Montana 2026 Elk Proposal

[MTLabrador]

When your primary goal is to be at or below an arbitrary population number, this is what you get.

I was talking to a buddy from work who grew up hunting elk in a lot of the same areas I did during this downward spiral. He made the point that FWP manages pheasants better than elk, and that everyone understands why we don’t want to kill hens, but they throw a fit when they can’t go scorched earth on elk. He’s not wrong.

 

[El Jason]

Time for the rubber to meet the road…

While this could temporarily reduce departmental revenue, the impact is quantifiable and manageable. If no nonresident B-licenses were sold, the estimated revenue loss would be about $1.1 million (4,000 tags × $275). Divided
across all 2024 elk licenses sold (141,379), this equates to a $7.80 increase per resident license—a modest adjustment.

 

[PoleX]

Agreed, it seems the shoulder seasons and additional cow tags has really taken away the incentive to use a general tag on a cow.

So does this mean less elk are getting pressured during general season because people have B tags to fall back on? I would think the public land hunter would be much more motivated to punch their tag on a cow earlier if they had one tag valid on public. I know the hunters I know only bull hunt then shoot cows late. I don’t know of the net result would be considered more or less pressure overall?

Again, go back to Game Damage hunts. It pretty much eliminates NRs because hunters have to be flexible on timing and is a very targeted approach.

Makes a lot of sense, no mental gymnastics needed.

 

[El Jason]

So does this mean less elk are getting pressured during general season because people have B tags to fall back on?

No. They spend all season looking for a bull.

 

[Gerald Martin]

So does this mean less elk are getting pressured during general season because people have B tags to fall back on? I would think the public land hunter would be much more motivated to punch their tag on a cow earlier if they had one tag valid on public. I know the hunters I know only bull hunt then shoot cows late. I don’t know of the net result would be considered more or less pressure overall?


Makes a lot of sense, no mental gymnastics needed.

Under current regulation in the area I hunt regularly there are 500 B-licenses in addition to being able to shoot a cow on my general tag. If I am successful in drawing a B-license I will shoot the first cow I can and continue to hunt the rest of the season for a bull. Those are a lot of additional hunter days on public land when multiplied by 499 other hunters doing the same thing.

If I don’t draw the B-license in a lot of years I’m filling the freezer with the first legal elk, cow or bull and not hunting that trailhead or unit any further. I’m not competing with other hunters or adding pressure to that public land.

 

[El Jason]

At the end of the day, this proposal is not perfect. It’s a step in the right direction.

I think it’s entirely fair to say the unintended consequences of this proposal are probably still better in the long run for the public land hunter than maintaining the status quo.

If you wait until you have a perfect proposal, you’ll and up doing nothing.

 

[El Jason]

The whole basis of hunting regulations is based on honor and most of it is hard or near impossible to enforce. I.e. legal shooting light, LE areas, etc

Not really.

 

[huntin24/7]

These threads always remind me why it’s so hard to get any positive changes in management. There is a lot of what’s best for me attitude and not for the resource. It’s significantly worse on the MT Facebook hunting sites than here.

 

[Gerald Martin]

In reading my first responses and after talking with Ian I realized I should have been more expansive in my explanation of what cow harvest opportunities will look like across the state.

In units that don’t have either sex or antlerless/brow tine bull regulations for general season there will still be opportunity for cow harvest but will be by elk permit for those units and will require the validation of your general license. Those antlerless permits would be valid on public land and the numbers would be determined by biologists and public participation during the seasonal meetings.
If population objectives aren’t being met additional B-licenses could be added as needed but those B-licenses would be private land only.

 

[PoleX]

Under current regulation in the area I hunt regularly there are 500 B-licenses in addition to being able to shoot a cow on my general tag. If I am successful in drawing a B-license I will shoot the first cow I can and continue to hunt the rest of the season for a bull. Those are a lot of additional hunter days on public land when multiplied by 499 other hunters doing the same thing.

If I don’t draw the B-license in a lot of years I’m filling the freezer with the first legal elk, cow or bull and not hunting that trailhead or unit any further. I’m not competing with other hunters or adding pressure to that public land.

I generally agree but think there’s still a lot of hunters that forgo hunter days during the general season on heavily pressured public cause they have a B tag to fall back on. Usually B tags are favorable for a resident looking to get an elk in the freezer as a lot of pressure dies off and elk are easier to find and hunt. Just my 2cents.

A lot of guys on here turn this into the “we don’t need to kill every last one” argument. I have no desire to kill every last one. Just not interested in blindly giving up opportunity, when I can’t make sense how it solves the problem in claims to solve. We’re all on the same team and want the same results. Just have different ideas on how to get there.

 

[Gerald Martin]

I generally agree but think there’s still a lot of hunters that forgo hunter days during the general season on heavily pressured public cause they have a B tag to fall back on. Usually B tags are favorable for a resident looking to get an elk in the freezer as a lot of pressure dies off and elk are easier to find and hunt. Just my 2cents.

A lot of guys on here turn this into the “we don’t need to kill every last one” argument. I have no desire to kill every last one. Just not interested in blindly giving up opportunity, when I can’t make sense how it solves the problem in claims to solve. We’re all on the same team and want the same results. Just have different ideas on how to get there.

In the areas you refer to can’t you kill a cow with your general license? If you need a B-license to kill a cow, that B-license could easily be converted to an antlerless permit.

Since permits require the use of either-sex tag and limit you to only hunting a cow in that unit for the entire time the permit is valid it should make it even easier for meat hunters to get a cow.

 

[El Jason]

These threads always remind me why it’s so hard to get any positive changes in management. There is a lot of what’s best for me attitude and not for the resource. It’s significantly worse on the MT Facebook hunting sites than here.

I guarantee you FWP offices are getting phone calls about extending the season.

 

[huntin24/7]

I guarantee you FWP offices are getting phone calls about extending the season.

I have no doubt you’re right.

 

[bigsky2]

So does this mean less elk are getting pressured during general season because people have B tags to fall back on? I would think the public land hunter would be much more motivated to punch their tag on a cow earlier if they had one tag valid on public. I know the hunters I know only bull hunt then shoot cows late. I don’t know of the net result would be considered more or less pressure overall?


Makes a lot of sense, no mental gymnastics needed.

I see the same thing- hardly anyone using a general tag on a cow because they know they have B tags or shoulder seasons to fall back on. They can dedicate most of their season to looking for a bull. A lot of people like to put an elk in the freezer every year regardless, and if they didn't have all those fallback options, I think people would be more likely to use their general tag on a cow. I would think it would reduce hunter days.

 

[SAJ-99]

I guarantee you FWP offices are getting phone calls about extending the season.

The goal of those in charge is to find a "solution" that makes people happy. It is impossible to make everyone happy. Those that are happy stop calling, while those that aren't will grab their phone.

It is also impossible to predict how a change in rules will change human behavior and eventually get you to an end goal. For those in decision-making seats, the path seems clear while reality often takes a couple of years to set it. I can't say I pay much attention to this nonsense since I moved, but I do laugh that the main point is they are looking to make tweaks to an elk management plan that was just created to replace the previous plan that had the exact same problems.

Stop beating around the bush with these ideas. Just shoot them from a helicopter and donate the meat to the poor MT hunters that can't afford to pay a reasonable price for a hunting tag. That is the most direct solution.

 

[flatgo]

This proposal would essentially return us to the regulations Montana had in the late 1990s and early 2000s—what many of us consider the golden age of public land elk hunting from roughly 2004 to 2008. For those who may not remember those regulations, harvesting a cow required using your general elk license, and most districts offered cow harvest only through permits, with a few districts providing either-sex opportunity. If I’m remembering correctly, even the late-season Gardiner hunt was not a B-tag hunt and required the use of a general elk license, though I may be mistaken as I was fairly young at the time. B-tags for cows are actually a relatively recent development.


From my perspective, this change is not taking away opportunity—because when many of us grew up hunting, this type of B-tag opportunity didn’t exist in the first place. Instead, I see this proposal as a strong step toward restoring the regulatory structure that helped create the exceptional elk hunting we experienced in Montana during that era. It may not be a perfect solution, but I believe it is an excellent starting point.

 

[El Jason]

For those who may not remember those regulations, harvesting a cow required using your general elk license, and most districts offered cow harvest only through permits, with a few districts providing either-sex opportunity. If I’m remembering correctly, even the late-season Gardiner hunt was not a B-tag hunt and required the use of a general elk license, though I may be mistaken as I was fairly young at the time.

This is correct. You had to choose the antlerless permit during the LE drawings. Many of the better cow permits had to be first choice if you wanted one. If you drew a cow permit, you could not hunt bull elk in that same hunting district.

 

[Forkyfinder]

Not really.

Very few poachers are caught.

You should have more brain power than disagreeing just to do it.

 

[cgasner1]

Did you actually read the proposal? It’s at the bottom of Randy’s post

From my understanding if a guy pulls 410-21 he would need to burn his general elk tag with it when he harvested. But if he had also drawn 410-00 he is now no longer able to legally fill that tag because it would also require to punch your general. I don’t hunt this unit but I also believe that if you draw the 410-00 tag you are allowed to shoot 2 cows and one being tagged with your general elk tag. If I have this wrong please inform me. On the phone Ian told me 1 elk on public that’s it.

 

[Nameless Range]

Not to derail too much, but I still hear some talking points that act as if it’s 2022 and not 2025. When we adopted our new elk plan in 2023, we went from a statewide elk population goal of 92,000 elk - which caused all sorts of consternation- to what is now a range of 96,000 - 151,000. The use of ranges (which mostly went up compared to our old plan ) within districts as opposed to hard numbers, has really alleviated the pressure the agency has to hammer elk in tons of geographies.

It’s not perfect, and there certainly are some districts still over objective, but an amendment like this is only possible because of that plan. We can finally start to at least consider serious proposals regarding the distribution of elk and elk pressure, as opposed to just trying to bring raw numbers down.