I read them religiously, but as the changes seem to have some ambiguity, I am asking to get some clarity. I am trying to understand what IS allowed and how the seasons will work if this new plan is adopted.
Montana General Season Structure Proposal
- Thread starter Gerald Martin
- Start date
The Hedgehog
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2000
- Messages
- 11,699
A couple beers sucked me into the Facebook Montanica page and the choice opinions of that Montana hunter group. At least they got some spring bear success photos to share..
Hem
Well-known member
You think a guy would stand a chance getting permission to hunt river bottom deer on the Yellowstone or Powder?
#sarcasm.
cgasner1
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2016
- Messages
- 1,776
Any tag still valid after the thanksgiving weekend
cgasner1
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2016
- Messages
- 1,776
What’s that thing have a 50” barrel?
So no changes to muzzleloader. Thank you for that.
Visiting Hunter
Well-known member
So I'm not against non residents in Montana. Because untill this last year I must just be lucky with the usual spots I pick.. east was always a bit busier... but never was it like the doobie brothers were in town... I do agree somehow that pressure needs to be spread more. I'm not sure it's a good idea or not.. because if I was a nr I wouldnt like it. I'd be curious if it's a necessary evil to incorporate some % of NR tags to a pool of must be outfitted to be taken out. And can't willy nilly free ride. Would increase private harvests as well this way in theory, and help push animals back to public. And since I'm not a nr I wouldn't really care personally what that % be but whatever it would be should be enough to evenly distribute nr pressure but also keep it in the hands of outfitters vs these private clubs... we all know how private clubs end up.. yellowstone club etc...
Last edited:
Carnage2011
Well-known member
pretty sure that Jefferson River otter that went wild last year is bigger than that bear!
antlerradar
Well-known member
Agree 100%. My father outfitted in the 60's and 70's. They took a lot of big bucks. He will quickly tell you that they saw a lot more that got a way back then that would not have today and he was using what would be considered crap glass today to find those bucks.
HSi-ESi
Well-known member
I applaud the effort and I will be supporting this approach as much as I can over the next years / months.
My current situation has me harvesting more whitetails (over the last 15-20 years) - but I grew up East of Billings and Mule Deer were definitely the focus. I'm constrained with the kids High School sports in the fall - so for the immediate future - choosing Region 2 and WT is an easy choice. Plus, there are plenty of B tags / archery-only tags - that keep us more than busy. We can have plenty of life-long experiences hunting close to home while balancing family life.
If we (as a family) could plan a trip to Region 6 or 7 in a specific year - and dedicate the tags choices - it would be a great fit. I think that most Resident hunters would follow suit - since it is easy to hunt close to home for the majority of trips. I do understand that many do plan longer vacations to hunt in a different region - but I do see it as a minor sacrifice (or just choose to hunt in a different region than you live in). I also see these folks as a minority - if you can't afford tag increases (which can be true) - you certainly can't take a week away from work for the added expenditure of travelling for hunting. Or, pick the region and species and hunt where you want to.
The season and/or tag structure has to change. My Dad has some old tags of his from the 50's, where it was 1 tag that allowed you to hunt Elk, Moose, Sheep, Goat, Black Bear and Deer (probably some I am forgetting). They focused on what was local to them because there wasn't time or money to travel. All game was opportunistic, much like Deer and Elk are now under the current tag structure.
I was always taught a phrase "what are we hunting today". If we were Elk hunting, then deer were off-limits. In fact, I had a LE bull tag in 2012 and my Dad was with me. It's a general deer unit - but he didn't want to carry a rifle. We found a beautiful mule deer, easily over 175 and in a spot we could of gotten him easily. I offered the rifle to my Dad as we had a few days yet to chase bulls. His response to my question was, "what are we hunting today". It easily would have been the biggest mule deer he had taken.
If I couldn't fill tags by picking a Region / Species - then I would put away my knives. There's no reason not to have a successful season anywhere in MT. This charity BS has to stop.
I would add on the muzzleloader topic. If you love hunting with a muzzleloader, you can do so within the General Rifle deer, plus another week in December. I think that is very generous.
I probably won't post again on this topic - but thanks to the folks for sticking their necks out. It's now our turn to keep pushing this forward as far as we can.
My current situation has me harvesting more whitetails (over the last 15-20 years) - but I grew up East of Billings and Mule Deer were definitely the focus. I'm constrained with the kids High School sports in the fall - so for the immediate future - choosing Region 2 and WT is an easy choice. Plus, there are plenty of B tags / archery-only tags - that keep us more than busy. We can have plenty of life-long experiences hunting close to home while balancing family life.
If we (as a family) could plan a trip to Region 6 or 7 in a specific year - and dedicate the tags choices - it would be a great fit. I think that most Resident hunters would follow suit - since it is easy to hunt close to home for the majority of trips. I do understand that many do plan longer vacations to hunt in a different region - but I do see it as a minor sacrifice (or just choose to hunt in a different region than you live in). I also see these folks as a minority - if you can't afford tag increases (which can be true) - you certainly can't take a week away from work for the added expenditure of travelling for hunting. Or, pick the region and species and hunt where you want to.
The season and/or tag structure has to change. My Dad has some old tags of his from the 50's, where it was 1 tag that allowed you to hunt Elk, Moose, Sheep, Goat, Black Bear and Deer (probably some I am forgetting). They focused on what was local to them because there wasn't time or money to travel. All game was opportunistic, much like Deer and Elk are now under the current tag structure.
I was always taught a phrase "what are we hunting today". If we were Elk hunting, then deer were off-limits. In fact, I had a LE bull tag in 2012 and my Dad was with me. It's a general deer unit - but he didn't want to carry a rifle. We found a beautiful mule deer, easily over 175 and in a spot we could of gotten him easily. I offered the rifle to my Dad as we had a few days yet to chase bulls. His response to my question was, "what are we hunting today". It easily would have been the biggest mule deer he had taken.
If I couldn't fill tags by picking a Region / Species - then I would put away my knives. There's no reason not to have a successful season anywhere in MT. This charity BS has to stop.
I would add on the muzzleloader topic. If you love hunting with a muzzleloader, you can do so within the General Rifle deer, plus another week in December. I think that is very generous.
I probably won't post again on this topic - but thanks to the folks for sticking their necks out. It's now our turn to keep pushing this forward as far as we can.
Lawnboy
Well-known member
Might get one mitten or a speedo type loin cloth out that hide
Increasing population numbers by making it so difficult to kill anything isn’t going to get any support. Blaming technology is not the answer. I’m no fan of long range idiots either but they are not the reason for the decline and trying to force everyone to give up their rifles for bows and flintlocks is ridiculous.
antlerradar
Well-known member
Most of the hunting clubs I am aware of are resident hunters, Outfitter tags would distribute pressure, but would likely be a poison pill in any proposal.
The Hedgehog
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2000
- Messages
- 11,699
When you can hand a teenage girl a rifle whose only fired 100 or less rounds in her life and she can easily shoot big game (under good conditions) at 700+ yards.. there is a technology problem. It’s not a small problem either. The challenge these days with rifle hunting is not killing animals - it’s finding them. So just to reiterate what others have— technology is a giant issue.
I agree with what you are saying but it’s not the cause. The cause is quantity of people. Addressing this as a method of take issue isn’t going to work. I’m not in any way saying that I disagree with your statement. I just think that it has to be delivered differently in order to gain support and actually get change made
The Hedgehog
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2000
- Messages
- 11,699
Well. We can agree to disagree. It only takes a handful of people with the good equipment to really change things in places. Have seen it first hand, lots of times, and realize I’ve contributed myself to it. Huge problem. Don’t try to downplay it to those of us doing it.
Copy that. I’m not innocent either. My point is that @Eric Albus suggestion that we limit rifles to one weekend and then primitive muzzle loaders and bows in order to reduce harvest is not going to gain any traction. Guarantee FWP wouldn’t even listen to that proposal.
It’s one of those situations where we have to pick our battles. We’re not gonna get everything at once.
The Hedgehog
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2000
- Messages
- 11,699
Well - I’m starting to appreciate his outlook if it’s sincere. Eric would lose clients for outfitting if that happened, but at least he’d have people that wanted to hunt and not just kill them from a half mile. Would be great if hunters were just those that enjoyed hunting and not all the jackasses roaming around with rifles in the fall.
I think you underestimate the crutch of the rut for lots of hunters. I know multiple people that all they do is drive around. If they hike 400 yards from a road to shoot a deer I’d be shocked. Tough to drive around all day in October and kill a mule deer buck. Not so tough to do that in the middle of November.
Eric Albus
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 24, 2012
- Messages
- 1,607
Agreed, to many ppl are the problem. Give everyone a flintlock and a brass telescope from 1875 and you can still let ppl hunt, they just won’t be as successful. If we want to continue being an opportunity state we have to limit technology, or face going LE permits.
This was my point in earlier post. I’m not advocating for or against limiting technology. Just saying it’s an option.
