Montana 2025 Legislative Session

[cgasner1]

Especially not game you can get within 100 or so yards of. It all maketh more sense now.

Believe it or not but a lot of public real estate also closes to public access to due winter range.

 

[cgasner1]

Had another phone call gonna keep at this as long as needed

 

[SixPoint]

What’s also clear is that roughly 81.8 percent of licensed elk hunters in Montana end the season with no elk. 16 percent harvest one. Some 2 percent get two elk. Yet, according to FWP, only .2 percent shoot the maximum allowed three elk in a license year.

When it comes to managing elk on private lands it's not going to get done by the 81.8% of folks that don't kill elk. It's the 16% and the .2% that can show up on the day they are supposed to hunt and get it done. Dealing with the public trying to manage elk is exhausting. Most folks with an elk tag in their pocket aren't capable at killing and dealing with one elk, let alone multiple elk. I'm not sure I love the idea of folks shooting 4 elk a year either but from a management perspective I get it.

 

[Forkyfinder]

When it comes to managing elk on private lands it's not going to get done by the 81.8% of folks that don't kill elk. It's the 16% and the .2% that can show up on the day they are supposed to hunt and get it done. Dealing with the public trying to manage elk is exhausting. Most folks with an elk tag in their pocket aren't capable at killing and dealing with one elk, let alone multiple elk. I'm not sure I love the idea of folks shooting 4 elk a year either but from a management perspective I get it.

Why are damage hunts so underutilized then?

 

[SixPoint]

Why are damage hunts so underutilized then?

probably because 90% of the folks on the damage roster aren't capable of killing an elk, can't come on the day they are needed, don't even answer the phone when they are called, don't have a gun that is sighted in, can't hike, didn't even realize what they signed up for... i could go on and on. Successfully managing elk, or deer for that matter, is not just a matter of getting more access. It's getting the ninja's out there that are self sufficient.

 

[Forkyfinder]

probably because 90% of the folks on the damage roster aren't capable of killing an elk, can't come on the day they are needed, don't even answer the phone when they are called, don't have a gun that is sighted in, can't hike, didn't even realize what they signed up for... i could go on and on. Successfully managing elk, or deer for that matter, is not just a matter of getting more access. It's getting the ninja's out there that are self sufficient.

Based on 7- 50 ish of those damage tags being issued per year in the last 10 years - i dont think there is data to validate your point about that.

 

[SixPoint]

Based on 7- 50 ish of those damage tags being issued per year in the last 10 years - i dont think there is data to validate your point about that.

I think we are talking about two different things. I believe you are referring to the Supplemental License Hunt and not a Damage Hunt. Damage Hunts, via the hunt roster, are what I was referring to. They are mostly a joke. Supplemental Hunts are great, and I completely agree with you. They are extremely effective and give landowners the flexibility to manage the hunt. Only downside is it is capped at 12 tags and only one tag per hunter. They are good for moving elk that are hitting haystacks or ag fields but not a great tool for reducing populations because of the limitations. Sorry our wires got crossed.

 

[cgasner1]

Based on 7- 50 ish of those damage tags being issued per year in the last 10 years - i dont think there is data to validate your point about that.

My buddy use to go do a damage hunt pretty regularly. They quit doing it because the ranch hand got sick of dealing with people. The straw that broke the camels back was the guy that showed up with his grandpas 30-30 and then did his best attempt at a mag dump on a herd at 400 yards. Sometimes we are our own worst enemy

 

[MTGomer]

Reminder: no ideas originally come from Loge. He doesn’t have the mental wherewithal to do that.
He’s just a useful idiot/tool of those that hate hunting.

He is not worth trying to explain anything to or ration with. He’s a narrow minded, unintelligent moron that already has his mind made up on everything because it has been made for him by others.

 

[Flynarrow]

When it comes to managing elk on private lands it's not going to get done by the 81.8% of folks that don't kill elk. It's the 16% and the .2% that can show up on the day they are supposed to hunt and get it done. Dealing with the public trying to manage elk is exhausting. Most folks with an elk tag in their pocket aren't capable at killing and dealing with one elk, let alone multiple elk. I'm not sure I love the idea of folks shooting 4 elk a year either but from a management perspective I get it.

I recognize that some hunters are relatively unskilled. However, most Montana hunters would be happy with one elk, and could do so relatively effectively if they had access to them. In many Montana landscapes, virtually all elk are safely hanging out on private lands inacessible to the average hunter. Door knockers not welcome.

In Montana, elk are still the public's elk. They are not private elk or a landowner's elk. Why should Galt and his like sell public elk bulls for thousands and then let only his hired hands and close friends kill and load up a trailer full of cow elk carcasses? And totally keep the public from harvesting any elk? If you like privatizing elk this moves dangerously closer to it.

 

[Forkyfinder]

My buddy use to go do a damage hunt pretty regularly. They quit doing it because the ranch hand got sick of dealing with people. The straw that broke the camels back was the guy that showed up with his grandpas 30-30 and then did his best attempt at a mag dump on a herd at 400 yards. Sometimes we are our own worst enemy

I believe you.... But when theres 15 or so guys a year using it over the last 10 years - i think its more of an excuse than a reality.

The odds someone shows up with a rifle set up to shoot that far, and further, have never been better.

 

[cgasner1]

I believe you.... But when theres 15 or so guys a year using it over the last 10 years - i think its more of an excuse than a reality.

The odds someone shows up with a rifle set up to shoot that far, and further, have never been better.

this isn’t a issue I’m really gonna get all fired up about but it’s such a hard situation to deal with. Especially when you look at Wyoming this isn’t an isolated thing. But when people start comparing how many people shot what it makes these elk sound like a participation trophy.

 

[Mountain Mule]

Without a proper vetting program for damage hunts it's impossible to know who will show up. If you only have elk on your property 10-15 times a season, you want to make the most impact on that herd as you possibly can when elk are present. It only takes a few duds and serious wounding events to turn landowners off to damage hunts. Often times landowners participating in a herd reduction program have adjacent landowners without the same goals in mind, thus why the herd got out of control to begin with. Most working ranches don't have unfettered access to these problem elk, but they often come through like a bull in a China shop from time to time in massive numbers.

If there was a way to vet hunters that can sign up for the damage hunts, that would be better. Same as limiting the hunter to being local to the property (faster response time when elk are present) and have a list of their avalibilities to hunt (so you're not making 47179 phone calls to turn up 2-3 avalible and competent hunters)

It's a shame when you only get a crack at the problem herd every couple of weeks and you have someone that is incompetent show up to simply come out and bump the herd off. Just to have them come back in the same numbers and cause mass amounts of damage at a later date.

When it comes to connecting hunters with landowners I really do believe a state liaison position would be beneficial as well as vetting the hunt roster in a way to know you're getting competent and avalible hunters. Some landowners could even add stipulations that hunters have two valid elk tags in their pockets to make sure you maximize the harvest when herds are avalible and grossly over objective.

I don't believe we need more tags per hunter, but rather an improvement of our current systems and processes to make them more efficient and less stressful for those involved.

Let the people shooting their unsighted 30-30 at 400 yards participate in public land hunts and save the management hunts for those that take it seriously and can have a real impact on the management of our herds. Remember that keeping herds within objective in some units can be beneficial to the resource overall, that's what we all want or should want in the long run, while still maintaining opportunity for the general public (granted they put some work in on their end).

 

[SixPoint]

I recognize that some hunters are relatively unskilled. However, most Montana hunters would be happy with one elk, and could do so relatively effectively if they had access to them. In many Montana landscapes, virtually all elk are safely hanging out on private lands inacessible to the average hunter. Door knockers not welcome.

In Montana, elk are still the public's elk. They are not private elk or a landowner's elk. Why should Galt and his like sell public elk bulls for thousands and then let only his hired hands and close friends kill and load up a trailer full of cow elk carcasses? And totally keep the public from harvesting any elk? If you like privatizing elk this moves dangerously closer to it.

I get it. It’s frustrating. But having been on the other side of the coin I can tell you that there are a lot of other property owners out there besides Galt that are wonderful people trying to do the right thing. You can provide more folks access but the majority of those folks probably aren’t going to be successful. Having a heavily managed hunt with serious hand holding is the only effective way I’ve found it possible to reduce populations. That gets expensive quick and the burnout from dealing with hunters is real.

 

[Forkyfinder]

I get it. It’s frustrating. But having been on the other side of the coin I can tell you that there are a lot of other property owners out there besides Galt that are wonderful people trying to do the right thing. You can provide more folks access but the majority of those folks probably aren’t going to be successful. Having a heavily managed hunt with serious hand holding is the only effective way I’ve found it possible to reduce populations. That gets expensive quick and the burnout from dealing with hunters is real.

Have you asked people from your community, perhaps that you know, to come help deal with your elk problem?

 

[cgasner1]

Without a proper vetting program for damage hunts it's impossible to know who will show up. If you only have elk on your property 10-15 times a season, you want to make the most impact on that herd as you possibly can when elk are present. It only takes a few duds and serious wounding events to turn landowners off to damage hunts. Often times landowners participating in a herd reduction program have adjacent landowners without the same goals in mind, thus why the herd got out of control to begin with. Most working ranches don't have unfettered access to these problem elk, but they often come through like a bull in a China shop from time to time in massive numbers.

If there was a way to vet hunters that can sign up for the damage hunts, that would be better. Same as limiting the hunter to being local to the property (faster response time when elk are present) and have a list of their avalibilities to hunt (so you're not making 47179 phone calls to turn up 2-3 avalible and competent hunters)

It's a shame when you only get a crack at the problem herd every couple of weeks and you have someone that is incompetent show up to simply come out and bump the herd off. Just to have them come back in the same numbers and cause mass amounts of damage at a later date.

When it comes to connecting hunters with landowners I really do believe a state liaison position would be beneficial as well as vetting the hunt roster in a way to know you're getting competent and avalible hunters. Some landowners could even add stipulations that hunters have two valid elk tags in their pockets to make sure you maximize the harvest when herds are avalible and grossly over objective.

I don't believe we need more tags per hunter, but rather an improvement of our current systems and processes to make them more efficient and less stressful for those involved.

Let the people shooting their unsighted 30-30 at 400 yards participate in public land hunts and save the management hunts for those that take it seriously and can have a real impact on the management of our herds. Remember that keeping herds within objective in some units can be beneficial to the resource overall, that's what we all want or should want in the long run, while still maintaining opportunity for the general public (granted they put some work in on their end).

Thanks for the thoughtful reply but a big part also seems to be the 20% of landowners that continue to harbor the elk. That number is random also

 

[SixPoint]

Have you asked people from your community, perhaps that you know, to come help deal with your elk problem?

Yup, exclusively. I maintain a list of folks from the local community that are proven killers and are good people, or ones who buy me beer.

 

[Mountain Mule]

Thanks for the thoughtful reply but a big part also seems to be the 20% of landowners that continue to harbor the elk. That number is random also

No doubt. We need to find ways to work with landowners that are willing to work with hunters though. We may never crack the nut that is the wealthy landowner, but at least we can aid those that are trying to help with management by giving them efficient tools, especially the ones that are adjacent to one of these hoarders. Caving in and allowing them to be king of management of elk on their property without some sort of access agreement, even if it is small, isn't really an option in my book. I hope others feel the same way.

 

[SixPoint]

Without a proper vetting program for damage hunts it's impossible to know who will show up. If you only have elk on your property 10-15 times a season, you want to make the most impact on that herd as you possibly can when elk are present. It only takes a few duds and serious wounding events to turn landowners off to damage hunts. Often times landowners participating in a herd reduction program have adjacent landowners without the same goals in mind, thus why the herd got out of control to begin with. Most working ranches don't have unfettered access to these problem elk, but they often come through like a bull in a China shop from time to time in massive numbers.

If there was a way to vet hunters that can sign up for the damage hunts, that would be better. Same as limiting the hunter to being local to the property (faster response time when elk are present) and have a list of their avalibilities to hunt (so you're not making 47179 phone calls to turn up 2-3 avalible and competent hunters)

It's a shame when you only get a crack at the problem herd every couple of weeks and you have someone that is incompetent show up to simply come out and bump the herd off. Just to have them come back in the same numbers and cause mass amounts of damage at a later date.

When it comes to connecting hunters with landowners I really do believe a state liaison position would be beneficial as well as vetting the hunt roster in a way to know you're getting competent and avalible hunters. Some landowners could even add stipulations that hunters have two valid elk tags in their pockets to make sure you maximize the harvest when herds are avalible and grossly over objective.

I don't believe we need more tags per hunter, but rather an improvement of our current systems and processes to make them more efficient and less stressful for those involved.

Let the people shooting their unsighted 30-30 at 400 yards participate in public land hunts and save the management hunts for those that take it seriously and can have a real impact on the management of our herds. Remember that keeping herds within objective in some units can be beneficial to the resource overall, that's what we all want or should want in the long run, while still maintaining opportunity for the general public (granted they put some work in on their end).

You nailed it!

 

[Mountain Mule]

Yup, exclusively. I maintain a list of folks from the local community that are proven killers and are good people, or ones who buy me beer.

Just let me know what kind of beer you drink and I'll be there next year