SB 380 Reconsideration of Bill!

[shoots-straight]

shoots...there are to many either sex tags in the breaks....quality has been degraded substantially. No room for discussion or arguement here... a herd bull is now a 290-300, where 10-15 years ago it was a 350+....to many bulls are being slaughtered....and to few cows....so why not work w/ landowners and figure out how to get access? Personally I would rather be able to access a cow elk than no elk at all.

That's as easy as getting everyone in the region, (sportsman's groups, landowners, FWP) on the same page during the Tentative process. Everyone aggree's that there's to many either-sex tags, and you slice them back some. The structure is already there.

That being said, I still don' t see how cutting weeks off of a limited entry tag does anything.

If your saying that the landowners, farmers, ranchers are trying to strong arm the season structure by holding access ransom, I say "go pound sand".

 

[Eric Albus]

Buzz, you will find that the elk hunting has not changed in the breaks. You will see 280-300 inch bulls as the top end norm....The breaks were really something when that top end was 350-380 consistently.

JLS, if you are happy w/ mediocre that is fine. Personally I like to see mature animals.

shoots, there are landowners in the breaks that would allow access, if the bull season were closed. Is that "strong arming the season"...maybe, but I would rather have access to shoot a cow than no access at all..

 

[The Hedgehog]

Top end 300? Seriously. My friends must bowhunt a different breaks.

 

[The Hedgehog]

And my folks must be in a different region 6 for block mgt.

And the resident elk hunters I know, must be unhappy with a different Montana public land "3rd world country" national forest elk hunting.

 

[shoots-straight]

shoots, there are landowners in the breaks that would allow access, if the bull season were closed. Is that "strong arming the season"...maybe, but I would rather have access to shoot a cow than no access at all..

So, they can't just let cow hunters in? They don' have to let anyone kill a bull. The number of bulls killed is relative to the number of tags allocated. The people you know, are trying to dictate season structure through a strong arm tactic. It's not going to work.

If I had a cow tag up in the 600's I wouldn't need any landowners permission to kill a cow. The problem is most of the elk taken are on public lands. That's why I asked where on public land was elk numbers up? You never answered me so I know, you know.

If a landowner is harboring game, and mostly doesn't allow hunting then those elk can be taken out of the accessible elk objective numbers (Page 55 of EMP).

Like I said "They can go pound sand"

 

[howler]

If we were all just trophy hunters and wanted only to hunt the biggest and best of the herd managing for trophy quality would be the easy way to go,, BUT we are not all trophy hunters just being out there and hunting is a top priority for me, If the biggest elk in the breaks topped out at 300 that would be fine with me, Now having said that If a big bull and a spike were standing side by side I would try for the bigger bull everytime. But I don't want to give up any hunting just so I could shoot that same bull. The spike would be fine. in fact I think the spike bull is the perfect elk. lots of meat and you know what your getting.. To me there is much more to hunting than horns, When I am deer hunting I always try for a bigger buck and pass on many smaller deer and am prepared to go with out a buck deer, but until the recent past we had plenty of doe tags available and getting some deer meat was not all that hard, but it is now,
I am worried about this conversation only dealing with the trophy aspect of hunting, That's important alright but there is much more to hunting than just restricting the hunters so much just to grow a big bull or buck. In years past Eric and I have had hours of conversation on this subject and at the time we were on the same page but things are different now. were losing hunting ground and we have to keep what we got and we have to keep hunters hunting.

 

[Eric Albus]

howler, I can respect you putting priority on time placed in field over "antlers"...which is the way it should be. What I personally would like to see is biological managment, diverse age structures and good ratios. Healthy herds equal more opportunity.

 

[shoots-straight]

howler, I can respect you putting priority on time placed in field over "antlers"...which is the way it should be. What I personally would like to see is biological managment, diverse age structures and good ratios. Healthy herds equal more opportunity.

I think your really saying that you want, socially acceptable elk populations, followed by 350 + bulls on private property, so you can charge a trespass fee to get at them.

You really should read the EMP for the hunting districts in the Breaks.

http://fwp.mt.gov/fishAndWildlife/management/elk/managementPlan.html

Let me know what you find out.

 

[TheJason]

howler, I can respect you putting priority on time placed in field over "antlers"...which is the way it should be. What I personally would like to see is biological managment, diverse age structures and good ratios. Healthy herds equal more opportunity.

It doesn't equal more opportunity if you're having to restrict it continually in order to pump out 350-380 bulls for everyone with the permit.

 

[Eric Albus]

shoots, we never have charged to hunt elk...hate to tarnish the image you may have of me, but no charge to hunt elks or antelopes for those fortunate enough to draw a tag....and I do not lease any land in the "breaks"...i have confined myself to being a lowly deer hunting guide/outfitter, along w/ pheasants, the occasional antelope, and infrequent holder of a 622 rifle elk tag...been giving free hunts to a couple youth every year for cow elk 622...further sully my image....ruining my capitalist name right here by my own admission.

The elk plan was a good refresher course...there is approx. 116K acres that have controlled access in the "Breaks" out of 17,000 sq. miles....those dreadful landowners/outfitters how dare they control 1%....or is my math wrong? 1% of the land in the breaks has caused an access issue? we needed to go to permits on archery because of the "rampant leasing" for archery elk....twas a ruse, a sham, the Dept. wanted to cheapen up land in the breaks to purchase and turn buffalo loose on the range..(that was a direct quote from a Dept. official heard by a feller I know)....but that is a different subject.

And the last time they updated was in 2004? I am going to a "breaks elk working group" meeting in a few days...perhaps I will have some new info to share w/ those who care.

 

[shoots-straight]

Maybe MOGA, and yourself will realize that the resident sportsman is in this for the long haul.

I have never seen an outfitter yet that was humbled, or gracious for the opportunity to make a living utilizing the public's resource. Maybe when that happens we will be able to work better with one another.

I see a lot of arrogance coming out of the MOGA camp. It's too bad they feel they have a right to make a buck on the backs of our wildlife.

200 vs. 200,000, maybe that will sink in!

 

[Straight Arrow]

Dept. wanted to cheapen up land in the breaks to purchase and turn buffalo loose on the range..(that was a direct quote from a Dept. official heard by a feller I know)....but that is a different subject.

That is a "different" subject and it is the kind of misinterpreted indirect inaccurate anecdotal "quote" that perpetuates the myth that the great State of Montana is going to simply roll the trucks into a wide spot on Highway 2 and release a thousand bison to trample the fields and pastures of the poor innocent hard-working CRP recipients of the northeastern sector of the state because ... Why????

... and is that the same "Dept." that spent way too much on the Milk River Ranch that is now going to "cheapen" land values in the Breaks?

From earlier flippant remarks, I can easily understand you drinking the "Cool-aid" of Sen Brenden, Kerry White, and company, but this is really disappointing. I'm sorry I gave you more credit previously. Seriously, think about it.

 

[Eric Albus]

shoots, that road runs both directions as well....I see a lot of "hunters" who arrogantly show up and demand access for "their wildlife" one day a year.
I thought my clients hunted w/ me on account of my wonderful sense of humor, outstanding service, and great personality(my perception)....I did not think they were paying me for "your wildlife". It is truely about ones perception I guess. However, do not think for a minute that I take it for granted that I am able to make a business out of hunting, it's a priviledge and I readily admit it. It can be taken away from us w/ the stroke of a pen...20-50 years of hard work put into a business gone at the hands of uninformed voters. Good thing I gamble for my living, otherwise I'd not sleep a wink.

 

[shoots-straight]

shoots, that road runs both directions as well....I see a lot of "hunters" who arrogantly show up and demand access for "their wildlife" one day a year.
I thought my clients hunted w/ me on account of my wonderful sense of humor, outstanding service, and great personality(my perception)....I did not think they were paying me for "your wildlife". It is truely about ones perception I guess. However, do not think for a minute that I take it for granted that I am able to make a business out of hunting, it's a priviledge and I readily admit it. It can be taken away from us w/ the stroke of a pen...20-50 years of hard work put into a business gone at the hands of uninformed voters. Good thing I gamble for my living, otherwise I'd not sleep a wink.

I think the voters in region 6 fall into the "uninformed" category.

How else could a guy like John Brenden get elected so many times.

There is not one person that has attacked sportsman, the Department, or Wildlife more that him. If there is I'd stand corrected. Bill, after bill comes up with his name on it. It must be a vendetta for his short stay as a commissioner.

Says a lot about the "uninformed" doesn't it?

Please read post #68 where I referenced the proportions of public ownership of game animals.

 

[Big Shooter]

Went to a branding today south of Miles City. Some outstanding country that is notorious for great hunting and I got to visiting with a couple of landowners that control a LOT of quality hunting. None of them are leased to outfitters, one of them will let people hunt if they ask, two ranches allowed out of state groups to hunt......free of charge. After we were done with the calves and were eating lunch, I got to picking their brains about what Montana could do to improve the hunting and what irritated them the most. Now, keep in mind that all of these guys were born and raised in this country and have seen the good times and the bad in respect to hunting.

The answers were as follows and in no particular order: Resident hunters that think they can go where ever, when ever; (that really chaps their ass); a season that encompasses the rut
(very detrimental to the quality of hunting in their opinion); resident sportsman that think they should have access to not only the game that lives there but also any and all public land that lies in the middle of their private ground ( really makes their faces turn red); corner hopping (really gets their blood pressure up); and the number one turn off..........free ranging buffalo (makes them throw their hats down and yell f@&$,) Because of these issues, they are shutting their ranches down totally......to everyone, until these problems go away.

My point being......landowners have had their bellies full of dealing with this chit for the last few years. They are very willing to work with the public as long as the public's attitude improves as well as the FWP's. These are all super good people that mange their game and don't really care if they have too many or not.

In most peoples eyes this is probably a real small sample, but in all reality a pretty good example of what landowners are thinking. Not to mention that they are damn sure spreading the word and trying to get more to follow suite.

Just telling what's going on in our neck of the woods.

 

[BuzzH]

Went to a branding today south of Miles City. Some outstanding country that is notorious for great hunting and I got to visiting with a couple of landowners that control a LOT of quality hunting. None of them are leased to outfitters, one of them will let people hunt if they ask, two ranches allowed out of state groups to hunt......free of charge. After we were done with the calves and were eating lunch, I got to picking their brains about what Montana could do to improve the hunting and what irritated them the most. Now, keep in mind that all of these guys were born and raised in this country and have seen the good times and the bad in respect to hunting.

The answers were as follows and in no particular order: Resident hunters that think they can go where ever, when ever; (that really chaps their ass); a season that encompasses the rut
(very detrimental to the quality of hunting in their opinion); resident sportsman that think they should have access to not only the game that lives there but also any and all public land that lies in the middle of their private ground ( really makes their faces turn red); corner hopping (really gets their blood pressure up); and the number one turn off..........free ranging buffalo (makes them throw their hats down and yell f@&$,) Because of these issues, they are shutting their ranches down totally......to everyone, until these problems go away.

My point being......landowners have had their bellies full of dealing with this chit for the last few years. They are very willing to work with the public as long as the public's attitude improves as well as the FWP's. These are all super good people that mange their game and don't really care if they have too many or not.

In most peoples eyes this is probably a real small sample, but in all reality a pretty good example of what landowners are thinking. Not to mention that they are damn sure spreading the word and trying to get more to follow suite.

Just telling what's going on in our neck of the woods.

What a joke...

Their game?

Arrogant pricks, the lot of them. They whine about the public wanting to make corner crossing legal, then turn right around and claim the States Wildlife as "their game".

The hypocricy never ends...

I got news....tell your buddies to pound sand. Its the publics wildlife and soon it will be the publics legal right to corner cross.

The times, they are a changing, FACT.

For years they've had it their way, now that the public is taking back whats rightfully theirs...the landowners are throwing their suckers in the dirt, stomping their feet, and holding their breath for an encore...

WOW!

 

[shoots-straight]

Went to a branding today south of Miles City. Some outstanding country that is notorious for great hunting and I got to visiting with a couple of landowners that control a LOT of quality hunting. None of them are leased to outfitters, one of them will let people hunt if they ask, two ranches allowed out of state groups to hunt......free of charge. After we were done with the calves and were eating lunch, I got to picking their brains about what Montana could do to improve the hunting and what irritated them the most. Now, keep in mind that all of these guys were born and raised in this country and have seen the good times and the bad in respect to hunting.

The answers were as follows and in no particular order: Resident hunters that think they can go where ever, when ever; (that really chaps their ass); a season that encompasses the rut
(very detrimental to the quality of hunting in their opinion); resident sportsman that think they should have access to not only the game that lives there but also any and all public land that lies in the middle of their private ground ( really makes their faces turn red); corner hopping (really gets their blood pressure up); and the number one turn off..........free ranging buffalo (makes them throw their hats down and yell f@&$,) Because of these issues, they are shutting their ranches down totally......to everyone, until these problems go away.

My point being......landowners have had their bellies full of dealing with this chit for the last few years. They are very willing to work with the public as long as the public's attitude improves as well as the FWP's. These are all super good people that mange their game and don't really care if they have too many or not.

In most peoples eyes this is probably a real small sample, but in all reality a pretty good example of what landowners are thinking. Not to mention that they are damn sure spreading the word and trying to get more to follow suite.

Just telling what's going on in our neck of the woods.

Wow, another attempt at a strong arm tactic. So tell me how well that works for ya?

Was there ever a consideration for "Free Range" Bison in that area? More hysteria, and more misinformation. I'm sure you set them straight, right?

Makes you want to support Bison introduction on any public lands. You might that most sportsman believe the same way as the ranchers on the Bison issue. No sense in having any common ground though.

There is a process to engage in to change season structures and seasons. If you want to do that you need to know how the process works. Strong arming it will get nothing but resentment.

Most of the land locked corner sections that are checker boarded, are leased. Check out the map you fellas report on. It tells a lot.

BTW, where exactly is this ranch? We could look up whether their ranches are leased through outfitters.

Never mind.

 

[Eric Albus]

bigshooter, there is no point explaining the landowners feelings. They just don't care. These people will never understand where "that side" is coming from. They fail to understand that landowners are very good stewards of the land and wildlife. They want to thank them by forcing access and killing everything that walks....perhaps that is where you and I have failed, perhaps this is our fault....If we had hunted more clients, sacrificed quality for quantity....well, then "their side" would not want access...'cause it would all look the same....

 

[Big Shooter]

Buzz..."their game", strictly a figure a speech on my part. They never referred to the deer and elk as "their" game, I did in my post simply meaning the game animals that reside on their property, not meaning they own them. Wow, a person really has to be grammatically correct on here or some people have a goddamn come apart. Sorry Buzz (never in a million years did I think I would type those two words), my bad.

Shoots...you can call it "strong arming" or you can say it's "hysteria" or whatever you so desire, but it's actually their way of banding together to get a point across. As far as the season structure and the rut and all of that are concerned, they aren't trying to get that changed by doing this. That was just one part of the discussion I thought was interesting. The bison, and the corner hopping issue and the way that I-161 was handled, via an initiative, is what pisses them off. The one fella actually did not agree with the OSL's and thought that everyone should be on an even playing field when applying for tags, but the way it was handled is what chapped him because he knows it will happen again in some way shape or form.

Oh yeah, as far as me telling you where these places are or who owns them, probably not gonna happen, but I can 100% honestly say that they are not leased to any outfitter. They did mention another landowner, who I know well, that is leased to an outfitter, that is shutting his down this fall too for the same reasons. All I'm relaying on to you guys is that the landowner community is getting a little grumpy over some of the "times that are a changing" FACT, so when there is all of this talk about citizen initiatives for this and that, and the other, their might be better ways of handling it that aren't so abrasive. Just saying.

 

[The Hedgehog]

These people will never understand where "that side" is coming from. They fail to understand that landowners are very good stewards of the land and wildlife. They want to thank them by forcing access and killing everything that walks....perhaps that is where you and I have failed, perhaps this is our fault....If we had hunted more clients, sacrificed quality for quantity....well, then "their side" would not want access...'cause it would all look the same....

So if you're a landowner, you're automatically a "good steward of the land." And resident hunters are for"forcing access and killing everything that walks"?

Your generalizations about MT hunters are pretty whacked out. I'm pretty thankful for the great groups of sportman that spent all that time in Hell'anu to fight off the crook bastards that are determined to bend us over and ram it in.