FWP’S BIENNIAL HUNTING SEASON-SETTING PROCESS BEGINS IN JUNE

[antlerradar]

I'm struggling with this one. Given populations and the closure has been in place since the 50's, not really sure what is gained here, but it sounds like there's support for it in Yellowstone county.

Was definitely support at the meeting in Miles City.

Also adding that if an area is chronically over-objective for elk, then you move to antlerless only on an A tag valid for private land, permits only for cows on public.

Of all the proposals, This is the one that stinks the most.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Of all the proposals, This is the one that stinks the most.

Tell me why.

 

[Badlandcat]

I'm struggling with this one. Given populations and the closure has been in place since the 50's, not really sure what is gained here, but it sounds like there's support for it in Yellowstone county.

Montana FWP is bent on F'g with everyone. The best goose hunting in the state period.
If they let people hunt the river, it'll just push them out.
I feel very sorry for our children, FWP is going to make sure that they will give up hunting.

 

[SAJ-99]

Montana FWP is bent on F'g with everyone. The best goose hunting in the state period.
If they let people hunt the river, it'll just push them out.
I feel very sorry for our children, FWP is going to make sure that they will give up hunting.

They asked for comments, so no decision was made yet. If hunters want to do it, then they are F’g themselves…again.

I’m sure Waterfowl hunters have complained about refuges since before the internet, but it sure has helped show how short-sighted some of them can be.

 

[DFS]

They asked for comments, so no decision was made yet. If hunters want to do it, then they are F’g themselves…again.

I’m sure Waterfowl hunters have complained about refuges since before the internet, but it sure has helped show how short-sighted some of them can be.

Asking hunters what they want is a joke. I want a moose sheep and goat tag every year.

 

[bigsky2]

Statewide:

-I support putting more districts in a Limited Entry model for mule deer bucks. To the question of how many years within a five year period should a hunter be able to hunt mule deer, I ask that you focus on the resource first. We have more hunters every year, different access dynamics, etc. To model management around such a question would be setting yourself up for failure.

I hate that they even asked that. Even if they were to go to limited entry districts, they have no way of knowing how often someone would draw without trying it for a few years to get an idea of the demand. Besides, make it a random drawing with bonus points like they do with limited entry for the other species. Odds are even if they place quotas on the units, the quotas will be so high that it would be reasonably possible for someone that's lucky to draw 5 out of 5 years.

I'd also put in your comments that they should leave quota ranges in place for buck and bull permits. We were told at our season setting meeting that the department wants to go away from that, so biologists would have to get permission from the commission to adjust permit numbers. I can think of a certain commission member that's an outfitter that might be reluctant to cut tags when it could negatively affect his business.

 

[SAJ-99]

Asking hunters what they want is a joke. I want a moose sheep and goat tag every year.

I believe it is required by law. But I'm sure someone will correct me if that is incorrect. Even if it wasn't, people would complain if they didn't ask for comments. No way for FWP to win in this situation.

 

[DFS]

I believe it is required by law. But I'm sure someone will correct me if that is incorrect. Even if it wasn't, people would complain if they didn't ask for comments. No way for FWP to win in this situation.

They can ask. Acting on the demands of western Montana for our mule deer is a different story.

 

[cgasner1]

Asking hunters what they want is a joke. I want a moose sheep and goat tag every year.

Not our fault your poor

 

[Badlandcat]

They asked for comments, so no decision was made yet. If hunters want to do it, then they are F’g themselves…again.

I’m sure Waterfowl hunters have complained about refuges since before the internet, but it sure has helped show how short-sighted some of them can be.

True, but', refuges = birds. pretty simple.

 

[antlerradar]

Tell me why.

The short answer is it smells a lot like UPOM.

This proposal will incentives harboring of elk. Harbor elk so that numbers are chronically over objectivity and the tags you want will be much easier to get when the unit goes general. Public land and your neighbors be damned as long UPOM gets their tags to sell.

Elk in eastern Montana will not tolerate general tag pressure. At least in Western Montana elk can go farther back in the mountains. In eastern Montana if an elk runs farther than a mile from hunters on a road he is most likely running closer to another road and hunters. The only safe place for an elk during the season will be on private where little hunting is allowed. We already have issues with elk moving to sanctuaries with limited tag numbers. Go to general tags and the elk will be leaving public in greater numbers and sooner in the season. Because of this we could very well see fewer elk harvested under general licenses than when tags are limited. Public hunters will almost certainly be killing fewer elk. Even if we do kill more elk, most of the increase will be bulls and that will not do much to keep elk numbers at objective.

Mule deer will take a beating. All the new general elk hunters will also have a general deer tag or two burning a hole in their pocket. Even more pressure on the mule deer herd that is struggling with the current hunting pressure.

 

[Ben Lamb]

The short answer is it smells a lot like UPOM.

This proposal will incentives harboring of elk. Harbor elk so that numbers are chronically over objectivity and the tags you want will be much easier to get when the unit goes general. Public land and your neighbors be damned as long UPOM gets their tags to sell.

Elk in eastern Montana will not tolerate general tag pressure. At least in Western Montana elk can go farther back in the mountains. In eastern Montana if an elk runs farther than a mile from hunters on a road he is most likely running closer to another road and hunters. The only safe place for an elk during the season will be on private where little hunting is allowed. We already have issues with elk moving to sanctuaries with limited tag numbers. Go to general tags and the elk will be leaving public in greater numbers and sooner in the season. Because of this we could very well see fewer elk harvested under general licenses than when tags are limited. Public hunters will almost certainly be killing fewer elk. Even if we do kill more elk, most of the increase will be bulls and that will not do much to keep elk numbers at objective.

Mule deer will take a beating. All the new general elk hunters will also have a general deer tag or two burning a hole in their pocket. Even more pressure on the mule deer herd that is struggling with the current hunting pressure.

Art,
I think we're confusing the issue with each other. The page 56 stuff from the EMP is what you're talking about, my thought is simply that if you are in an over objective area, make the A tag valid for cow elk only, only on private land. You'd keep the permits for bulls and you'd have to have a permit for cows on public.

Just trying to think of ways to push elk off of private and keep pressure on public low.

 

[antlerradar]

Art,
I think we're confusing the issue with each other. The page 56 stuff from the EMP is what you're talking about, my thought is simply that if you are in an over objective area, make the A tag valid for cow elk only, only on private land. You'd keep the permits for bulls and you'd have to have a permit for cows on public.

Just trying to think of ways to push elk off of private and keep pressure on public low.

Could be, I was going by what was presented at Miles City.
Nothing wrong with the A tag valid on private land. That is already done here in 799, plus you can even shoot a spike on your A tag. We have had several people use their A tag on spikes as they seem to stick around a few more days longer than the cows after the shooting starts.

 

[rogerthat]

Montana FWP is bent on F'g with everyone. The best goose hunting in the state period.
If they let people hunt the river, it'll just push them out.
I feel very sorry for our children, FWP is going to make sure that they will give up hunting.

I’m making comments right now. What is the purpose and history of the closure area? Does this closure keep the geese in the area? Like what you said on the river?

 

[cgasner1]

I’m making comments right now. What is the purpose and history of the closure area? Does this closure keep the geese in the area? Like what you said on the river?

From what I got out of the Billings meeting most years it wouldn’t matter that much due to low water level or the river being froze. To me when I read that it seemed like they wanted to keep people off it to not mess the leases up in hysham

 

[bigsky2]

I’m making comments right now. What is the purpose and history of the closure area? Does this closure keep the geese in the area? Like what you said on the river?

Yes, the closure is to give the birds a safe place to roost.

 

[bigsky2]

From what I got out of the Billings meeting most years it wouldn’t matter that much due to low water level or the river being froze. To me when I read that it seemed like they wanted to keep people off it to not mess the leases up in hysham

I highly doubt that is the case. That stretch has been closed since 1959. Not very likely that there were leases around there in 1959.

 

[antlerradar]

I highly doubt that is the case. That stretch has been closed since 1959. Not very likely that there were leases around there in 1959.

I think it is the people now leasing that want to keep it closed not FWP.

 

[cgasner1]

I highly doubt that is the case. That stretch has been closed since 1959. Not very likely that there were leases around there in 1959.

I agree but it kind of seemed like that was the reason they didn’t wanna open it. I don’t know how much effect it would actually have due to the access

 

[rogerthat]

Comments submitted. I ended up staying out of the melee on the sky carp closure due to lack of knowledge. I supported every possible proposal to protect our mule deer. Hopefully all of you can do the same, setting aside your desire for unfettered opportunity and acknowledging the mule deer resource just can’t take it.