bigskyblueman
Member
Last edited:
Montana closing sage grouse hunting?
- Thread starter bigskyblueman
- Start date
shoots-straight
Well-known member
It's a sad day.
mdunc8
Well-known member
That sucks. Didn't realize they were thinking about closing it down.
shoots-straight
Well-known member
You wouldn't think there would be a influx of bird hunters in those areas that the birds were doing OK?
Flynarrow
Well-known member
Dan Vermillion, Chairman
Fish, Wildlife and Parks Commission
P.O. Box 200701
Helena, MT 59620-0701
Dear Chairman Vermillion and Members of the Commission:
As you may be aware, Montana Backcountry Hunters and Anglers has strongly advocated for sage grouse and their habitat in both the Montana Sage Grouse Conservation Plan, as well as in all the major BLM Resource Management Plans currently being revised across Montana. We are committed to preservation of sage grouse populations and their habitats across Montana. That being said, our organization has not seen science based evidence that would justify ending sage grouse hunting on a statewide basis.
We believe the regulation of sage grouse hunting should be premised on the best available science. Therefore, we applaud the recent division of the state into 3 subunits for the better management of sage grouse populations. We also support restricting sage grouse hunting if the collective data identifies hunting as a substantial mortality factor in declining sage grouse populations. At this time it is our understanding that hunting related sage grouse mortality is not having a major influence upon Montana sage grouse population dynamics.
Sage grouse hunting is culturally important and a true Montana tradition. From experience, we know that re-initiating a hunting season once it has been closed will be politically difficult and likely not to occur. Hunters, including our members, are important advocates for sage grouse and its habitat that will lose some interest in the species if there is no hunting season. Therefore, we request that each of Montana’s sage grouse populations be treated based upon the population condition of their management subunit. We also request that you considering less severe options, such as a reduction in season length or bag limits, rather than a blanket state-wide season-long closure.
Research has provided substantial data documenting the long-term adverse effects of human actions such as habitat fragmentation, cultivated agriculture, oil and gas development and mismanaged grazing upon sage grouse populations. Thus, our organization would advocate for a more critical eye toward these major factors influencing sage grouse populations versus the limited impact of hunting.
Sincerely,
s/greg munther
Greg L Munther, Co-Chairman
Montana Backcountry Hunters and Anglers
Fish, Wildlife and Parks Commission
P.O. Box 200701
Helena, MT 59620-0701
Dear Chairman Vermillion and Members of the Commission:
As you may be aware, Montana Backcountry Hunters and Anglers has strongly advocated for sage grouse and their habitat in both the Montana Sage Grouse Conservation Plan, as well as in all the major BLM Resource Management Plans currently being revised across Montana. We are committed to preservation of sage grouse populations and their habitats across Montana. That being said, our organization has not seen science based evidence that would justify ending sage grouse hunting on a statewide basis.
We believe the regulation of sage grouse hunting should be premised on the best available science. Therefore, we applaud the recent division of the state into 3 subunits for the better management of sage grouse populations. We also support restricting sage grouse hunting if the collective data identifies hunting as a substantial mortality factor in declining sage grouse populations. At this time it is our understanding that hunting related sage grouse mortality is not having a major influence upon Montana sage grouse population dynamics.
Sage grouse hunting is culturally important and a true Montana tradition. From experience, we know that re-initiating a hunting season once it has been closed will be politically difficult and likely not to occur. Hunters, including our members, are important advocates for sage grouse and its habitat that will lose some interest in the species if there is no hunting season. Therefore, we request that each of Montana’s sage grouse populations be treated based upon the population condition of their management subunit. We also request that you considering less severe options, such as a reduction in season length or bag limits, rather than a blanket state-wide season-long closure.
Research has provided substantial data documenting the long-term adverse effects of human actions such as habitat fragmentation, cultivated agriculture, oil and gas development and mismanaged grazing upon sage grouse populations. Thus, our organization would advocate for a more critical eye toward these major factors influencing sage grouse populations versus the limited impact of hunting.
Sincerely,
s/greg munther
Greg L Munther, Co-Chairman
Montana Backcountry Hunters and Anglers
Flynarrow
Well-known member
MT BHA Opposes Statewide Sage Grouse Closure
Dan Vermillion, Chairman
Fish, Wildlife and Parks Commission
P.O. Box 200701
Helena, MT 59620-0701
Dear Chairman Vermillion and Members of the Commission:
As you may be aware, Montana Backcountry Hunters and Anglers has strongly advocated for sage grouse and their habitat in both the Montana Sage Grouse Conservation Plan, as well as in all the major BLM Resource Management Plans currently being revised across Montana. We are committed to preservation of sage grouse populations and their habitats across Montana. That being said, our organization has not seen science based evidence that would justify ending sage grouse hunting on a statewide basis.
We believe the regulation of sage grouse hunting should be premised on the best available science. Therefore, we applaud the recent division of the state into 3 subunits for the better management of sage grouse populations. We also support restricting sage grouse hunting if the collective data identifies hunting as a substantial mortality factor in declining sage grouse populations. At this time it is our understanding that hunting related sage grouse mortality is not having a major influence upon Montana sage grouse population dynamics.
Sage grouse hunting is culturally important and a true Montana tradition. From experience, we know that re-initiating a hunting season once it has been closed will be politically difficult and likely not to occur. Hunters, including our members, are important advocates for sage grouse and its habitat that will lose some interest in the species if there is no hunting season. Therefore, we request that each of Montana’s sage grouse populations be treated based upon the population condition of their management subunit. We also request that you considering less severe options, such as a reduction in season length or bag limits, rather than a blanket state-wide season-long closure.
Research has provided substantial data documenting the long-term adverse effects of human actions such as habitat fragmentation, cultivated agriculture, oil and gas development and mismanaged grazing upon sage grouse populations. Thus, our organization would advocate for a more critical eye toward these major factors influencing sage grouse populations versus the limited impact of hunting.
Sincerely,
s/greg munther
Greg L Munther, Co-Chairman
Montana Backcountry Hunters and Anglers
Dan Vermillion, Chairman
Fish, Wildlife and Parks Commission
P.O. Box 200701
Helena, MT 59620-0701
Dear Chairman Vermillion and Members of the Commission:
As you may be aware, Montana Backcountry Hunters and Anglers has strongly advocated for sage grouse and their habitat in both the Montana Sage Grouse Conservation Plan, as well as in all the major BLM Resource Management Plans currently being revised across Montana. We are committed to preservation of sage grouse populations and their habitats across Montana. That being said, our organization has not seen science based evidence that would justify ending sage grouse hunting on a statewide basis.
We believe the regulation of sage grouse hunting should be premised on the best available science. Therefore, we applaud the recent division of the state into 3 subunits for the better management of sage grouse populations. We also support restricting sage grouse hunting if the collective data identifies hunting as a substantial mortality factor in declining sage grouse populations. At this time it is our understanding that hunting related sage grouse mortality is not having a major influence upon Montana sage grouse population dynamics.
Sage grouse hunting is culturally important and a true Montana tradition. From experience, we know that re-initiating a hunting season once it has been closed will be politically difficult and likely not to occur. Hunters, including our members, are important advocates for sage grouse and its habitat that will lose some interest in the species if there is no hunting season. Therefore, we request that each of Montana’s sage grouse populations be treated based upon the population condition of their management subunit. We also request that you considering less severe options, such as a reduction in season length or bag limits, rather than a blanket state-wide season-long closure.
Research has provided substantial data documenting the long-term adverse effects of human actions such as habitat fragmentation, cultivated agriculture, oil and gas development and mismanaged grazing upon sage grouse populations. Thus, our organization would advocate for a more critical eye toward these major factors influencing sage grouse populations versus the limited impact of hunting.
Sincerely,
s/greg munther
Greg L Munther, Co-Chairman
Montana Backcountry Hunters and Anglers
katqanna
Well-known member
I posted this in Dec when I saw Brendens placeholder bill LC0023 prohibiting MT hunters from hunting sage grouse. I am wondering why Hagener is changing his mind, when he has publicly stated twice that I know of, that hunters are not affecting numbers and the USFWS stated the same. Is this legislative pressure on FWP, their budget, causing the 180?
Montana: GREATER SAGE-GROUSE HABITAT CONSERVATION STRATEGY Jan 2014
Page 33 on Hunting states (which would supports Ben's statement of closures in specific districts):
Montana: GREATER SAGE-GROUSE HABITAT CONSERVATION STRATEGY Jan 2014
Page 33 on Hunting states (which would supports Ben's statement of closures in specific districts):
Manage the season: Cut it to two weeks, with a bag limit of 1 & a possession of 2. Still provides opportunity for those who want to chase Sage Grouse & protects from overharvest.
putm2sleep
New member
---------------
Reducing tags seems quick on the draw too when a unit or a state has plenty of game?
Elk, deer and many other species seem 'ok'. Why do I have to wait 5 years to draw?
If they want to cancel seasons and stop us from hunting - its going to happen and its getting closer all the time!
a lot of BS man.
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
Perhaps it's the beginning of a new era of management ... proactive, rather than crisis reactive.
I think you're confusing LE permits in areas where opportunity would quickly take a toll on critters like elk & deer versus closing the entire state to hunting because of a potential listing of SG under the ESA.
The proposal from FWP is to shut down hunting completely. Even in areas where hunter harvest would have no impact on sage grouse numbers, like SW MT. Sage Grouse are born to be killed. Hunter mortality is one of the least concerns listed by the USFWS as it relates to grouse conservation. In fact, almost everything ranks higher in terms of causing problems for sage grouse than hunting.
Hunting can be additive to population decline in areas where numbers are already significantly low, and it should be stopped there. Places like Cedar Creek Anticline have desperately low populations due to O&G development and habitat degradation. It makes no sense to hunt sage grouse there. The Shields Valley has fewer and fewer birds on leks every year due to ag land conversion. It makes sense not to hunt there.
I'm all for shutting down some hunting in places where it makes sense, but a blanket closure isn't how I would approach the issue.
bigskyblueman
Member
This closure also says to the non-hunting public that we hunters are culpable for the birds decline. This false impression could be a difficult one to erase.
It will certainly be celebrated by those who care not for the bird, just for their pocket book.
Eliminate hunting, you eliminate some of the best advocates for conservation: Hunters.
Agreed!
One way to keep a season open and limit take is to do as Utah does (I can't believe I typed that either
) by issuing permits on a draw by area. Seems to work well there.Agreed!
One way to keep a season open and limit take is to do as Utah does (I can't believe I typed that either
I disagree on permits, but think that reduced harvest is necessary in order to ensure that populations currently ok remain so.
Here's the letter from a few groups regarding the proposed closure:
Why no to permits? IMO, it gives much more control on legal harvest numbers. Another idea would be to impose quota's by area. Limiting the daily take or possession might work but would be much more difficult to quantify without mandatory reporting.
Ben, thanks for sharing this letter. It is excellent. I will do what I can to get its message out.
I don't think they're necessary. There is not a terrible amount of pressure to hunt sage grouse. At most, you have a dedicated core of people who love to hunt them, and a few guys who shoot some as incidental take while hunting other upland species.
The MT plan doesn't call for permits, but reduction in opportunity based on certain specific parameters (45% reduction in population for 3 years in a row, which has not been documented statewide). In the areas where sage grouse are doing well, there are not many other upland opportunities (Big Hole, Centennial Valleys). In the areas where sage grouse are hurting, we haven't even hit the prescribed metrics for the plan, as I understand it.
Furthermore, hunting is not additive to overall flock health and the USFWS doesn't consider hunting to be a limiting factor in sage grouse populations. It's behind predators in their list of concerns. So, FWP is proposing to shut down a season based on incomplete data and a fear of listing when we know that the service isn't looking at how we hunt sage grouse. Hunters are saying: We get it. We need to stop hunting in populations are declining rapidly. We're up for that.
Just don't take away our opportunity because the legislature and oil and gas industry want you too.
Lastly: Because Utah.
I can get that last one. I love hunting sage grouse and if I lived in a state that had them would definitely make time to spend a few days doing it every year. I'm pretty sure I'm going to regret not mounting any of those that I've shot...
Similar threads
