Save $100 on the Leupold VX-3HD

Hunter Days Per Elk Harvested : The Metric That Matters?

Nameless Range

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 6, 2013
Messages
5,788
Location
Western Montana
I have some time off of work today so figured I would share something I have been thinking about.

Many different metrics need to be considered when analyzing the health of a hunting district and the efficacy of management strategies and what that means for hunt-quality. We often talk about populations (raw numbers and objective status), success rates per hunter, etc. A stat I think can be incredibly meaningful that I don't see thrown around that often is Hunter-Days-Per-Elk-Harvested. Such a data point tells the closest thing we have to literal human energy per elk harvested and what hunters can expect. This data may be skewed in some districts, like the Elkhorns for example, because hunters may be pursuing an animal of a specific age class and thus passing on elk. Additionally, not all districts have the same tag management structure. Some allow a cow to be killed on a general tag and others do not. The fact is though, in most of Montana's hunting districts, an elk hunter will kill the first legal elk they have an opportunity to. I believe this to be a functionally-universal truth, with outliers to this maxim existing in the single digits percentage-wise. This data also controls for closeness to urban areas, or HDs that get hit hard. We may see HDs with a high success rate (harvests per hunter), but they may have a disproportionately high hunter-days-per-elk-killed (because they are close to population centers and thus easy for tons of hunters to hit repeatedly).

All the data I am referencing was acquired at this site: https://myfwp.mt.gov/fwpPub/harvestReports

I have attached .txt files that can be viewed in excel, each a different tab in the spreadsheet I am working in, breaking Montana's Hunting Districts down with the additional column of hunter days per elk killed for the 2020 season, as well as that district's 2020 objective status. There are tabs in the spreadsheet so folks can see the raw data, as well as data by status - all broken down by district.

I think this data could be useful when the official proposals for the merging of districts comes along. It could be the case the a district with abysmal stats could be combined with stats from another district that would obfuscate the true story on the landscape. I also think this will be critical data to point to as a new EMP comes along.

One district I looked closely at is one I enjoy spending time in and rarely killing elk in - HD 350. In 2020 in HD 350, a district considered "over objective" that is almost entirely public land or private land enrolled in block management, it took 93 hunter-days-per-elk-harvested.

(HD 350)
1632164846892.jpeg

One could also look at things regionally:

1632164815616.png

I want to be clear that all of this is 2020 data acquired using FWPs Harvest Report website. https://myfwp.mt.gov/fwpPub/harvestReports


Something I think could be meaningful, particularly as the new EMP comes along, is comparing Montana with other state's analogous data. Using the data in the spreadsheet, one could get as granular as hunter-days per bull or cow or calf. Would we find that Montana's "opportunity" really means abysmal chances at killing an elk relative to what our neighboring states offer? I don't know and would be curious. If anyone has such data for other states, feel free to share.
 

Attachments

  • AllDistricts.txt
    8.6 KB · Views: 25
  • AtObjective.txt
    1.6 KB · Views: 6
  • BelowObjective.txt
    1.3 KB · Views: 5
  • OverObjective.txt
    4.8 KB · Views: 14
I have some time off of work today so figured I would share something I have been thinking about.

Many different metrics need to be considered when analyzing the health of a hunting district and the efficacy of management strategies and what that means for hunt-quality. We often talk about populations (raw numbers and objective status), success rates per hunter, etc. A stat I think can be incredibly meaningful that I don't see thrown around that often is Hunter-Days-Per-Elk-Harvested. Such a data point tells the closest thing we have to literal human energy per elk harvested and what hunters can expect. This data may be skewed in some districts, like the Elkhorns for example, because hunters may be pursuing an animal of a specific age class and thus passing on elk. Additionally, not all districts have the same tag management structure. Some allow a cow to be killed on a general tag and others do not. The fact is though, in most of Montana's hunting districts, an elk hunter will kill the first legal elk they have an opportunity to. I believe this to be a functionally-universal truth, with outliers to this maxim existing in the single digits percentage-wise. This data also controls for closeness to urban areas, or HDs that get hit hard. We may see HDs with a high success rate (harvests per hunter), but they may have a disproportionately high hunter-days-per-elk-killed (because they are close to population centers and thus easy for tons of hunters to hit repeatedly).

All the data I am referencing was acquired at this site: https://myfwp.mt.gov/fwpPub/harvestReports

I have attached .txt files that can be viewed in excel, each a different tab in the spreadsheet I am working in, breaking Montana's Hunting Districts down with the additional column of hunter days per elk killed for the 2020 season, as well as that district's 2020 objective status. There are tabs in the spreadsheet so folks can see the raw data, as well as data by status - all broken down by district.

I think this data could be useful when the official proposals for the merging of districts comes along. It could be the case the a district with abysmal stats could be combined with stats from another district that would obfuscate the true story on the landscape. I also think this will be critical data to point to as a new EMP comes along.

One district I looked closely at is one I enjoy spending time in and rarely killing elk in - HD 350. In 2020 in HD 350, a district considered "over objective" that is almost entirely public land or private land enrolled in block management, it took 93 hunter-days-per-elk-harvested.

(HD 350)
View attachment 195017

One could also look at things regionally:

View attachment 195016

I want to be clear that all of this is 2020 data acquired using FWPs Harvest Report website. https://myfwp.mt.gov/fwpPub/harvestReports


Something I think could be meaningful, particularly as the new EMP comes along, is comparing Montana with other state's analogous data. Using the data in the spreadsheet, one could get as granular as hunter-days per bull or cow or calf. Would we find that Montana's "opportunity" really means abysmal chances at killing an elk relative to what our neighboring states offer? I don't know and would be curious. If anyone has such data for other states, feel free to share.
I think hunter days is a reasonable proxy for effort needed. As with all statistics, its not perfect, but that is mostly because the data isn't measured precisely (FWP asks hunters to guesstimate how many days they hunted) and one key element isn't asked that I wonder about - whether the hunter is DIY or used a guide. I'm not surprised that WY is so much better.

per @mulecreek, this is the WY forecast for 2021.

"The expected harvest this year should be about 2.5% higher than last year and Game and Fish expects 6,779 more hunters than in 2020. Wildlife managers expect 42% of hunters to be successful, down from 2020’s 46%. They calculate it will take 17.6 hunter-days to kill an elk, a shorter time than the 18 days in 2020. The figure includes days spent by unsuccessful hunters.
All told, elk hunters will spend 476,790 days afield pursuing elk, Game and Fish calculates."
 
Yep, it's no secret that the elk hunting is better in Wyoming. I can't, for the life of me, understand why folks keep moving to Montana!;)

Probably similar reasons to why I take my gun for a walk in HD 350 from time to time even though it will take me 3 rifle seasons worth of walking every day of the season to find that elusive wapiti. 😂
 
Probably similar reasons to why I take my gun for a walk in HD 350 from time to time even though it will take me 3 rifle seasons worth of walking every day of the season to find that elusive wapiti. 😂
I have a similar place in the Absaroka-Beartooth area that I like to take armed death marches through at least a few times a year.

I’ve been focusing my archery season this year on a completely new mountain range I’ve never really hunted but always wanted to, and I’ve been pleasantly surprised.
 
Probably similar reasons to why I take my gun for a walk in HD 350 from time to time even though it will take me 3 rifle seasons worth of walking every day of the season to find that elusive wapiti. 😂
The average of CO OTC units is 30 days.

So units where anyone in the country can show up and buy a archery/rifle tag... everyone's "back up plan".

Seems like that should be the yardstick for "decent chance at success".
 
Aaaaaaand there goes my optimism for this season 😂
Really interesting data though. I'm still kind of processing and comparing but I find it interesting that lots of "over objective" units do have lots of hunter days per elk harvest (with such low success rates).

Also from personal experience, looking at units that do require harvest reporting and knowing that in these places, a vast majority of elk (bulls and cows) in the unit are harvested on private land...the hunter days per elk could be skewed a bit?

....lots of hunter days in certain units though 😳 really puts things into perspective.
 
I think the days per hunter is what you want to look at. Otherwise areas with lots of hunters will have more hunter days even if success rate is the same (or even better).
 
I think the days per hunter is what you want to look at. Otherwise areas with lots of hunters will have more hunter days even if success rate is the same (or even better).
Oops, I'm wrong. I misread the "days per hunter" as being average days required to harvest an elk.
 
MTNTOUGH - Use promo code RANDY for 30 days free

Forum statistics

Threads
110,816
Messages
1,935,444
Members
34,888
Latest member
Jack the bear
Back
Top