Draft Elk Management Plan is out

[antlerradar]

I think you will be pleasantly surprised

Yes and no. I was at the meeting at Miles City last night. The increase in the observed elk objective is much more realistic for 799. This is a good thing.
The most concerning part of the plan is where limited districts that are over objective long enough could go to general tags. This would be an absolute disaster.

 

[Ben Lamb]

This story came out today: https://www.greatfallstribune.com/s...ges-reset-herd-population-object/70389418007/

I tend to agree with it's assessment that the new EMP does place a high value on habitat and elk distribution. There are a lot of good things in here, but there are some concerning. Page 56, as it's been pointed out by @tjones & @antlerradar along with the loss of page 55 from the old EMP are the primary concerns in the introduction. I had a good conversation with some of the Helena folks, and they're clear that the plan will change based on feedback from the public.

While we're all extremely nervous about the final product, I do want to recognize that FWP's draft really encompassed a lot of the public comment that was put in during the scoping phase, and the Elk Advisory Council's ideas are threaded throughout as well. I'm cautiously optimistic that the final EIS is going to be something that builds off of the 2005 plan, and advances a lot of the recent research relative to elk/habitat/predation studies that have been done as well as hopefully recognizing that increased opportunity leads to decreased harvest when you consider effort over time expended.

 

[rogerthat]

Yes and no. I was at the meeting at Miles City last night. The increase in the observed elk objective is much more realistic for 799. This is a good thing.
The most concerning part of the plan is where limited districts that are over objective long enough could go to general tags. This would be an absolute disaster.

I agree. I was pleasantly surprised with the objectives. I think statewide the cumulative increase in objectives is much more reasonable than I was expecting. When you expect the worst you are more easily impressed I guess. That’s not a good thing lol

 

[Pagosa]

Don't forget about the folks that come back in the spring and find those " winterkill" deadhead bulls.

I’ve spent a lot of time working, scouting, and hunting in 705 and 704 and have only found two deadheads. Both were deer. I hope a lot of people wouldn’t do that

 

[Irishman]

Great point but I don’t think it’s just for the Custer this can be applied for the whole state. It illustrates why elk and deer season can’t be concurrent.

I recently asked a landowner to hunt he said we have too many elk we don’t like the elk and no you can’t hunt. I don’t blame him one bit but it shows you landowners are more willing to put up with elk than hunters. Shortening seasons would help that. FWP is doing exactly opposite of what needs to happen if they want to put a beat down on elk populations. Landowners have the tools to kill elk it’s more of a neighbor problem at this point. Just like fixing fence some simply won’t do it.

Too many hunters on public, or accessible private land, isn’t that one of the biggest complaints that hunters have? Wouldn't the shortening of seasons just make lands more crowded?

 

[Mallardsx2]

Don't forget about the folks that come back in the spring and find those " winterkill" deadhead bulls.

You don't trust hunters either? lol

My wife and I were just talking last night about just how untrustworthy most hunters are in general. It's sad to see the worst in people but I guess I have just seen so much BS that I have lost a lot of faith in the common man. Unfortunately, game agencies still have too much faith in the common man.

GA is a state that has a DNR that places peoples morals high on the totem pole. When in reality, most hunters here are savages when it comes to doing things the legal way. Yet, they continue to ignore it.

 

[mtnkid85]

What are folks general opinions on this move away from the quota based individual unit B licenses to the OTC unlimited B licenses valid in a bundle of units?

I do appreciate that they specify "valid on private only" for the august hunt and "not valid on NF lands" for the late hunts. I also recognize the need to remove elk off of private lands for landowners. It will make it easier for folks to access these licenses, being able to buy them whenever/where ever.

This maybe has more to do with the season setting, than the EMP but now that we see that alot of the objectives are increasing, do we really need to make it easier to kill cows?

 

[Ben Lamb]

What are folks general opinions on this move away from the quota based individual unit B licenses to the OTC unlimited B licenses valid in a bundle of units?

I do appreciate that they specify "valid on private only" for the august hunt and "not valid on NF lands" for the late hunts. I also recognize the need to remove elk off of private lands for landowners. It will make it easier for folks to access these licenses, being able to buy them whenever/where ever.

This maybe has more to do with the season setting, than the EMP but now that we see that alot of the objectives are increasing, do we really need to make it easier to kill cows?

Most folks I've talked with seem to support a model that allows for antlerless harvest on private land while either eliminating cow harvest on public or moving to a permit system.

It's an area that I think still needs refinement, personally. We don't need to open up antlerless harvest, we need to focus that harvest where it's an actual issue, either in terms of moving elk off of private, or herd size management.

 

[antlerradar]

Too many hunters on public, or accessible private land, isn’t that one of the biggest complaints that hunters have? Wouldn't the shortening of seasons just make lands more crowded?

Maybe, maybe not. Right now people are crowding around the two weeks coinciding with peak rut. A slightly shorter and earlier season may spread hunters out.

 

[antlerradar]

You don't trust hunters either? lol

My wife and I were just talking last night about just how untrustworthy most hunters are in general. It's sad to see the worst in people but I guess I have just seen so much BS that I have lost a lot of faith in the common man. Unfortunately, game agencies still have too much faith in the common man.

GA is a state that has a DNR that places peoples morals high on the totem pole. When in reality, most hunters here are savages when it comes to doing things the legal way. Yet, they continue to ignore it.

Sadly the best place to find a deadhead is with in a 1/2 mile of a well used road.

 

[antlerradar]

While we're all extremely nervous about the final product,

Yes, kind of like opening a Greenhorn link when your wife is not sound asleep.

 

[mtnkid85]

Most folks I've talked with seem to support a model that allows for antlerless harvest on private land while either eliminating cow harvest on public or moving to a permit system.

It's an area that I think still needs refinement, personally. We don't need to open up antlerless harvest, we need to focus that harvest where it's an actual issue, either in terms of moving elk off of private, or herd size management.

I agree. Thats why Im supportive of the language stating these are good on private only. Focusing the harvest is something where damage hunts should be better utilized. It seems landowners don't want to jump through the hoops to utilize that program though.

 

[Ben Lamb]

I agree. Thats why Im supportive of the language stating these are good on private only. Focusing the harvest is something where damage hunts should be better utilized. It seems landowners don't want to jump through the hoops to utilize that program though.

There's a sentiment that came out of the Phillipsburg meeting where people were essentially saying that the shoulder seasons didn't work there. One story recounted 100 people being reached out to, 50 showing up and 13 elk getting shot. 26% success rate is about average for public land antlerless elk hunting in MT, maybe a bit lower IIRC.

 

[mtnkid85]

There's a sentiment that came out of the Phillipsburg meeting where people were essentially saying that the shoulder seasons didn't work there. One story recounted 100 people being reached out to, 50 showing up and 13 elk getting shot. 26% success rate is about average for public land antlerless elk hunting in MT, maybe a bit lower IIRC.

lol, unfortunately I feel like thats pretty good. 26%. Some folks just need a lot of help.

I wonder if the private sector could help here. What would it take for FWP to contract out a private hunt coordinator to work some of these properties experiencing high damages and hold the publics hand to help get elk off.
Some of the big money ranches down in Paradise Valley that are internally doing this have like 80-90% success rates. You show up on the morning that your told to, get in his pickup, drive out to the pivot, he sets up a tripod, you lean over it, he gives you a range, you pull the trigger. Done.

Could this be done cheaper by hiring it out rather than having a fwp staff person be the "guide"? I still don't know that it would actually be feasible to afford or not.

 

[rogerthat]

lol, unfortunately I feel like thats pretty good. 26%. Some folks just need a lot of help.

I wonder if the private sector could help here. What would it take for FWP to contract out a private hunt coordinator to work some of these properties experiencing high damages and hold the publics hand to help get elk off.
Some of the big money ranches down in Paradise Valley that are internally doing this have like 80-90% success rates. You show up on the morning that your told to, get in his pickup, drive out to the pivot, he sets up a tripod, you lean over it, he gives you a range, you pull the trigger. Done.

Could this be done cheaper by hiring it out rather than having a fwp staff person be the "guide"? I still don't know that it would actually be feasible to afford or not.

And people consider “ranch” hunts unsportsmanlike. Maybe we could just round them up into a corral. That would help success even more. I would rather get my nuts put in a vice while drinking bud light than partake in the “hunts” you just described

 

[Ben Lamb]

lol, unfortunately I feel like thats pretty good. 26%. Some folks just need a lot of help.

I wonder if the private sector could help here. What would it take for FWP to contract out a private hunt coordinator to work some of these properties experiencing high damages and hold the publics hand to help get elk off.
Some of the big money ranches down in Paradise Valley that are internally doing this have like 80-90% success rates. You show up on the morning that your told to, get in his pickup, drive out to the pivot, he sets up a tripod, you lean over it, he gives you a range, you pull the trigger. Done.

Could this be done cheaper by hiring it out rather than having a fwp staff person be the "guide"? I still don't know that it would actually be feasible to afford or not.

The Blank ranch property program is awesome and accounts for about 60% of the elk harvest in that district. It's a great model but super pricey to administer.

The expense of Hunt Tech's isn't a cost-barrier for FWP. IIRC, their budget had a bump for new hires in this program, so they can add more. Since these are modified employees, it would make sense to simply hire a local hand/land manager to help coordinate hunters (not guide them or do like the AMB properties necessarily, but just ensure people are spread out & have someone who knows elk movement for those particular critters). With the new top end rate for Block Management, and with the ARM rules changing this year, there's a lot of opportunity within Block Management to create new systems that allow for this.

And people consider “ranch” hunts unsportsmanlike. Maybe we could just round them up into a corral. That would help success even more. I would rather get my nuts put in a vice while drinking bud light than partake in the “hunts” you just described

I think a big part of this is that hunters view cow elk hunting as a lesser endeavor and therefore not real hunting. That's more of a commentary on hunter ethics, IMO. While we all jealously guard the democratic allocation of the resource, and the equitable allocation for antlered opportunity, I think we also need to reafirm our role as wildlife managers and be part of the solution when it comes time to kill critters, or move them off. Perhaps it isn't pure hunting, but it is management - and it's something that if hunters don't step up and help out, the legislature will.

 

[rogerthat]

The Blank ranch property program is awesome and accounts for about 60% of the elk harvest in that district. It's a great model but super pricey to administer.

The expense of Hunt Tech's isn't a cost-barrier for FWP. IIRC, their budget had a bump for new hires in this program, so they can add more. Since these are modified employees, it would make sense to simply hire a local hand/land manager to help coordinate hunters (not guide them or do like the AMB properties necessarily, but just ensure people are spread out & have someone who knows elk movement for those particular critters). With the new top end rate for Block Management, and with the ARM rules changing this year, there's a lot of opportunity within Block Management to create new systems that allow for this.



I think a big part of this is that hunters view cow elk hunting as a lesser endeavor and therefore not real hunting. That's more of a commentary on hunter ethics, IMO. While we all jealously guard the democratic allocation of the resource, and the equitable allocation for antlered opportunity, I think we also need to reafirm our role as wildlife managers and be part of the solution when it comes time to kill critters, or move them off. Perhaps it isn't pure hunting, but it is management - and it's something that if hunters don't step up and help out, the legislature will.

Getting the elk back on public land and keeping them there would help this some but I get what your saying.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Getting the elk back on public land and keeping them there would help this some but I get what your saying.

I think a big part of this is the public perception both in terms of "what is expected of hunters" from other hunters in order to maintain position within the community (big racks, big efforts, etc) and "we don't want to clean up someone else's mess" kind of hold us back from being honest partners with folks in the landowner community.

If we're serious about getting elk back on to public land we need to reduce public land pressure while applying more pressure to private. The trick is figuring out how to do that while not succummbing to the lowest common denominator (damage payments, transferable licenses, etc). That's where expanding some programs to include more wildlife management components would be helpful (block mgt). Manage for the overall herd population and social tolerance on private while providing better conditions on public both in terms of secure habitat and security from 2 legged predators.

We have to make public land more appealing to elk than private.

 

[DFS]

Too many hunters on public, or accessible private land, isn’t that one of the biggest complaints that hunters have? Wouldn't the shortening of seasons just make lands more crowded?

Landowner fatigue I believe is a big reason for losing access to private land. Growing up before hunting became what it has become my family used to have out of state hunters visit every year and they looked forward to it. Now when hunting season comes they look forward to it being over. Being constantly barraged by hunters for 11 weeks or however long it is, landowners are hesitant to give any access for fear more people will ask.

Constant pressure on accessible lands also moves elk to private refuge. Currently we’ve tried adding tags and lengthening seasons. It hasn’t worked and won’t for reducing elk population.

 

[Deleted member 20812]

Getting the elk back on public land and keeping them there

Is going to take the ranch hunts to do.