MT shoulder season decision...

[Pinecricker]

Buzz,

We've had similar doubts here in Idaho on population estimates. Through outreach to IDF&G, including public records requests, myself and a few others requested a copy of the "model" used to estimate elk numbers. I am a statistician by trade, and I wanted to take a look at their modelling methods from a technical perspective.

Unfortunately, they never provided anything that could be considered at all scientific. It was hard not to be left with the impression that their estimates were SWAG's.

The key metric IDF&G cites here for population health is cow calf ratios, which are determined from samples taken during flights. It seems like a reasonable indicator of health, but I'm not sure an accurate, current population estimate can be derived from it.

There certainly isn't a lot transparency into the estimation methods used here in Idaho. It would be nice if their was. It creates a ton of ill will and suspicion when there isn't.

I'm highly suspect of the elk population estimates in Montana conducted by the MTFWP.

IMO, elk should be managed on OBSERVED numbers, not some population model. Its pretty typical of the MTFWP to say they "flew on a bad day" or "there wasn't enough snow" and determine that there "must have been more elk that we didn't see hiding in the trees"...and any other excuse to over-estimate the population.

After reading some of the crap that was in the shoulder season proposal...I don't put much faith in the MTFWP's ability to manage field mice.

 

[HighWildFree]

Here in 446 and 391 some of the largest landowners that make over six figures leasing their land out to outfitters are pushing the hardest for this shoulder season. It seems they want to have their cake and eat it too. The also actively harbor and haze elk during the season to keep them on their land. It's a sad sight to see elk being chased til those foaming at the mouth just to be shot by some of the landowners buddies from a $20,000 Razer. But that it what goes on here in central Montana. Your wildlife.

 

[mtlion]

Has anyone read the propaganda piece on the shoulder seasons in Montana Outdoors? They paint a rosy picture of landowners, managers and hunters all holding hands and singing campfire songs over how great the shoulder seasons are.

The tone of the article is very pro shoulder seasons and brushes under the rug the very vocal resistance they are meeting. You should read the quotes in favor of shoulder seasons they pulled from the comment period that are supposedly from the public.

They sell the idea to hunters by saying:

"By using more of the calendar, shoulder seasons would basically give hunters more times at bat."

Yep. Until the elk run out. Then you're benched sucker.

 

[Bugle 'Em In]

Has anyone read the propaganda piece on the shoulder seasons in Montana Outdoors? They paint a rosy picture of landowners, managers and hunters all holding hands and singing campfire songs over how great the shoulder seasons are.

The tone of the article is very pro shoulder seasons and brushes under the rug the very vocal resistance they are meeting. You should read the quotes in favor of shoulder seasons they pulled from the comment period that are supposedly from the public.

They sell the idea to hunters by saying:

"By using more of the calendar, shoulder seasons would basically give hunters more times at bat."

Yep. Until the elk run out. Then you're benched sucker.

I did notice that article, but couldn't stomach reading the whole propaganda piece. Unfortunately, I think FWP will get a tremendous amount of support for the shoulder season's because most people don't kill elk every year and want the rules changed to help them do so. Most people on here kill elk regularly, but in the real world, the same publication you mention (page 8, top left) states "20% On average, the percent of elk hunters in MT who are successful killing an elk (bull or cow) each year".

 

[Rat Fink]

Here in 446 and 391 some of the largest landowners that make over six figures leasing their land out to outfitters are pushing the hardest for this shoulder season. It seems they want to have their cake and eat it too. The also actively harbor and haze elk during the season to keep them on their land. It's a sad sight to see elk being chased til those foaming at the mouth just to be shot by some of the landowners buddies from a $20,000 Razer. But that it what goes on here in central Montana. Your wildlife.

It would be interesting to hear what landowners in 391 are in favor of this proposal. I know of one. Please pm me with your info. I am pretty involved in this right now and want to be sure the right info is out there. Thanks.

 

[exponentialpi]

The landowners simply do not want to be burdened with hunter requests for 6 months out of the year. They are already burned out with the "Management Hunt" that started in August, and the General Season. They are sick of hunters, phone calls, door knocks, road hunting, trespassing, and lots of unethical behavior.

Last weeks slaughter of the herd in the flats again like last year, pissed many of them off even more. Guys are still using vehicles to herd elk and run them to lands they can slaughter them. This years incident had guys herding elk INTO Canyon Ferry reservoir where some drowned and those that didn't were assassinated as soon as they swam to a spot where they could stand again after swimming for miles. 8 cows and spikes left dead in the fields from flock shooting and trying to peel the bulls out. These are the things that have the landowners turned against hunters and the shoulder season in 391/392.

If the FWP Commission approves the shoulder season in 391/392 this year we the hunters are going to lose thousands of acres of access permanently. The landowners are shutting it ALL down. No more public access in the general season, pulling out of BMA, and certainly no access during the shoulder seasons. We will lose big time if this proposal goes forward.

Wow. Just wow. Herding elk into the reservoir. Sounds like a complete s*** show just to fill the freezer.

 

[BuzzH]

I did notice that article, but couldn't stomach reading the whole propaganda piece. Unfortunately, I think FWP will get a tremendous amount of support for the shoulder season's because most people don't kill elk every year and want the rules changed to help them do so. Most people on here kill elk regularly, but in the real world, the same publication you mention (page 8, top left) states "20% On average, the percent of elk hunters in MT who are successful killing an elk (bull or cow) each year".

The MTFWP cooks the books on the elk success rates just like they do with the population estimates. They take a random sample and then estimate harvest from that. Its one thing that is estimated that absolutely doesn't have to be. Mandatory harvest reporting isn't that tough or expensive in the computer age.

I believe that Montana hunters would be shocked if they actually knew:

1. What the total elk population in Montana actually is.
2. The real number of elk killed.
3. The real success rate.

I know a bunch of good elk hunters in Montana and I also know that they are either not filling their elk tags or are having to hunt a lot longer to do so.

If the elk numbers that the MTFWP claims are out there was a reality, and success was what they are reporting is fact, why then are my buddies having such a hard time killing elk??? Guys that in the past shot them every year???

When things don't make sense, there's usually a reason why they don't make sense.

 

[exponentialpi]

The MTFWP cooks the books on the elk success rates just like they do with the population estimates. They take a random sample and then estimate harvest from that. Its one thing that is estimated that absolutely doesn't have to be. Mandatory harvest reporting isn't that tough or expensive in the computer age.

I believe that Montana hunters would be shocked if they actually knew:

1. What the total elk population in Montana actually is.
2. The real number of elk killed.
3. The real success rate.

I know a bunch of good elk hunters in Montana and I also know that they are either not filling their elk tags or are having to hunt a lot longer to do so.

If the elk numbers that the MTFWP claims are out there was a reality, and success was what they are reporting is fact, why then are my buddies having such a hard time killing elk??? Guys that in the past shot them every year???

When things don't make sense, there's usually a reason why they don't make sense.

Yep, internet based reporting is fairly straight forward these days and would give more reliable statistics than the current method.

 

[tjones]

Given the current FWP and Commission make up and how they don't use public comment, I am not sure now is the time update the EMP. It desperately needs done. I think the current administration is not the ones to do it.

We all hate the one we have now but I would bet they could turn out something worse. I am certain page 55 would come up missing.

 

[BuzzH]

Wow. Just wow. Herding elk into the reservoir. Sounds like a complete s*** show just to fill the freezer.

Yep, it is that.

But, when the elk no longer spend any time on public land, because of 11 week seasons, over-issuing unit wide cow permits, and the MTFWP trying to kill them down to the low population objectives of the EMP via Legislative meddling...this is exactly what happens. The elk harbor up in safe zones, and when they cross onto public land, they get hammered.

People are going to hunt where the elk are...and if that means playing border patrol until a herd slips across the line into public...and the ensuing chit-show that follows when they do...these types of things will continue to happen.

The MTFWP has played a big hand in why these situations happen. They refuse to use the tools available to them in the EMP, continue to count harbored elk when setting cow permit numbers, etc. etc. etc. etc.

Its sad that the MTFWP lacks the leadership to stand up for wildlife and hunters in Montana...really sad.

 

[BuzzH]

Given the current FWP and Commission make up and how they don't use public comment, I am not sure now is the time update the EMP. It desperately needs done. I think the current administration is not the ones to do it.

We all hate the one we have now but I would bet they could turn out something worse. I am certain page 55 would come up missing.

Big deal if page 55 comes up missing...its just like it doesn't exist now, what's the difference???:W::W::W:

 

[tjones]

Big deal if page 55 comes up missing...its just like it doesn't exist now, what's the difference???:W::W::W:

We are using it here in the Root but it took 3 years back in the Vore days to get it done. I have no faith in FWP now to turn out something better then the current POS EMP. Sad.

We just went through the process of resetting objectives in 3 HD's here in the Bitterroot.

Our group met with FWP and hashed out numbers on population objectives, bull/cow ratios and cow /calf ratios. Two public meetings in Darby supported those numbers and actually raised the bull/cow ratios for HD250. Those numbers were sent to Helena where the bull/cow ratios were promptly cut to what they are currently. Approved by the commission with absolutely zero public support.

 

[Bugle 'Em In]

Wow. Just wow. Herding elk into the reservoir. Sounds like a complete s*** show just to fill the freezer.

I'm guessing its more about the ego than filling the freezer. Not sure how the heck someone can take pride in doing that to an animal.

 

[Bugle 'Em In]

The MTFWP cooks the books on the elk success rates just like they do with the population estimates. They take a random sample and then estimate harvest from that. Its one thing that is estimated that absolutely doesn't have to be. Mandatory harvest reporting isn't that tough or expensive in the computer age.

I believe that Montana hunters would be shocked if they actually knew:

1. What the total elk population in Montana actually is.
2. The real number of elk killed.
3. The real success rate.

I know a bunch of good elk hunters in Montana and I also know that they are either not filling their elk tags or are having to hunt a lot longer to do so.

If the elk numbers that the MTFWP claims are out there was a reality, and success was what they are reporting is fact, why then are my buddies having such a hard time killing elk??? Guys that in the past shot them every year???

When things don't make sense, there's usually a reason why they don't make sense.

I couldn't agree more. I have a few friends that are GREAT elk hunters and have had one helluva time filling their tags for the last few years. Granted they may do so now, but they are going deep into the season to get it done.

 

[exponentialpi]

Yep, it is that.

But, when the elk no longer spend any time on public land, because of 11 week seasons, over-issuing unit wide cow permits, and the MTFWP trying to kill them down to the low population objectives of the EMP via Legislative meddling...this is exactly what happens. The elk harbor up in safe zones, and when they cross onto public land, they get hammered.

People are going to hunt where the elk are...and if that means playing border patrol until a herd slips across the line into public...and the ensuing chit-show that follows when they do...these types of things will continue to happen.

The MTFWP has played a big hand in why these situations happen. They refuse to use the tools available to them in the EMP, continue to count harbored elk when setting cow permit numbers, etc. etc. etc. etc.

Its sad that the MTFWP lacks the leadership to stand up for wildlife and hunters in Montana...really sad.

It is really sad. In my youth, I witnessed these situations down in the Madison. I agree the MTFWP is making a number of mis-steps here and not thinking longer term.

 

[katqanna]

I just got a copy of the pilot project options for 2015-16. While FWP qualifies all the areas, saying, "Not valid on National Forest lands or FWP WMA's and in the case of HD 410, "Not valid on CMR refuge," HD 410 has a hell of a lot of BLM public land there not excluded, nor are any MT State public lands excluded in any of these projects.

 

[What Map]

This is interesting. What are the landowner arguments?

Me too. What don't the landowners not like? I thought the landowners got most of what they wanted?
Outfitters are probably still on board. Right?

 

[bigskyblueman]

Thanks Rat, I hadn't heard of any of that. These slaughters were one of my big concerns with having OTC cow hunts and it can only get worse in the late season.

huntin24/7 - thanks to a law that passed in 2003 the objectives are determined by rancher tolerance. It has nothing to do with science and is artificially low. The Gardiner district is AT objective but numbers are so low that you will have to draw a permit to hunt there next year. Legislators seem fine with that.

Deckard Flats just closed to elk hunting. Remnants of the Northern Yellowstone Elk Herd were apparently spotted so FWP got excited and closed the flats.

 

[What Map]

The landowners simply do not want to be burdened with hunter requests for 6 months out of the year. They are already burned out with the "Management Hunt" that started in August, and the General Season. They are sick of hunters, phone calls, door knocks, road hunting, trespassing, and lots of unethical behavior.

Somehow I missed all the comments on page 3 of this thread from Kat, RobG, BuzzH, JLS and others. I have a much clearer picture of landowner concerns who oppose the shoulder seasons. It will be interesting to listen to the meeting next Thursday.

 

[Rat Fink]

I personally have a copy of the landowners comments and signatures opposing the shoulder seasons in 391/392. You are looking at between 40,000 and 50,000 acres of land that allows some form of public hunting about to vanish from free public access. And that includes some BMA lands that will be removed. I don't want to see the elk herds get slaughtered, and I don't want to see the access go away. I sure hope FWP does the right thing and pulls these districts out at a minimum, or even better just drop the whole shoulder season concept.

One funny thing to note. Landowner names associated with outfitting are absent from the signatures page. Specifically the Chair of House FWP committee who continues to advocate for this.