Prank call

[warmer]

SD uses email for hunter surveys. Can't believe Montana doesn't have the technology to do it that way.

 

[MThuntr]

They called the other day but there was a pause at first and, expecting "we've been trying to reach you about your extended warranty" I hung up. They called back and I sent it to voicemail. They really need to be using something that pops up as FWP so they don't get ignored. There is a much easier way to do this and wouldn't require a near ambush at 730 on a Friday night.

 

[Hammsolo]

Got my call from Montana FWP. Did you deer hunt? yes. Did you elk hunt? Yes. Did you see any wolves. No. No question of if I harvested a deer or elk or not. Good stuff. mtmuley

This is such an inefficient use of resources. Paying a biologist to call people? Sheesh.

The goal should be accurate and complete data to make calculated decisions on all species. This could produce healthier populations and communities.

What system should we have? In the words of RMEF, “Hunting is Conservation.”

 

[BuzzH]

I agree with others, the computer age seems to be at least 10-15 years from being "discovered" by the MTFWP.

Also, the current state of affairs with check stations is not good, at least the Bonner check station. I went through there a few times this fall. We typically hunt 1-3 miles behind a gate and stay until dark. Meaning, 45 minutes to maybe and hour and 20 minutes out to the truck. Usually another hour or so to the check station. So, I went through usually around 6:30 or 7 PM...check station was boarded up and closed.

They probably catch the morning hunters, but anything killed at prime time at dark isn't even getting checked.

The data collected by phone calls is spotty at best.

But, then I think about whether its even worth the effort fighting the way the MTFWP collects harvest data. I dont believe it is.

The reason for saying that, even with the best data you could collect, the odds are extremely high that absolutely nothing will change.

When elk units West of Missoula are flown and 8 elk counted, and the season doesn't change one bit, why would it matter to have harvest data to prove you only shot 2 elk in that same unit? Further, if no changes are going to happen, why bother to even fly it or collect any data?

I'd be more spun up about it if the data was actually going to be used for some worthwhile changes.

Further, its kind of funny how I get called from the GF, personally, to ask specifics about the areas I hunt in Wyoming. I've also talked with field biologists several times when they cruise around talking to people in their hunting camps, during the season. In 40 years of hunting in Montana, I've never had a field biologist walk into my camp and ask questions about how the game numbers are, any concerns, etc. etc.

I was also talking with my brother a few days ago about when the last time we actually saw a MT warden driving around checking people where we hunt...2006. Used to see them maybe once a year in the 1980's through about 1996-97.

I don't know why the huge difference between WY and MT, but the MTFWP really seems like they've more or less thrown in the towel and are just going through the motions...

Since that's the case, not sure I find in necessary to put any effort into collecting better data.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

I agree with others, the computer age seems to be at least 10-15 years from being "discovered" by the MTFWP.

Also, the current state of affairs with check stations is not good, at least the Bonner check station. I went through there a few times this fall. We typically hunt 1-3 miles behind a gate and stay until dark. Meaning, 45 minutes to maybe and hour and 20 minutes out to the truck. Usually another hour or so to the check station. So, I went through usually around 6:30 or 7 PM...check station was boarded up and closed.

They probably catch the morning hunters, but anything killed at prime time at dark isn't even getting checked.

The data collected by phone calls is spotty at best.

But, then I think about whether its even worth the effort fighting the way the MTFWP collects harvest data. I dont believe it is.

The reason for saying that, even with the best data you could collect, the odds are extremely high that absolutely nothing will change.

When elk units West of Missoula are flown and 8 elk counted, and the season doesn't change one bit, why would it matter to have harvest data to prove you only shot 2 elk in that same unit? Further, if no changes are going to happen, why bother to even fly it or collect any data?

I'd be more spun up about it if the data was actually going to be used for some worthwhile changes.

Further, its kind of funny how I get called from the GF, personally, to ask specifics about the areas I hunt in Wyoming. I've also talked with field biologists several times when they cruise around talking to people in their hunting camps, during the season. In 40 years of hunting in Montana, I've never had a field biologist walk into my camp and ask questions about how the game numbers are, any concerns, etc. etc.

I was also talking with my brother a few days ago about when the last time we actually saw a MT warden driving around checking people where we hunt...2006. Used to see them maybe once a year in the 1980's through about 1996-97.

I don't know why the huge difference between WY and MT, but the MTFWP really seems like they've more or less thrown in the towel and are just going through the motions...

Since that's the case, not sure I find in necessary to put any effort into collecting better data.

The only place I've ever been checked by a Warden was WY. I saw a warden in CO one time driving down a dirt road, never saw a Warden in MT.

 

[Drake4]

I killed a bull in NV this year...had to fill out a mandatory harvest report online that was emailed directly to me. It was simple and asked for some detailed information. I was glad to do it. After I submitted it, I received a personal email back from the local biologist with additional questions, which led to a great back and forth dialogue with him. He asked for photos, more area specifics and was generally very interested in the hunt and my experience. I learned a lot from it and the biologist was generally excited for the additional info.
It was quite eye opening, and I probably provided the state of NV more information from (1) 6-7 day hunt then I have the last 15 years in MT.

 

[Western Traveler1]

The only place I've ever been checked by a Warden was WY. I saw a warden in CO one time driving down a dirt road, never saw a Warden in MT.

The wardens make the rounds in our area. I’ve been contacted at the trailhead a few times in the past. I enjoy talking to them. As to harvest numbers that’s another story. The year I killed my moose when I was called I was told they weren’t collecting data in that unit for moose (I passed it onto the biologist as requested by her). The moose numbers have dropped off dramatically in that unit.
Two seasons ago I stopped in at our check station with my mule deer from a Limited entry unit up the road and was told we don’t collect kill numbers from there.

 

[OntarioHunter]

Sounds like Idaho has the right idea: mandatory reporting on a questionnaire before hunters can apply for license and draws online. I don't think that would be difficult challenge for IT specialist.

Agree with the stupidity of closing the check stations at six. The one at Havre is only open on weekends anyway and usually only biology techs from the university. I bet most of those kids would be delighted to stay longer.

I have enough biology and statistics in my extensive university background to understand the value and complexity of using survey data for management decisions. However, I also know that in the past many of the individuals selected for the Montana Fish & Game Commission were not picked for their knowledge of science or statistics (e.g. car dealer, soda pop bottler, camper manufacturer). Decisions too often were made for the benefit of certain individuals or area tourist dollars instead of what would be best for the resource. Anyway, I do my best to provide as much information as possible whenever possible. I send in federal wing survey envelopes for every waterfowl taken each year. I bet there's many duck hunters on here who don't even know what I'm talking about. And every year they send me back feedback on what I have shot. Can be intersting. A couple years ago they reported one duck was a mallard/black duck hybrid. Since then two more have turned up in my bag. I called them to ascertain if the hybrids fell under the general daily limit or the restricted two bird limit for blackies. The biologist informed me I could - and should if it was possible to ID them in air - fill the daily limit with hybrids. Damn horny greenheads are dangerously contaminating the struggling black duck gene pool. Similarly my 2019 wing survey response showed one giant Canada goose. Many may recall that the true giant Canada was once thought to be extinct and only rediscovered in the 1950s. Since then it has been reintroduced to several, if not all, flyaways and undergone an amazing recovery. (Note: giants are not to be confused with the eastern and western varieties that are somewhat smaller ... but not as small as cackling geese [formerly lesser Canada]). I remembered that goose after I read the report. Its three wing primary tips barely fit in the mailer envelope.

 

[SAJ-99]

Sounds like Idaho has the right idea: mandatory reporting on a questionnaire before hunters can apply for license and draws online. I don't think that would be difficult challenge for IT specialist.

Agree with the stupidity of closing the check stations at six. The one at Havre is only open on weekends anyway and usually only biology techs from the university. I bet most of those kids would be delighted to stay longer.

I have enough biology and statistics in my extensive university background to understand the value and complexity of using survey data for management decisions. However, I also know that in the past many of the individuals selected for the Montana Fish & Game Commission were not picked for their knowledge of science or statistics (e.g. car dealer, soda pop bottler, camper manufacturer). Decisions too often were made for the benefit of certain individuals or area tourist dollars instead of what would be best for the resource. Anyway, I do my best to provide as much information as possible whenever possible. I send in federal wing survey envelopes for every waterfowl taken each year. I bet there's many duck hunters on here who don't even know what I'm talking about. And every year they send me back feedback on what I have shot. Can be intersting. A couple years ago they reported one duck was a mallard/black duck hybrid. Since then two more have turned up in my bag. I called them to ascertain if the hybrids fell under the general daily limit or the restricted two bird limit for blackies. The biologist informed me I could - and should if it was possible to ID them in air - fill the daily limit with hybrids. Damn horny greenheads are dangerously contaminating the struggling black duck gene pool. Similarly my 2019 wing survey response showed one giant Canada goose. Many may recall that the true giant Canada was once thought to be extinct and only rediscovered in the 1950s. Since then it has been reintroduced to several, if not all, flyaways and undergone an amazing recovery. (Note: giants are not to be confused with the eastern and western varieties that are somewhat smaller ... but not as small as cackling geese [formerly lesser Canada]). I remembered that goose after I read the report. Its three wing primary tips barely fit in the mailer envelope.

Interesting that you bring up waterfowl. You might remember that HIP questions on harvest are very broad, as are number of days hunted. Waterfowl hunters have complained about that stuff for decades, not understanding what is even being collected or why. I get that same feeling here. Even if I agree it would be better to automate the whole thing, I think the sampling FWP does would work fine. I’ll stir the pot, mostly out of boredom, but the accuracy people seem to be wanting really isn’t necessary and is probably too expensive for FWP to collect.

 

[mtmuley]

but the accuracy people seem to be wanting really isn’t necessary and is probably too expensive for FWP to collect.

Why? And not waterfowl, but big game numbers. If you weren't referring to big game, go somewhere else. mtmuley

 

[SAJ-99]

Why? And not waterfowl, but big game numbers. If you weren't referring to big game, go somewhere else. mtmuley

Well aren’t you your usual charming self this evening.
Of course I’m talking about big game numbers. There are people here that know about this stuff directly. They probably don’t chime in because it’s pointless arguing statistical collection methods. Harvest numbers don’t affect the season setting process. Hunting is supposed to take the excess/surplus. In summary, Shocker, they don’t give a shit if you killed an elk on your general tag.

 

[mtmuley]

Well aren’t you your usual charming self this evening.
Of course I’m talking about big game numbers. There are people here that know about this stuff directly. They probably don’t chime in because it’s pointless arguing statistical collection methods. Harvest numbers don’t affect the season setting process. Hunting is supposed to take the excess/surplus. In summary, Shocker, they don’t give a shit if you killed an elk on your general tag.

And it has been hashed over before you were a member. Have a good night. mtmuley

 

[MTGamecock]

When they called me, I answered for myself and my 13-year old son. For my son, FWP only wanted to know if he harvested a deer. For me, they only wanted to know if I'd harvested an antelope.

 

[Werty]

I got a call within 2 weeks of the season closing last year. I was very surprised, they asked about everything zones, harvest days in the field.

 

[Tradewind]

The wardens make the rounds in our area. I’ve been contacted at the trailhead a few times in the past. I enjoy talking to them. As to harvest numbers that’s another story. The year I killed my moose when I was called I was told they weren’t collecting data in that unit for moose (I passed it onto the biologist as requested by her). The moose numbers have dropped off dramatically in that unit.
Two seasons ago I stopped in at our check station with my mule deer from a Limited entry unit up the road and was told we don’t collect kill numbers from there.

I enjoy talking to the game warden in the unit i frequent. We trade info. It's always a good chat

 

[Western Traveler1]

I enjoy talking to the game warden in the unit i frequent. We trade info. It's always a good chat

Yep...

 

[timmy]

I tried to tell them where I hunted because I thought that was important. And he said no we only take that every couple years. I was naming districts he didn’t care about. It’s sad how little they care.

 

[Walkathon]

They called me and asked if I had shot a deer on my general NR deer combo. They did collect the unit info on the deer that I shot. They didn't ask about my R7 antelope tag.

 

[OntarioHunter]

I enjoy talking to the game warden in the unit i frequent. We trade info. It's always a good chat

The area warden (conservation officer) here and the one where I hunt in Montana have both given me their cell numbers. I never call unless there's a problem (only once so far). Great that they trust me with it. A few years ago while goose hunting I witnessed some suspicious shooting (at cranes which are not legal here). My vehicle was parked over there and I didn't want the farmers thinking I was involved so I called 911. City cops also have jurisdiction in the area and dumbass operator insisted on sending them. They descended on ME instead of culprits. It was a mess! When the CO checked me next year, I told him about it and he gave me his cell number. He has walked out to see me in the field several times since. Never looks at my license and maybe just a glance at the birds. He loves my dogs, especially Ellie. We chat about hunting. The Montana warden doesn't check my license anymore either. "You're not going to drive all the way out here and not get one" My old red Jimmy with Ontario plates is rather distinctive. He's a fine young fella from the local community. His boss in at the Havre office is a flaming asshole! Rude in the extreme. I'm an annoyance for bringing in a roadkill to be checked for CWD.

 

[Tradewind]

The area warden (conservation officer) here and the one where I hunt in Montana have both given me their cell numbers. I never call unless there's a problem (only once so far). Great that they trust me with it. A few years ago while goose hunting I witnessed some suspicious shooting (at cranes which are not legal here). My vehicle was parked over there and I didn't want the farmers thinking I was involved so I called 911. City cops also have jurisdiction in the area and dumbass operator insisted on sending them. They descended on ME instead of culprits. It was a mess! When the CO checked me next year, I told him about it and he gave me his cell number. He has walked out to see me in the field several times since. Never looks at my license and maybe just a glance at the birds. He loves my dogs, especially Ellie. We chat about hunting. The Montana warden doesn't check my license anymore either. "You're not going to drive all the way out here and not get one" My old red Jimmy with Ontario plates is rather distinctive. He's a fine young fella from the local community. His boss in at the Havre office is a flaming asshole! Rude in the extreme. I'm an annoyance for bringing in a roadkill to be checked for CWD.

I always hand the game warden my license while we are talking. He kind of looked at me funny the 2nd year at the same location. I told him there was no need for me to buy a license
if he wasn't going to check it. he laughed.