The Hedgehog
Well-known member
Will the late season hunters be able to wear yoga pants?
Sb 245
- Thread starter Eric Albus
- Start date
BuzzH
Well-known member
...only if the federal public land is transferred to the state.
katqanna
Well-known member
Finally made time to listen to the hearing. They dont have any exhibit documents up yet or the minutes.
RMEF, Blake Henning, spoke at 52:44 mark. Said that RMEF was concerned with management in the state, that there was a significant group of hunters that would enjoy and benefit from these late season hunts, that he was one of them.
Concerning objective numbers he stated that RMEF believes these numbers should be based mostly on science, understood though there is a social carrying capacity out there with elk numbers. They'd like to see the politics taken out of setting those numbers, use the science.
Frequently RMEF submits statements in writing, if so in this case, it will be an exhibit that will be uploaded in a few days.
Hard to listen to audio with my head so I didnt transcribe everything, like their constituents that voiced approval of this bill. But the time stamp is there so that you can listen quickly.
RMEF, Blake Henning, spoke at 52:44 mark. Said that RMEF was concerned with management in the state, that there was a significant group of hunters that would enjoy and benefit from these late season hunts, that he was one of them.
Concerning objective numbers he stated that RMEF believes these numbers should be based mostly on science, understood though there is a social carrying capacity out there with elk numbers. They'd like to see the politics taken out of setting those numbers, use the science.
Frequently RMEF submits statements in writing, if so in this case, it will be an exhibit that will be uploaded in a few days.
Hard to listen to audio with my head so I didnt transcribe everything, like their constituents that voiced approval of this bill. But the time stamp is there so that you can listen quickly.
Eric Albus
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 24, 2012
- Messages
- 1,680
buzz, you have a lot of opinion, no history, and to state there are not enough bull tags? There are to many bull tags and to many bulls harvested, hence such poor quality the last 10 years, but I will not delve into that. There are to many elk in 620-21-22, if there were no bull hunting the last 2 weeks of the season I think that you would see a lot more access to the places the elk seek refuge....w/out stopping the bull hunting you will not see access to those places. If you are stating the elk are not near "carry capacity" that I will agree w/, but landowner tolerance of them in the breaks(and surrounding areas) is over "carry capacity".
greenhorn, yes, we have to many elk in 620-21-22 and 631....we now have a herd of approx. 50 (up from last yrs. 35) just south of hwy. 2 (north end of 631)....I will not be shocked to see 60-80 head this year(I hope not)....these elk are coming out of the breaks, why I do not know, unless the agriculture draws them, or it is an over-crowding thing.....if I have to wear yoga pants to participate in a late season hunt....well, count me out....lol
I guess nobody is going to bite on "we need more predators"....I was floored to hear that testimony. Talk about destroy credibility.
greenhorn, yes, we have to many elk in 620-21-22 and 631....we now have a herd of approx. 50 (up from last yrs. 35) just south of hwy. 2 (north end of 631)....I will not be shocked to see 60-80 head this year(I hope not)....these elk are coming out of the breaks, why I do not know, unless the agriculture draws them, or it is an over-crowding thing.....if I have to wear yoga pants to participate in a late season hunt....well, count me out....lol
I guess nobody is going to bite on "we need more predators"....I was floored to hear that testimony. Talk about destroy credibility.
BuzzH
Well-known member
Eric, I think you misunderstood what I was saying on the bull permits. There aren't enough of them issued, for landowners to be worried that someone may kill a bull if they allow cow hunting during the general season.
I don't think there are too many rifle tags issued, but rather way too many archery tags.
By the last 2 weeks of rifle season, I believe that 80%, or more, of the bull hunters are done. I bet after the first week most are done.
Using bull tags still being valid as a reason to keep antlerless hunters out is a bunch of crap and a red herring.
There are not too many elk in the breaks, there's a handful of whining landowners, that wont let people hunt, that think there are.
Frankly, I don't care if landowners don't allow antlerless hunting when bull tags are valid...their land, their choice. Just don't whine and try to change the system to suit your needs...its ridiculous. Live with your choices and work within the system already in place.
If hunters don't get to hunt some private places over it...no biggie, elk numbers will just increase, which is exactly what should happen in all those units.
I don't think there are too many rifle tags issued, but rather way too many archery tags.
By the last 2 weeks of rifle season, I believe that 80%, or more, of the bull hunters are done. I bet after the first week most are done.
Using bull tags still being valid as a reason to keep antlerless hunters out is a bunch of crap and a red herring.
There are not too many elk in the breaks, there's a handful of whining landowners, that wont let people hunt, that think there are.
Frankly, I don't care if landowners don't allow antlerless hunting when bull tags are valid...their land, their choice. Just don't whine and try to change the system to suit your needs...its ridiculous. Live with your choices and work within the system already in place.
If hunters don't get to hunt some private places over it...no biggie, elk numbers will just increase, which is exactly what should happen in all those units.
Eric Albus
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 24, 2012
- Messages
- 1,680
buzz, I can agree w/ just about everything you just said. What you don't understand are the surrounding landowners who are allowing public hunting...they are affected by high elk numbers and their patience is wearing thin. If something is not done, more access could be lost. The landowner(s) who don't allow hunting whilst bull tags are valid are not complaining about the elk. So in order to keep numbers in check, keep surrounding landowners happy, why not go last 2 weeks no bull hunting, or have a late season to control numbers?
The other thing I agree w/ is that there are to many either sex archery tags. Rifle tags, there we disagree, 130 valid either sex is many on the west side of Timber Creek to the highway, unless quality is not the issue/objective. If opportunity is all anyone is worried about, leave the archery and rifle tags where they are at.
The other thing I agree w/ is that there are to many either sex archery tags. Rifle tags, there we disagree, 130 valid either sex is many on the west side of Timber Creek to the highway, unless quality is not the issue/objective. If opportunity is all anyone is worried about, leave the archery and rifle tags where they are at.
Last edited:
300stw
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2008
- Messages
- 863
i would like to see the elk distribution map of the units eric speaks of, if there are to many elk there should be quite a few on all the public land in those units,,,
I spent 12 days riding my mules from timber creek to the pines, last year, it was truly remarkable how many elk that were not on any of that public land, miles of habitat, very few elk, cant hardly believe theres too many, same way timber creek to to the slippery ann, buddy and I and his kids put many miles on the horses and mules thru that country ,,many miles of habitat not a lot of elk interaction,,,
hard to believe the public land has too many elk, we did see lot of elk on some different private ground, my buddy visited a few landowners looking for acces for his kids, none was offered unless a large fee changed hands, even for an opportunity for a cow,,,,
seems like if there were problems those landowners would love to have them kids shoot them cows,,,,
I spent 12 days riding my mules from timber creek to the pines, last year, it was truly remarkable how many elk that were not on any of that public land, miles of habitat, very few elk, cant hardly believe theres too many, same way timber creek to to the slippery ann, buddy and I and his kids put many miles on the horses and mules thru that country ,,many miles of habitat not a lot of elk interaction,,,
hard to believe the public land has too many elk, we did see lot of elk on some different private ground, my buddy visited a few landowners looking for acces for his kids, none was offered unless a large fee changed hands, even for an opportunity for a cow,,,,
seems like if there were problems those landowners would love to have them kids shoot them cows,,,,
Last edited:
The Hedgehog
Well-known member
I think a big healthy herd of bison is the solution - along with legalizing corner crossing to public land.
Have you ever heard the idiom "cutting off the nose to spite the face?" Sounds like their beef should be with their neighbors, not FWP.
SB 245 has changed!!! The sponsor has added an amendment stating "The department may not limit the number of licenses or permits in a hunting district for a population of elk, deer, or antelope that remains above the sustainable population number".
This is another attempt to create unlimited archery elk tags in the Breaks! It would also allow for unlimited rifle permits in the Breaks.
I would expect some of the proponents of the bill to be running out the door to get away from this bill. Rumor has it that the Dept. will withdraw their support.
This is another attempt to create unlimited archery elk tags in the Breaks! It would also allow for unlimited rifle permits in the Breaks.
I would expect some of the proponents of the bill to be running out the door to get away from this bill. Rumor has it that the Dept. will withdraw their support.
shoots-straight
Well-known member
My thoughts exactly. They always want to show power, but do a poor job of implementing it.
Instead of all these bills meant to attack our resource, why don't we get after the problem?
How about a bill that holds harboring landowners liable for the damages done to their neighbors property? Their the ones that are the problem.
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
A relatively bad bill becomes a terrible bill with that amendment. 'Likely the end game all along.
BuzzH
Well-known member
Exactly right.
Eric Albus
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 24, 2012
- Messages
- 1,680
Don't know where you were riding exactly, when I guided elk hunters in 622, we saw a ton of elk, 100+ per day....and all were on public land.
greenhorn....this has turned into a bison and corner crossing issue?
shoots---this bill did not attack the resource, it was/is a bill intended to manage the resource.....instead of forcing landowners into a corner, why not try this for a year or 2 and see if it works? however, if the language was changed to go back to unlimited permits the bill becomes untenable.
greenhorn....this has turned into a bison and corner crossing issue?
shoots---this bill did not attack the resource, it was/is a bill intended to manage the resource.....instead of forcing landowners into a corner, why not try this for a year or 2 and see if it works? however, if the language was changed to go back to unlimited permits the bill becomes untenable.
Last edited:
e300winmag
Member
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2013
- Messages
- 318
Eric,
Did you allow cow hunters onto your property this year? I believe your name was on a list along with many of your neighbors to contact for access. Would you allow access next year?
Did you allow cow hunters onto your property this year? I believe your name was on a list along with many of your neighbors to contact for access. Would you allow access next year?
300stw
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2008
- Messages
- 863
spent 2 days on or near albus land for the youth elk season never seen an elk that they were complaining about, seen a lot of elk sign I called 5 landowners they said had 20 - 40 head around, also was told a few archery hunters took elk, the landowers provided acces free of charge in this case, In years past I have called the outfitter in 622 for youth elk cow tag, 2500 to 3000 to hunt a cow on private land, if the issue is so bad there is too many elk seems the outfitter would love to have the kids come for free and help out the problem,,,
Vito,
Did the committee take executive action on it? The Laws site says no action yet. I know UPOM wanted that amendment but hadn't heard that they took action.
If it is added, I do think it loses all support.
shoots-straight
Well-known member
You see that's where your wrong. The wording has much bigger effects on the public lands big game in the Western part of the state. Debbie Barretts Bill, which was HB 42 in 2003 set the stage for the rapid decline of our herds in the mostly public land hunting districts in Western Montana. This bill adds to that language, and nothing good could come from it.
Where it's private or mostly private there's few options other than working with landowners to give access, or create real legislation that holds them liable for the hording.
Get over the late hunting season wording.. The Department already had the power to do that. The elk herds in the Breaks have been reduced drastically regardless of what you see every day. I look at the data, while valuing you opinion. The elk objectives for the Breaks was heavily weighed by the ag community when picked, even though there's massive amounts of public lands available.
In the same amount of real estate in Western Montana we have far more elk. I guess we shouldn't bitch even though the habitat is there for more elk?
Eric Albus
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 24, 2012
- Messages
- 1,680
The language was not changed. End of hysteria. I do agree though Ben, if that language were adopted...sb 245 is dead.
e300winmag....yes, we did allow access, and not just for cow elk....there were several bulls taken as well...we (my family, and neighbor landowners) have not decided what we will do for this coming year. We have heard nothing from FWP on the subject.
and to whomever hides behind the anonymous moniker of 300stw......
The archery hunters near as I can recollect killed 7-9 bulls. (out of approx. 24 different bulls we counted ahead of season, thrashing fields/fences)....cows I am not certain how many were killed, but not near enough of them, there were anywhere from 25-38 head of cows/calves/spikes around. From the sounds of your post it must be my fault you were unsuccessful? Or maybe we let to many other hunters in and they wised up the elk, making them difficult to find?...either way sounds like my bad.... An outfitter charges 2-3k to hunt for a cow elk? Guess I will have to call the only 2 outfitters I know who hunt 622 and see.
e300winmag....yes, we did allow access, and not just for cow elk....there were several bulls taken as well...we (my family, and neighbor landowners) have not decided what we will do for this coming year. We have heard nothing from FWP on the subject.
and to whomever hides behind the anonymous moniker of 300stw......
The archery hunters near as I can recollect killed 7-9 bulls. (out of approx. 24 different bulls we counted ahead of season, thrashing fields/fences)....cows I am not certain how many were killed, but not near enough of them, there were anywhere from 25-38 head of cows/calves/spikes around. From the sounds of your post it must be my fault you were unsuccessful? Or maybe we let to many other hunters in and they wised up the elk, making them difficult to find?...either way sounds like my bad.... An outfitter charges 2-3k to hunt for a cow elk? Guess I will have to call the only 2 outfitters I know who hunt 622 and see.
Last edited:
