a conversation could be had regarding small herds on large tracts of public land. It's unfortunate that other people feel the need to demonize a group that done a hell of a lot for wildlife and for hunters rather than look at the facts.

 

[Eric Albus]

Ben, never said that the group has not done a lot for wildlife...but the underlieing agenda w/ the NWF is not one that promotes sport hunting....the close ties w/ anti-hunting groups like DoW are certainly not comforting...the fact that DoW funded the transfer of the bison to Ft. Peck is not very comforting either.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Ben, never said that the group has not done a lot for wildlife...but the underlieing agenda w/ the NWF is not one that promotes sport hunting....the close ties w/ anti-hunting groups like DoW are certainly not comforting...the fact that DoW funded the transfer of the bison to Ft. Peck is not very comforting either.

NWF and MWF are different groups with different goals and agendas.

It's funny that folks want to talk about wing in bed with DOW when RMEF, MDF and a host of other groups work with them in coalition on issues like Land and Water Conservation Fund, etc.

You're pulling on threads that aren't there.

NWF works with anyone if it benefits wildlife. They were key players in the land exchanges on the Gallatin for elk, and they held conserve the Missouri River Breaks through the monument designation.

If you look at other issues,couch asTeaming for Wildlife, they were there with RMEF, NSSF,etc. so they have picked one side: wildlife.

I don't agree with everything they do, but they're a damned sight better than SFW has been.

 

[Eric Albus]

ben, did a little more digging on the parent of MWF, the NWF....what a leftist leaning alarmist organization....and I saw nothing that was even close to pro-hunting, pro anything that even most of the left leaning folks I know could not endorse....good grief...check out the NWF's web site....they are worried about "global warming"(spend a week in NE MT w/ me and see if you are still worried about it). Then check out "bison"...and "restoring them to the west"....the circle for "bison range" on their web page takes in my neighbors ranches, farms, homes, not to mention my own house/ranch/farm....wonder why I think these folks may not have my best interests at heart?

 

[Ben Lamb]

ben, did a little more digging on the parent of MWF, the NWF....what a leftist leaning alarmist organization....and I saw nothing that was even close to pro-hunting, pro anything that even most of the left leaning folks I know could not endorse....good grief...check out the NWF's web site....they are worried about "global warming"(spend a week in NE MT w/ me and see if you are still worried about it). Then check out "bison"...and "restoring them to the west"....the circle for "bison range" on their web page takes in my neighbors ranches, farms, homes, not to mention my own house/ranch/farm....wonder why I think these folks may not have my best interests at heart?

Eric,

I would dare say I've got more knowledge about NWF than most. I worked for the Wyoming and Montana Wildlife Federations for a total of 7 years. The staff in Missoula and Boulder of NWF are some of the finest hunters and advocates for wildlife, using actual science.

Climate change is real. I can't help it if you don't agree with the facts that are staring us in the face.

The bison issue has been blown way out of proportion. But the truth of what groups are working towards doesn't matter because the myth of "free roaming" bison sells better than the truth.

 

[dustinf]

ben, did a little more digging on the parent of MWF, the NWF....what a leftist leaning alarmist organization....and I saw nothing that was even close to pro-hunting, pro anything that even most of the left leaning folks I know could not endorse....good grief...check out the NWF's web site....they are worried about "global warming"(spend a week in NE MT w/ me and see if you are still worried about it). Then check out "bison"...and "restoring them to the west"....the circle for "bison range" on their web page takes in my neighbors ranches, farms, homes, not to mention my own house/ranch/farm....wonder why I think these folks may not have my best interests at heart?

So close, yet so far away.

 

[Eric Albus]

Ben, I attended the meetings this summer in both Glasgow and Miles City about the bison debacle. The truth of what the "groups" are working toward looks like a "free range bison herd". At least that was the agenda heard at both places.

Climate change is real? Certainly it is....but what a far cry from "global warming"..when liberals could not sell global warming, they changed it to "climate change"...and I concur...the climate does/is/will change...from the mini ice-age in the 16th century...to the last warming trend...to this weeks new worry of a "new mini ice-age".

I am more worried about my right to keep and bear arms at this time than I am climate change.

Once again, we have digressed from the topic at hand... how to manage mule deer... I know, let's keep using the chicken bones and dice...been working really great so far. There have been some good ideas thrown out here in this discussion...at the top of this page Travis threw some ideas out there that are good....

Those who are resistant to change, like no rut hunting, more diversified seasons, ect., need to see what can happen and how much better the quality could be. I would like to try for 3 years a new plan of management. If the mule deer are not better off, then we switch back to the old method of hunt the pre-peak-post rut, "kill 'em all, mostly small".... I can remember not so long ago, that a 180+ buck was a reality on public land...it could be again, if we would only manage the resource.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Ben, I attended the meetings this summer in both Glasgow and Miles City about the bison debacle. The truth of what the "groups" are working toward looks like a "free range bison herd". At least that was the agenda heard at both places.

Climate change is real? Certainly it is....but what a far cry from "global warming"..when liberals could not sell global warming, they changed it to "climate change"...and I concur...the climate does/is/will change...from the mini ice-age in the 16th century...to the last warming trend...to this weeks new worry of a "new mini ice-age".

I am more worried about my right to keep and bear arms at this time than I am climate change. You can continue to believe that it's no big deal, even though the vast body of peer reviewed science has been shown to be fairly accurate especially when it comes to increased severeity of storms, changing seasons, etc. Read some of this: http://www.seasonsend.org/

These reports were put together by those alarmists at RMEF, TRCP, Pheasants Forever, Ducks Unlimited, and yep, the National Wildlife Federation.

Once again, we have digressed from the topic at hand... how to manage mule deer... I know, let's keep using the chicken bones and dice...been working really great so far. There have been some good ideas thrown out here in this discussion...at the top of this page Travis threw some ideas out there that are good....

Those who are resistant to change, like no rut hunting, more diversified seasons, ect., need to see what can happen and how much better the quality could be. I would like to try for 3 years a new plan of management. If the mule deer are not better off, then we switch back to the old method of hunt the pre-peak-post rut, "kill 'em all, mostly small".... I can remember not so long ago, that a 180+ buck was a reality on public land...it could be again, if we would only manage the resource.

No denying the FWP road show was a debacle that quickly escalated into full blown paranoia. Especially when you have fools like Rehberg running around with his road show and "leaked memo."

It was Frank Lutz, Republican brain trust and spin meister who came up with Climate Change. He said that it wouldn't scare people so much.

And back to Mule Deer, I think we've got a few good concepts out of this thread: Reduce B tags or eliminate them when populations are low, look at how to better manage block management for quality of hunt rather than boots on the ground, increase lion harvest for short term gains, focus on habitat condition for long term sustainability and in a few areas, look at LE permits or shortened seasons (like 406). At least that's what I see as being the common ground.

 

[----]

One thing I'd definitely want if they ever did drop the General mule deer rut hunt, would be a system like Idaho's where you had to pick between mule deer or the whitetail rut hunt.

If they closed mule deer down on the east side for thanksgiving, but kept the whitetail general, our already vulnerable mountain whitetail over here would get absolutely hammered.

 

[shoots-straight]

One thing I'd definitely want if they ever did drop the General mule deer rut hunt, would be a system like Idaho's where you had to pick between mule deer or the whitetail rut hunt.

If they closed mule deer down on the east side for thanksgiving, but kept the whitetail general, our already vulnerable mountain whitetail over here would get absolutely hammered.

Especially if HB 161 passes. That bill would add 17900 more NR deer tags.

 

[Mudranger1]

Eric,

I'm beginning to really like you.

Billy,

you are an idiot.

this simple comment has to be me one of my favorite of all time ...carry on

 

[Eric Albus]

Ben,

That appears to be the general consensus from what I have gathered in the preceding comments. As Randy11 points out, we must be careful of shifting pressure around the state.

 

[howler]

Eric pointed out a few posts ago about coyotes taking down deer on Fort Peck I was traveling doen the lake today and run accross this this was a Mule deer doe until 8 coyotes made a mess. I am not on the kill all coyotes band wagon I just like to get he ones coming into a rabbit call. these guys were to full to come in.

 

[Eric Albus]

And the ice has snow on it...imagine how many dead deer there could be if it was clear ice? Had a talk yesterday w/ our "coyote killin' legend" here in NE MT...and I quote "anyone who thinks that coyotes do not have an impact on the fawn recruitment is an idiot".... Neither of us would advocate killing every coyote(which can not be done), but canis latrans has a very negative impact on deer/antelope populations.

 

[howler]

it is a fairly common sight on the lake, no doubt.

 

[Ben Lamb]

It's also a fairly common sight on the side of a road.