BuzzH
Well-known member
Hey Paul, thanks for providing that news snippet. Next time try the whole story...
Big game numbers strong
Sun River quota cut; calf numbers are down
By MICHAEL BABCOCK
Tribune Outdoor Editor
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fewer elk were counted on the Sun River Wildlife Management Area west of Augusta this winter and Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks commissioners have cut the elk harvest quota by half in the north district and kept the conservative quota for the south district.
The FWP wildlife biologist in charge of the area said the elk herd is right at population target but he is concerned by a low number of elk calves and he raised the possibility that wolves may be responsible.
"It behooves us to ask that question," said wildlife biologist Quentin Kujala. "(The elk herd) is a public resource..."
Kujala counted 2,511 elk on the Sun River WMA this year; last year he saw 2,638.
But this year he counted only 18 to 20 elk calves per 100 cows when he expected to find 30. Last year he counted 36 calves per 100 cows and the year before there were 26.
Kujala said that the severe storm in June last year could have killed some of the newborn elk -- elk calve in early to mid-June -- and the continuing drought could have hurt the ability of elk cows to produce calves.
"We are measuring last year's calves and in June last year we had real significant snow and cold," Kujala said. "You can wonder, 'did that take a certain percent of the calves on the ground at that time?' There are no clear answers."
But, Kujala said, "I don't think we can exclude the potential for wolves to be part of that 18 to 20."
In late winter, Kujala counted a dozen wolves at the west end of Gibson Reservoir, which is in the Sun River country. The wolves were eating a white-tailed deer. He also saw wolves there last year and they were feeding on a whitetail then, too.
"The wolf represents one more addition to what we consider," Kujala said.
"I bring it up because everybody brings it up to us," Kujala said. "I guess the best response is, 'that's a good question.'"
Grizzly and black bears also feed on newborn elk.
In Hunting District 442, the north end of the area, FWP commissioners cut the quota from 400 to 200 elk. In HD 424, the southern district, the quota was left at 50 elk.
During the 2002 hunting season, hunters checked only 130 elk through the Augusta game check station, what Kujala called a light harvest. He said that might be due to the light winter -- hunters are more successful when there is heavy snow.
The Sun River Country did not receive that last winter.
"Last year we were over target. With the drought and what the elk would do to the forage base over time at the game range and their presence on private property, we went after them aggressively.
"The 2,500 head this year surprised me," Kujala said. "I certainly expected to see more total elk and to see 30 calves per hundred cows. That is why we turned right around to go from 400 back to 200."
Herds wintered well
In general, big game herds wintered well in northcentral Montana. Elk numbers are strong and mule deer populations are generally doing well, especially east of the Rocky Mountain Front.
Kujala said that in his area mule deer herds are slowly expanding from the low numbers of five to six years ago and whitetail numbers remain about constant.
Gary Olson, the FWP biologist stationed in Conrad, surveys six areas of his broad territory, which ranges from north of Great Falls to the Canadian border and west to the Rocky Mountain Front.
Elk numbers there look good, although they are down in the Sweet Grass Hills.
"That's good," Olson said. "We have been trying to get them down. That herd is much more palatable to landowners at around 450 elk."
In HDs 441 and 415, which are along the Rocky Mountain Front, Olson said elk numbers are down more than expected. He blamed the June storm last year.
"The snow stayed so long that it may have had an impact, although there is no evidence that the calf crop is below normal. We didn't see the numbers of elk we expected on Dupuyer Creek."
But Olson said landowner tolerance is almost gone for elk in HD441.
"The camel's back is almost broken. The population goal is 500 and last year we were way above that."
He said hunter access continues to be an issue there.
Mulies best on prairie
In Olson's area, numbers of mule deer in the mountains are low but out on the prairie in areas such as the Marias and Teton rivers and the Kevin rim, mule deer numbers are approaching all-time highs.
Olson said he expects to see big differences in whitetail numbers, especially away from the Marias where a disease hit the deer two years ago.
"I have an aggressive B tag program with deer," Olson said. "We will maintain that. We have tapered back in the Sweet Grass Hills but on the Rocky Mountain Front north we are still hitting them hard with permits."
Around Lewistown
In the Lewistwon area, wildlife biologist Tom Stivers said mule deer numbers are strong and "we have gobs of elk."
Stivers said that in the isolated mountain foothills around Lewistown -- the Judiths, Snowies and Moccasin mountain ranges -- mule deer numbers are holding up quite well.
He said the prairie breaks areas along Arrow Creek, the Judith River and those streams that run off the Little Belts and the Snowies are productive areas where mule deer numbers are holding up well.
"They are right in with the long-term average," Stivers said. "We have had liberal batches of antlerless mule deer permits and we are going to continue that. However, this year in the spring survey, the recruitment is good but it is not great."
Stivers said on Sage Creek, there were 36 fawns per 100 adults and on Coffee Creek 33 fawns per 100 adults.
"The stock market didn't increase that much in those areas," he said.
Stivers said his surveys of the Sand Creek-Carroll Coulee area, which is a good predictor of Missouri Breaks Hunting District 410, show mule deer still about 30 percent below the long-term average.
"Fawn recruitment was better than last year but the total number of deer, largely comprised of adults, still is 30 percent below long-term average.
"The area differs from other areas. There are fewer agricultural crops in close proximity to the breaks habitat," he said.
Stivers said as the habitat changes from the isolated mountain ranges and foothills around Lewistown out to Sand Creek, mule deer production goes from best to lowest.
"It has always been that way. Lewistown and the Judith Breaks will have two to three times the densities of deer than at Carroll Coulee, Sand Creek or Chain Buttes," he said.
Stivers said that in the Missouri Breaks from Fort Benton to Coal Banks Landing, the breaks habitat is narrower and deer density would be higher there. That's because it is short distance from good cover of the breaks to the farm crops of the uplands.
"In the Judith River Breaks, you get double that effect: You have the agriculture on the tops and hay on the bottom and steep, precipitous breaks in between.
"You get farther down on the Missouri, everything gets so much bigger that there is a zone in middle and then you have the CMR refuge.
Stivers said he recommended no changes in the Lewistown area and that permit levels will remain the same.
Elk in the Breaks
In HD 410, which covers the south side of the Missouri Breaks from the Musselshell to Highway 191, there was no elk survey this winter. But the year before, the elk population was 700 over the target of 2,300.
Stivers said most of those elk are south of the C.M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge.
In HD 417, which is west of HD 410, there are about 800 elk, although the population target is 400. Stivers said permit numbers have been increased there, but hunter access to private land is an issue.
"Access is difficult in HD 417. The northern third of hunting district has ample BLM land but not a proportionate number of elk," Stivers said. "A disproportionate number of elk occur in southern two-thirds in which access is more restrictive."
Stivers said that in the Judiths, elk numbers are good. Even with a lengthened season on antlerless elk and a pretty good harvest, the elk population is slightly over target.
"In the Snowies, which includes the Big and Little Snowies, the population objective is 800 to 900 elk and we counted this past winter 1,350.
"On the west end ... we counted 473 elk so we are still over objective both in bulls and cows. If you project out an average calf crop, we will be considerably above again."
He said that on the east end of the Snowies, he counted 900 elk, almost 400 over target.
On the C.M. Russell Wildlife Refuge northeast of Lewistown, manager Mike Hedrick said elk had a great winter there.
"Pronghorn look good. It was a nice winter and we are getting a lot of moisture so it is shaping up to be a nice spring," he said.
Big game numbers strong
Sun River quota cut; calf numbers are down
By MICHAEL BABCOCK
Tribune Outdoor Editor
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fewer elk were counted on the Sun River Wildlife Management Area west of Augusta this winter and Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks commissioners have cut the elk harvest quota by half in the north district and kept the conservative quota for the south district.
The FWP wildlife biologist in charge of the area said the elk herd is right at population target but he is concerned by a low number of elk calves and he raised the possibility that wolves may be responsible.
"It behooves us to ask that question," said wildlife biologist Quentin Kujala. "(The elk herd) is a public resource..."
Kujala counted 2,511 elk on the Sun River WMA this year; last year he saw 2,638.
But this year he counted only 18 to 20 elk calves per 100 cows when he expected to find 30. Last year he counted 36 calves per 100 cows and the year before there were 26.
Kujala said that the severe storm in June last year could have killed some of the newborn elk -- elk calve in early to mid-June -- and the continuing drought could have hurt the ability of elk cows to produce calves.
"We are measuring last year's calves and in June last year we had real significant snow and cold," Kujala said. "You can wonder, 'did that take a certain percent of the calves on the ground at that time?' There are no clear answers."
But, Kujala said, "I don't think we can exclude the potential for wolves to be part of that 18 to 20."
In late winter, Kujala counted a dozen wolves at the west end of Gibson Reservoir, which is in the Sun River country. The wolves were eating a white-tailed deer. He also saw wolves there last year and they were feeding on a whitetail then, too.
"The wolf represents one more addition to what we consider," Kujala said.
"I bring it up because everybody brings it up to us," Kujala said. "I guess the best response is, 'that's a good question.'"
Grizzly and black bears also feed on newborn elk.
In Hunting District 442, the north end of the area, FWP commissioners cut the quota from 400 to 200 elk. In HD 424, the southern district, the quota was left at 50 elk.
During the 2002 hunting season, hunters checked only 130 elk through the Augusta game check station, what Kujala called a light harvest. He said that might be due to the light winter -- hunters are more successful when there is heavy snow.
The Sun River Country did not receive that last winter.
"Last year we were over target. With the drought and what the elk would do to the forage base over time at the game range and their presence on private property, we went after them aggressively.
"The 2,500 head this year surprised me," Kujala said. "I certainly expected to see more total elk and to see 30 calves per hundred cows. That is why we turned right around to go from 400 back to 200."
Herds wintered well
In general, big game herds wintered well in northcentral Montana. Elk numbers are strong and mule deer populations are generally doing well, especially east of the Rocky Mountain Front.
Kujala said that in his area mule deer herds are slowly expanding from the low numbers of five to six years ago and whitetail numbers remain about constant.
Gary Olson, the FWP biologist stationed in Conrad, surveys six areas of his broad territory, which ranges from north of Great Falls to the Canadian border and west to the Rocky Mountain Front.
Elk numbers there look good, although they are down in the Sweet Grass Hills.
"That's good," Olson said. "We have been trying to get them down. That herd is much more palatable to landowners at around 450 elk."
In HDs 441 and 415, which are along the Rocky Mountain Front, Olson said elk numbers are down more than expected. He blamed the June storm last year.
"The snow stayed so long that it may have had an impact, although there is no evidence that the calf crop is below normal. We didn't see the numbers of elk we expected on Dupuyer Creek."
But Olson said landowner tolerance is almost gone for elk in HD441.
"The camel's back is almost broken. The population goal is 500 and last year we were way above that."
He said hunter access continues to be an issue there.
Mulies best on prairie
In Olson's area, numbers of mule deer in the mountains are low but out on the prairie in areas such as the Marias and Teton rivers and the Kevin rim, mule deer numbers are approaching all-time highs.
Olson said he expects to see big differences in whitetail numbers, especially away from the Marias where a disease hit the deer two years ago.
"I have an aggressive B tag program with deer," Olson said. "We will maintain that. We have tapered back in the Sweet Grass Hills but on the Rocky Mountain Front north we are still hitting them hard with permits."
Around Lewistown
In the Lewistwon area, wildlife biologist Tom Stivers said mule deer numbers are strong and "we have gobs of elk."
Stivers said that in the isolated mountain foothills around Lewistown -- the Judiths, Snowies and Moccasin mountain ranges -- mule deer numbers are holding up quite well.
He said the prairie breaks areas along Arrow Creek, the Judith River and those streams that run off the Little Belts and the Snowies are productive areas where mule deer numbers are holding up well.
"They are right in with the long-term average," Stivers said. "We have had liberal batches of antlerless mule deer permits and we are going to continue that. However, this year in the spring survey, the recruitment is good but it is not great."
Stivers said on Sage Creek, there were 36 fawns per 100 adults and on Coffee Creek 33 fawns per 100 adults.
"The stock market didn't increase that much in those areas," he said.
Stivers said his surveys of the Sand Creek-Carroll Coulee area, which is a good predictor of Missouri Breaks Hunting District 410, show mule deer still about 30 percent below the long-term average.
"Fawn recruitment was better than last year but the total number of deer, largely comprised of adults, still is 30 percent below long-term average.
"The area differs from other areas. There are fewer agricultural crops in close proximity to the breaks habitat," he said.
Stivers said as the habitat changes from the isolated mountain ranges and foothills around Lewistown out to Sand Creek, mule deer production goes from best to lowest.
"It has always been that way. Lewistown and the Judith Breaks will have two to three times the densities of deer than at Carroll Coulee, Sand Creek or Chain Buttes," he said.
Stivers said that in the Missouri Breaks from Fort Benton to Coal Banks Landing, the breaks habitat is narrower and deer density would be higher there. That's because it is short distance from good cover of the breaks to the farm crops of the uplands.
"In the Judith River Breaks, you get double that effect: You have the agriculture on the tops and hay on the bottom and steep, precipitous breaks in between.
"You get farther down on the Missouri, everything gets so much bigger that there is a zone in middle and then you have the CMR refuge.
Stivers said he recommended no changes in the Lewistown area and that permit levels will remain the same.
Elk in the Breaks
In HD 410, which covers the south side of the Missouri Breaks from the Musselshell to Highway 191, there was no elk survey this winter. But the year before, the elk population was 700 over the target of 2,300.
Stivers said most of those elk are south of the C.M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge.
In HD 417, which is west of HD 410, there are about 800 elk, although the population target is 400. Stivers said permit numbers have been increased there, but hunter access to private land is an issue.
"Access is difficult in HD 417. The northern third of hunting district has ample BLM land but not a proportionate number of elk," Stivers said. "A disproportionate number of elk occur in southern two-thirds in which access is more restrictive."
Stivers said that in the Judiths, elk numbers are good. Even with a lengthened season on antlerless elk and a pretty good harvest, the elk population is slightly over target.
"In the Snowies, which includes the Big and Little Snowies, the population objective is 800 to 900 elk and we counted this past winter 1,350.
"On the west end ... we counted 473 elk so we are still over objective both in bulls and cows. If you project out an average calf crop, we will be considerably above again."
He said that on the east end of the Snowies, he counted 900 elk, almost 400 over target.
On the C.M. Russell Wildlife Refuge northeast of Lewistown, manager Mike Hedrick said elk had a great winter there.
"Pronghorn look good. It was a nice winter and we are getting a lot of moisture so it is shaping up to be a nice spring," he said.
