mtnkid85
Well-known member
Does anyone know when was Tabors amendment made?
FWP Commission to change Gardiner Elk hunting
- Thread starter Big Fin
- Start date
I’d be curious to know as well. Guessing it was after all the MOGA friends and family submitted theirs by Nov. 18th.
rogerthat
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2015
- Messages
- 3,629
Wh would an outfitter support this? More hunters they can charge for a bull hunt? Seems really short sighted since you will shoot out your age class on a year like this and the following years hunting will be very tough except for raghorns. Doesn’t seem like a smart way to run a business. I will send the commission an email.
mtnkid85
Well-known member
There where comments about 313 submitted on the 3rd it looks like.
Gerald Martin
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2009
- Messages
- 9,625
When you run @130 clients per year as an outfitter it’s pretty obvious that cramming hunters into your camp is more important than the effects of your harvest on the resource.
Thinking that these kinds of outfitters prioritize the resource over their profits is the first fallacy.
You are right it isn’t sustainable and doesn’t make sense if you care about the resource and the giving every client the best experience possible.
rogerthat
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2015
- Messages
- 3,629
Yeah sounds about like running too many livestock on your land. You will get by for a while but eventually it will catch up to you and you go tits up.
mtnkid85
Well-known member
I emailed the department with some questions about elk trends, bull:cow ratios, etc in HD313 and was sent
the 2022 Northern Yellowstone Elk Classification Survey. Im going to see if I can figure out how to share it here, but for now here's a little blip copy & pasted.
"Harvest History and Management
In response to declining elk numbers during the 2000s, antlerless harvest opportunity was progressively reduced including a reduction and eventual elimination of the Gardiner late hunt opportunity. In response to improved and stabilizing recruitment in the early 2010s (Figure 2), antlerless harvest opportunity was increased slightly in 2016, with 60 antlerless permits available. As part of the directive to simplify hunting regulations and eliminate antlerless permits during the 2022-2023 season setting process, the antlerless elk permits were replaced with antlerless B licenses (with a quota of 60, all of which are currently youth-only). Additionally, 317-00 B licenses may be used in the portion of HD 313 north of Dome Mountain WMA; these B licenses are an important tool for managing game damage and brucellosis concerns.
FWP responded to declining bull ratios (Figures 6 and 7) that was concurrent with increasing bull harvest (Figure 8) by requiring an unlimited permit to hunt bulls in HD 313 beginning in 2012. In 2014, this permit was changed to a first choice only option. These changes were unsuccessful in reducing bull harvest. In 2016, the season structure in HD 313 was changed to allow brow-tined bull harvest with an general license only during the first 3 weeks of the hunting season; bull harvest during the final 2 weeks of the hunting season requires a limited-draw permit.
Although harvest estimates from the 2021 hunting season are not yet available, elk harvest increased in 2020 despite limited snowfall events during that hunting season, (Figures 8 and 9, Table 4) and bull harvest is a significant cause of mortality in addition to natural mortality. Total bull harvest in 2020 was higher than the long-term average of bull harvest (222). Although the 2020 harvest of both bulls with 5 points or less and 6 points or more increased from 2019 levels (Figure 9), the harvest of younger bulls is above the long term average (100), while the harvest of bulls with 6 points or greater is below average (134). Harvest estimates from 2021 will be available later this year. Data since 2016 indicate that the current season structure has been unsuccessful in reducing bull harvest or increasing the number of mature bulls on the landscape. Discussions among FWP, sportsmen, landowners, and other interested parties regarding bull management in HD 313 are ongoing and will be part of the public process for the Elk Plan Revision."
the 2022 Northern Yellowstone Elk Classification Survey. Im going to see if I can figure out how to share it here, but for now here's a little blip copy & pasted.
"Harvest History and Management
In response to declining elk numbers during the 2000s, antlerless harvest opportunity was progressively reduced including a reduction and eventual elimination of the Gardiner late hunt opportunity. In response to improved and stabilizing recruitment in the early 2010s (Figure 2), antlerless harvest opportunity was increased slightly in 2016, with 60 antlerless permits available. As part of the directive to simplify hunting regulations and eliminate antlerless permits during the 2022-2023 season setting process, the antlerless elk permits were replaced with antlerless B licenses (with a quota of 60, all of which are currently youth-only). Additionally, 317-00 B licenses may be used in the portion of HD 313 north of Dome Mountain WMA; these B licenses are an important tool for managing game damage and brucellosis concerns.
FWP responded to declining bull ratios (Figures 6 and 7) that was concurrent with increasing bull harvest (Figure 8) by requiring an unlimited permit to hunt bulls in HD 313 beginning in 2012. In 2014, this permit was changed to a first choice only option. These changes were unsuccessful in reducing bull harvest. In 2016, the season structure in HD 313 was changed to allow brow-tined bull harvest with an general license only during the first 3 weeks of the hunting season; bull harvest during the final 2 weeks of the hunting season requires a limited-draw permit.
Although harvest estimates from the 2021 hunting season are not yet available, elk harvest increased in 2020 despite limited snowfall events during that hunting season, (Figures 8 and 9, Table 4) and bull harvest is a significant cause of mortality in addition to natural mortality. Total bull harvest in 2020 was higher than the long-term average of bull harvest (222). Although the 2020 harvest of both bulls with 5 points or less and 6 points or more increased from 2019 levels (Figure 9), the harvest of younger bulls is above the long term average (100), while the harvest of bulls with 6 points or greater is below average (134). Harvest estimates from 2021 will be available later this year. Data since 2016 indicate that the current season structure has been unsuccessful in reducing bull harvest or increasing the number of mature bulls on the landscape. Discussions among FWP, sportsmen, landowners, and other interested parties regarding bull management in HD 313 are ongoing and will be part of the public process for the Elk Plan Revision."
mtnkid85
Well-known member
Lets see if this works.
We've heard that comments are rolling in to oppose this amendment. Please keep after it. Keep it polite, thoughtful and simply state your opposition to the amendment and ask that the amendment get pulled from the agenda.
And please sign up for the Commission meeting. If you plan on attending via zoom, you have to sign up by noon, Monday December 19th.
fwp.mt.gov
And please sign up for the Commission meeting. If you plan on attending via zoom, you have to sign up by noon, Monday December 19th.
Fish And Wildlife Commision | Montana FWP
The Commission sets fish and wildlife regulations, approves property acquisitions, and approves certain rules and activities of the Fish, Wildlife & Parks Department as provided by statute.
fwp.mt.gov
T
tjones
Guest
When the bulls dry up in that unit we will hear from the outfitters and Tabor that the wolves killed them.
El Jason
Well-known member
Yep. Guaranteed.
rogerthat
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2015
- Messages
- 3,629
Yeah the lack of common sense in some of these proposals is mind numbing. 1) Low numbers of mature bulls + more licenses = even less mature bulls. 2) Low numbers of bull elk + more licenses = even less bulls and for the outfitter types - small bulls (from equation 1) + less bulls(derived from the equation 2) = less clients willing to pay big money. Why is it any more complicated than that?
rogerthat
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2015
- Messages
- 3,629
Hunting - a way to improve business relations? Got to be honest that’s a perspective I have never thought about. Got to love business men. It’s always about the business.
El Jason
Well-known member
Really? There are some huge duck clubs that do a lot of corporate hunts, etc.
Irrelevant
Well-known member
Miller, no one can take you seriously with that lame signature... you really should fix it.
If you google "Corporate hunting retreat" there will be hundreds of results. Def a thing.
rogerthat
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2015
- Messages
- 3,629
That makes sense. I guess I was saying I have never thought of elk hunting that way but Im not a business man.
Dr. samuel_284Win
Well-known member
Email sent to all commissioners.
It is hard for me to comprehend amendments like this when Montana already has a plethora of general rifle units to hunt for 5 weeks. I mean come on, while we are at it let's just make a couple of our large "elky" WMAs open to general bull harvest (joking)!
My opinion: Montana really needs to revert back to the days of Posewitz with commissioners attaining that position after years of serving the fish and game resources of MT, not appointed by the governor. I think it's pretty messed up that 4 of 7 commissioners have to have a connection to agriculture (as if that vocation automatically gives you a graduate degree in wildlife management). I work in agriculture research at MSU and I can tell you for sure my department should not be your first stop for wildlife-related questions. End of my soap box.
It is hard for me to comprehend amendments like this when Montana already has a plethora of general rifle units to hunt for 5 weeks. I mean come on, while we are at it let's just make a couple of our large "elky" WMAs open to general bull harvest (joking)!
My opinion: Montana really needs to revert back to the days of Posewitz with commissioners attaining that position after years of serving the fish and game resources of MT, not appointed by the governor. I think it's pretty messed up that 4 of 7 commissioners have to have a connection to agriculture (as if that vocation automatically gives you a graduate degree in wildlife management). I work in agriculture research at MSU and I can tell you for sure my department should not be your first stop for wildlife-related questions. End of my soap box.
