MT proposed season changes

[----]

FWP just released the new season changes for public comment.

http://fwp.mt.gov/hunting/oppForPubCommentDefault.html

The high notes include squaring bonus points, moving opening day to Saturday, extending spring bear seasons in region 2, combining many central and eastern archery elk tags into one 900 tag, and having a four year wait on elk tags with <10% draw odds.

You can issue comments through this link, or attend one of the local meetings.

Any comments in support of the new formation of Bear Unit 200, with the season running through the end of May, would be greatly appreciated by yours truly.

 

[Breaks Runner]

Square those points baby!!!!!

+1 on the four year wait...

+1 for BB Unit 200

Comments in transit..............

 

[mtmiller]

I do not agree with the 4 year wait on units with <10% draw odds. I agree with the 4 year wait concept, but just list which HD's will be included without hunters having to research the odds.

Here is a quick example.
http://oyoa.hunterstrailhead.com/hu...&type=Brow-tined+Bull+or+Antlerless&year=2008

2005 1.4%
2006 10.4%
2007 10.0%
2008 7.8%

According to the proposal, it was not listed, so apparently it was above 10% in 2009?

If this was already in place 10 years ago would you rather have drawn 313-10 in 2007 or 2008?

 

[Lawnboy]

Saturday opener would be sweet I know right where I would be on Sat. morning.
I don't mind the 4 year wait on those "nasty draw units"

I have no idea why they wouldn't lower the buck and doe permits in 312-50 (Bridgers). I dare them to find a total of 250 deer on this west side. Doe permits are absolutely ridiculous. I guess it's too hard for them to go do a survey 5 miles from town. Sorry about the rant, some things just don't make sense. I often wonder if those who are making the management decisions are really hunters and hunt at all in the areas they make decisions over. They sure would have their eyes opened.

 

[sweetnectar]

I second the notion to have a Saturday as an opener.

I don't understand what is ment by assembling diffent hunting districts but if they are talking about combining them as one tag I think that is a mistake by not allowing for better management of animals unless the thinking is the wolves are just going to mow everything down anyway. I get the feeling that FWP doesn't like to survey areas and adjust quotes all the time...perhaps they people who work for FWP just want to focus on their own little pet projects.

 

[thecrittergitter]

Bart, I agree on the 312-50.......FOR SURE!

Lots of good stuff in the changes proposed, some stupid stuff too.

Biggest thing missing right now that is needed is a substantial increase in quota for wolves in specific areas. I suspect they are leaving that out of the proposed changes until Malloy makes his ruling such as not to influence his decision at all......that quota of 75 sounds just about right for the 100 and 200 districts ONLY!!!

 

[tjones]

Here is something else I cannot support. Replacing cow permits with A9/B12.

Replace all antlerless and brow-tined bull/antlerless elk permits (hereafter "antlerless permits") with antlerless elk licenses.

 

[belly-deep]

That 4-year wait on the bull tags is stupid.

All it will do is drive draw odds down in areas that now have greater than 10% odds.

They need to rephrase this:

If an applicant receives an either sex elk permit that had a drawing success rate of 10% or less the previous year, that applicant must wait four years before applying for any either sex elk permit with a 10% or less drawing success rate.

To say that you can't put in for any either sex tag for 4 years.

 

[mtmiller]

If I have this screwed up, someone please set me straight.

I am assuming the 4-year wait is based on 10% draw odds for someone with zero points. I am sitting on max points, so most areas are over 10% for me, but not for the guy with zero points. I know if I do draw I now will have to wait 4 years to apply for any other HD below 10%. As I mentioned earlier I am not a fan of having to research every year as HD's fall above or below the 10% from year to year.

Here is my main concern and maybe some of you math whizzes can figure this out.

Bear with me, I am going to bring in another proposal that couldd change things quite a bit.

Let's say I am sitting on max points, which I think is 7; number is not important in my example. Right now my name goes in the hat 7 times and someone without points gets their name in the hat once. Let's say this HD is ~18% for someone with no points, so not awful and a unit that will not be on that 10% list. Now with the other new proposal to square points comes into play. I now would have 49 names in the hat and the guy with no points still only has one chance. The way I see it, there will be quite a few more HD's that will be falling into the <10% category based on applicants with zero points.

Am I over thinking this?

 

[Fish]

I like the squaring pts and 4 yr wait. Will get the people up in the pts for moose, sheep, goats getting some tags and rolling out.

-mtmiller, over thinking things, they aren't going to have different odds and therefore waits for 0 pt guys and 7 pt guys. they would do the 10% on just the tags versus number of people, simple odds as they have in the past. But they should just list the units that have a 4-5 yr average of less than 10%, and maybe add units accordingly.

not sure about the 900 archery elk tag if everyone ends up in the same area ??

Should of put in a new NR rule of 20% tag allocation while they are at it

 

[belly-deep]

Should of put in a new NR rule of 20% tag allocation while they are at it

Not a chance in hell...haha!

 

[shoots-straight]

Should of put in a new NR rule of 20% tag allocation while they are at it

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahah ah Hahahahahahahahahah!

 

[belly-deep]

Actually, it wouldn't do much for the NRs.

My uncle bought a leftover big game combo this year...in October. They must have been short a few non residents this time around. Another 10% wouldn't have drawn in any more.

 

[----]

Miller, I'm pretty sure the 10% is an "average" percent chance of all the people that applied the year prior. Not sure how they arrive at this average percentile, but I'm sure it would be the same as what they print in the regulations.
As far as researching the 10% units, I'm pretty sure there was a note in there saying FWP had to designate and print the units that counted towards this each year. So no research needed.

 

[Waymore]

Hunting regs up for discussion... Public hearing on proposed changes to hunting regulations for Montana tonight (1-06-10) at 7 at the Bozeman Holiday Inn, 5 E. Baxter Lane.

Some highlights of what's being considered (as some have already discussed on this thread):

- A plan to reduce the number of elk hunted in the Gallatin Canyon.
- Moving the opening of deer and elk firearm season to a Saturday.
- A special deer-hunting season for youths ages 12 through 16 on the third Thursday and Friday of October.
- Moving the opening day of general firearm season for antelope to the Saturday of Columbus Day weekend and adjusting the antelope archery-only season to the Friday before this opener.
- Reopening hunting district 302 -- near Lima -- to bighorn sheep hunting.
- Creating an archery season for black bears in the state.
- Creating an archery season for mountain lions.

The Bozeman meeting is one of 46 scheduled across the state by FWP.

Comments on the proposed changes will be taken at the meetings or can be submitted through www.fwp.mt.gov through Jan. 22

Info copied from http://bozemandailychronicle.com/articles/2010/01/06/news/000hunting.txt

If you're around and want to voice your opinion- please show up.

 

[----]

Went to the one last night in Missoula.
Even if you guys can't go to a meeting, get your opinions submitted online.
Some of these ideas don't really make any sense, and should rightfully be shot down.
Also lots of good stuff on there, that should be supported.

 

[shoots-straight]

Randy11, elaborate for me, which ones are which in your opinion?

 

[----]

There's one unit in specific I don't agree with how they're handling, but would really rather not share it on a public forum as it's limited entry and where my family and I do a lot of our hunting.

I don't agree at all with switching to A9 only, and especially with how they are giving out the same numbers straight across. Can't be good for the bull numbers, and more elk being killed isn't a good idea at all in our part of the state.

I also don't agree with letting Non-residents know well ahead of time what limited entry tags they might or might not have drawn

And as I said in the original post, I really support the extension of spring bear in region 2. I'm sick and tired of having to stop hunting a week or two before I can even get off the main road, and especially when the rest of the state still gets to hunt. It was based on flawed logic thought up in the eighties concerning reducing grizzly encounters.

Also strongly support the start of a two day kids deer season in junction with the holiday break they have in October. Don't see how this can be anything besides a good thing.

I like the idea of having bear and lion open for archers that first ten days too. Any greater opportunity to reduce predators right now is a good thing.

 

[----]

Just curious, is everyone down there pretty well in support of making the west side limited entry for mule deer?

 

[BuzzH]

The one that I dont agree with at all is the two additional days for kids to hunt deer. Thats just plain stupid. Kids already have a full 5 week rifle season where than can shoot any deer and any elk for the entire 5 weeks. Just ridiculous to feel like more has to be done for kids opportunities. If whats already in place isnt enough, then so be it...tell the kids to stay home and play video games.

Also, I dont see why residents and non-residents both dont know within a couple weeks if they drew or not. Its ridiculous to drag out draw results for months and months. If you're postponing draw results to determine winter kill, etc. thats one thing. Seems to me the commission and the FWP could come up with population estimates, winter kill data, etc. way before the last week in August. Even more ridiculous is that a vast majority of the state is OTC anyway for elk and deer. The cow permits and limited entry permits dont change that much from year to year anyway. I got news for Montana, the way they manage big-game is about as far from complicated as shit gets. Because of that, its ridiculous to drag out the draw results until nearly September.

Bear being open longer, no big deal, same with giving archery hunters ten more days...big deal, go for it.

Montana has some very serious issues to address that are not being covered in any of the new proposals. Montana has got to come to the conclusion that vast opportunity and quality are never going to make a good combination. What you have to accept is the price you pay for lots of opportunity is over-all poor trophy quality in most of the state and having to work extremely hard to find quality animals (for the most part). I'm fine with that, as I still believe that those that work the hardest should be rewarded the most, and I like the long seasons in Montana. However, it gets equally tiresome listening to alot of my friends in Montana bitch about no quality anymore when they get 11 weeks of combined archery and rifle seasons each year. Thats a lot of hunting pressure, no matter how you slice it, and lots of game is going to bite the dust.

Same with making all mule deer hunting in western Montana draw only...wont really change much. Ending the mule deer season November 1st would be a way bigger positive for mule deer than simply forcing people to put in for 100% draw odds limited entry permits.

Montana tried that once already and it didnt do a thing for mule deer quality.