I have no experience with western MT deer hunting, but my understanding is mule deer numbers have been hurting over there for a long time. I wouldn’t judge the health of the mule deer herd by what’s in your parents’ back yard or what you might see in town. If you’ve only been hunting in eastern MT for 5 years, I can see why you wouldn’t notice much of a change in deer numbers. I was born and raised in eastern MT and it’s down right depressing comparing the quality of todays mule deer hunting to what it was like when I was growing up, and I’m only in my 30’s.
Montana Mule Deer Mismanagement
- Thread starter rogerthat
- Start date
Elky Welky
Well-known member
I'm also in my mid 30s, and my parents' yard is in the country, 15 miles out of town on 20 acres at the foothills of some mountains, to clarify.
But that may just be it: if I'm just used to there being less mule deer as a western MT hunter (although not really...) where I grew up hunting, then maybe eastern Montana is easier (not exactly the word I'm looking for, perhaps: "more expected") for me than it is for those who are used to more.
rogerthat
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2015
- Messages
- 3,629
It’s not just an eastern Montana thing. Region 3 south of Butte is in pretty tough shape compared to 20 years ago also. I spent a week on the winter range down there this year looking for wolves. However Montana is a giant state so I’m sure everyone’s observations would vary greatly. Much of powder river was down 60% plus vs the 10 year LTA so I’m surprised you didn’t notice that a little @Elky Welky this past year
MTelkHuntress
Well-known member
I guess how I have come to understand mismanagement through these threads is both a decrease in population and a lack of broad age structure in mule deer. Not as simple "no big bucks". Also lower buck to doe ratios.
I don't think anyone here is saying there needs to be massive mule deer bucks behind every corner, but rather there should be some mature bucks out there unlike what folks who have hunted these areas for years are seeing.
I haven't hunted eastern Montana, but I have hunted western Montana my whole life as have generations of my family. The stories of seeing hundreds of mule deer in a day in some areas is amazing but you just don't see that today. Yes, there's habitat changes, more hunters and different management priorities, but it's still a stunning change in mule deer populations.
The term "shifting baseline" comes to mind and I'm curious where this baseline will go. Obviously we can't get back to the days before settlers but I do wonder where the balance is.
I think some folks here also understand how slow change in the department can be and that if we don't enact changes now, then there could be some serious damage to mule deer populations in the future (some are already seeing the damage being done). Rather, we should be taking a more proactive approach, especially with the increase of hunters in the field.
Also I'm just gonna say it, I hope antlerradar is on the mule deer committee (as well as other HT members). There's many different ideas and I hope the new committee can explore those more.
I don't think anyone here is saying there needs to be massive mule deer bucks behind every corner, but rather there should be some mature bucks out there unlike what folks who have hunted these areas for years are seeing.
I haven't hunted eastern Montana, but I have hunted western Montana my whole life as have generations of my family. The stories of seeing hundreds of mule deer in a day in some areas is amazing but you just don't see that today. Yes, there's habitat changes, more hunters and different management priorities, but it's still a stunning change in mule deer populations.
The term "shifting baseline" comes to mind and I'm curious where this baseline will go. Obviously we can't get back to the days before settlers but I do wonder where the balance is.
I think some folks here also understand how slow change in the department can be and that if we don't enact changes now, then there could be some serious damage to mule deer populations in the future (some are already seeing the damage being done). Rather, we should be taking a more proactive approach, especially with the increase of hunters in the field.
Also I'm just gonna say it, I hope antlerradar is on the mule deer committee (as well as other HT members). There's many different ideas and I hope the new committee can explore those more.
This is an excellent post.
brocksw
Well-known member
Edit: incorrect post
Last edited:
Carnage2011
Well-known member
I understand what you are saying, but how would they cut tags that are OTC? They aren’t going to go limited entry statewide so I’m not really sure what they could do this year..
brocksw
Well-known member
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that MTFWP still has the ability to cut doe tag availability to residents and NR.
Carnage2011
Well-known member
You are correct. I forget that we give out shitloads of doe tags. My apologies.
I tried that. I nicely got told I didn’t know what I was talking about and to pound sand.
I said what about private land only doe tags. That also is not an option.
Someone should explain to me how they come up with their population totals though. The aerial counts are a small part of the equation from my understanding. The equation went right over my head.
They told me they have to wait until the spring counts to make any decisions on doe tags. That could be changed at the June commission meeting. I got the feeling that was unlikely at best.
cgasner1
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2016
- Messages
- 5,594
Spots I hunted in eastern Montana it wasn’t uncommon to see 5-10 four point bucks a day hiking nothing crazy just little guys but it was good to see them. Now you lucky to see a couple bucks in a weekend and they are 2x3.
antlerradar
Well-known member
I will be applying. I have never applied for a committee and not been chosen, we shall see those past commitments pays off. This is the committee I want the most.
MTelkHuntress
Well-known member
huntin24/7
Well-known member
Maybe I’m just naive, but I guess I just don’t see the problem with every unit being limited entry for mule deer and many units being species specific. I don’t mean this primarily for trophy management purposes either, but each unit can only handle so many deer of either sex taken off the landscape every year. I don’t have sympathy for any hunter whose inconvenience from having to pick a unit and hunt only that unit when they draw is more of an issue than the overall herd health of the deer in this state.
They will probably cut doe tags. But they won’t eliminate them.
Here’s what’s on the books for this year
The excuses I’ve gotten is the deer migrate between districts so it wouldn’t work. Besides the excuse of deer numbers doing great. But let’s be real FWP can’t even handle a drawing for the big 3. Can you imagine if they had to figure it out for each deer district
huntin24/7
Well-known member
That’s a fair point.lol I’m sure the deer in other states in limited entry units never migrate to other units either.
. Maybe growing up in another state where you applied for a specific unit makes it bother me less. I personally don’t have a problem not drawing a buck tag every year if the numbers don’t warrant it. There are other species out there to hunt also.brocksw
Well-known member
Ya it’s a bullshit excuse. They don’t even know where the deer are being killed at to begin withThat’s a fair point.lol I’m sure the deer in other states in limited entry units never migrate to other units either.
antlerradar
Well-known member
Five years is not enough time, sure you can lase up your boots a little tighter and find deer, might even find a big one if you are very lucky. I started hunting around the Custer in 78, The mule deer hunting for the most part been in constant decline, the 80's were better than the 90's were better than the 2000's were better than the 2010's and the 2020's are showing no sign of breaking the trend. This is the problem, sure some years there is some improvement, but the long term trend is going in the wrong direction and is unsustainable. At fist it was just a decline in the number of big buck, but for the past 15 or so years it is not just the older age buck but all deer numbers. This is most pronounced on the bigger blocks of public land. Some of the places I had great success in the 80's are now almost deer less now.
In the 80's and 90's most of the concern was about the lack of big bucks. Now many are still concerned about the lack of big bucks, but the poor deer numbers lack of recovery form the 2012 winter is just as concerning. This is most apparent on the bigger blocks of public land.
When doe hunting on the Custer was first proposed in I think the 90's, I was all for it. My thinking was that if a few does were shot off the roads, the does would move to the roadless places I liked to hunt and fewer bucks would be taken by the orange army of roadhunters. Boy was I wrong, The does herds in the easy to access and best habitat were shot out of existence, Read the rose-pedal effect. Other does may have changed where they live, but they didn't move to the rough roadless ground. Does tend to prefer the most productive habitat according to the does are from Venus, bucks are from Mars article in Montana Outdoors. The does found the productive land on private much more to their liking. The problem with the doe tags is that there are zero restrictions on where the tags are filled. Far too many are filled on the bigger blocks of Public. The public never recovers as fast private and as soon as numbers start to recover region wide, FWP is increasing the number of doe tags. Deer numbers never make much of a recovery on public land.
Every one wants opportunity, but it has its tradeoffs. Most are aware of the tradeoff between more opportunity and less quality. The problem is when quality slips badly some hunters are willing to pay for better hunting. The demand for new hunting leases near me is not coming from outfitters, it is coming from well off resident hunters that are looking for better quality hunting. This new demand is directly tied to the decline in quality hunting on public land and opportunity management. To a landowner opportunity is money, easy to get tags, long seasons, the rut and any other opportunity all increase the price someone will be willing to pay so there is also a tradeoff with access. Simply put more opportunity less access.
The rut hunt was great in the 70's when hunters could get access to just about everywhere. Wait until bad weather and the rut brought the bucks out of the mountains and rough breaks to rut with the does in the fields was a hell of a deal. You can still hunt those fields, but you will have to pay. When my ancestors first moved of SE Montana the rule was, control the water you controlled grazing on the surrounding government land. Today we have a different rule. Control the doe herds on the hay field and you can control the bucks on the near by public. Having the season run the length of the rut moves lots of bucks from public to private. Sure there are some that move from private to public. Kind of like there are some people driving into New Orleans when a hurricane is coming. Having hunters blasting every doe that moves on public is not helping. I don't know if ending the rut hunting will result in more big bucks, I think it will but I could be wrong. I am certain that a lot fewer bucks will be shot in a hay field form the cab of a pickup.
Last edited:
