Montana Mule Deer Mismanagement

[Forkyfinder]

Speculating - but it could be from check stations. Which are not really voluntary - you have to stop if you have harvested game. The above is a snip from the R7 check stations in 2020.

Article below from last fall in Augusta.

Redirect Notice

"As in recent years, most of the mule deer harvest this year consisted of antlered bucks, 76 percent of the total mule deer harvest. Of the mule deer able to be aged, adult bucks greater than 2.5 years old made up 38 percent of the total mule deer harvest, with an average age of 3.9 years old, four antler points on each side, and a field dressed weight of 139 pounds."

The data doesnt look all that bad (4 or more points) based on history if you look at their harvest estimates.

Not a big sample size in relation to totals. But again, a real uphill battle will be had to convince fwp to redo the whole set of season dates for mule deer when their "data" shows a non-issue and the surveys of Montana hunters dont show a burning desire for big change. Let alone the resolution that passed. I wish you guys luck, but based on the evidence (whether or not its credible doesnt matter if thats all that exists besides anectdotes) i dont see much of a case.

 

[cgasner1]

View attachment 370316
Speculating - but it could be from check stations. Which are not really voluntary - you have to stop if you have harvested game. The above is a snip from the R7 check stations in 2020.

Article below from last fall in Augusta.

Redirect Notice

"As in recent years, most of the mule deer harvest this year consisted of antlered bucks, 76 percent of the total mule deer harvest. Of the mule deer able to be aged, adult bucks greater than 2.5 years old made up 38 percent of the total mule deer harvest, with an average age of 3.9 years old, four antler points on each side, and a field dressed weight of 139 pounds."

The data doesnt look all that bad (4 or more points) based on history if you look at their harvest estimates.

Not a big sample size in relation to totals. But again, a real uphill battle will be had to convince fwp to redo the whole set of season dates for mule deer when their "data" shows a non-issue and the surveys of Montana hunters dont show a burning desire for big change. Let alone the resolution that passed. I wish you guys luck, but based on the evidence (whether or not its credible doesnt matter if thats all that exists besides anectdotes) i dont see much of a case.

You are playing with charts from 21 the numbers have dropped in last 2 years. Which may not just be from hunting pressure. Honestly it would be neat to see how these numbers have changed over the course of the last decade.

 

[huntin24/7]

Turns out they are all old mountain warriors

Or old troll bucks if it’s a mediocre buck but you have to make the story sound good for the gram.

 

[bigsky2]

I think I heard Wakeling mention that mule deer hunters are satisfied with current management based on their surveys they’ve sent out in the past. Has anyone looked into whether or not the results could be flawed based on how they counted the neutral responses, similar to what they did with the recent elk hunter survey?

OPINION: Are Montanans really satisfied with elk management?

Backcountry Hunters & Anglers is the voice for our wild public lands, waters and wildlife.

www.backcountryhunters.org

 

[Forkyfinder]

I think I heard Wakeling mention that mule deer hunters are satisfied with current management based on their surveys they’ve sent out in the past. Has anyone looked into whether or not the results could be flawed based on how they counted the neutral responses, similar to what they did with the recent elk hunter survey?

OPINION: Are Montanans really satisfied with elk management?

Backcountry Hunters & Anglers is the voice for our wild public lands, waters and wildlife.

www.backcountryhunters.org

https://fwp.mt.gov/binaries/content/assets/fwp/conservation/deer/mule-deer-resident-deer-hunter-survey-2023.pdf

I thought the same and reviewed it and didnt arrive at that conclusion, theres a lot of non-neutral polling showing satisfaction and not much showing dissatisfaction. 70 percent support or strongly support the current rifle season dates. Almost all metrics show more positive results to the season structure and mangement than negative.

 

[WanderWoman]

MT FWP’s definition of 4x or better.View attachment 370283View attachment 370284View attachment 370285View attachment 370286

MT hunters’ idea of 4 point or better.
View attachment 370287View attachment 370288View attachment 370289View attachment 370290

I’m still working my way through the episode, but if you’re talking about harvest reporting (outside of the limited overall check station data collected), wouldn’t it be a MT hunter reporting those bucks as 4x4, if indeed they were? I could have missed a previous point and if so, sorry.

Related to aerial surveying, a biologist that could make out those top bucks as 4 pt or better from a fixed-wing a few hundred feet above, without binos, at 40-60mph, in variable light conditions, while the animal is running every which direction, has truly amazing eagle eyes. If I were said bio I’d be calling those ‘young adult bucks’ or something like that, which is a category they use besides ‘yearling’ and ‘mature,’ depending on the bio.

 

[ismith]

Whatd you make of the median buck harvested being over 4.5 and over 60% 4 point or better in r6/r7?

4 point eastern count maybe? That would make more sense being as nonresidents are the majority.

 

[Forkyfinder]

4 point eastern count maybe? That would make more sense being as nonresidents are the majority.

Fish, Wildlife & Parks, Department of

directory.mt.gov

Not sure. But the eastern part of the state, by percentage, has twice as many 4 or better points harvested according to Brian Wakeling with FWP.

Basically - the eastern part of the state is great if the western part is the barometer

 

[Carnage2011]

https://fwp.mt.gov/binaries/content/assets/fwp/conservation/deer/mule-deer-resident-deer-hunter-survey-2023.pdf

I thought the same and reviewed it and didnt arrive at that conclusion, theres a lot of non-neutral polling showing satisfaction and not much showing dissatisfaction. 70 percent support or strongly support the current rifle season dates. Almost all metrics show more positive results to the season structure and mangement than negative. View attachment 370323

This is exactly why I always Hunttalk is not a good representation of the majority of Montana hunters.

 

[sclancy27]

Median. Not average.

@sclancy27 curious of your thoughts as the numbers guy behind the proposal.

The part relevant to that starts at 1:07.

I haven't seen the particular data he quoted. I believe that certain years 50% of the harvest is 4x4 or better is real, I would have to dig into the numbers to see how they have varied over the last 20 years.

Given that I don't know the data he is referencing, there is some data I am familiar with that would shed doubt on it. I'm sure some are familiar with the book "Ecology and Management of Mule Deer and White-tailed deer in Montana". It represents the bulk of the studies from the 70's-90's from FWP and grad students that sort of define the management strategy. Within this book, they have measured annual mortality for mule deer bucks across various ecotones. As is logical, higher annual mortality from hunting is seen in more open areas and lower in more wooded areas (Eastern MT vs Western MT basically). I am not looking at the numbers right now, but I know that the basement for annual mule deer buck mortality (hunting + others) in Eastern MT is around 40%, which means that 60% survive a year. Based on those numbers you would expect only 12-13% of bucks to reach 4.5 years old from an age class. The aggregate of bucks over 4.5 (until the age class gets so small it's basically 0, which happens around 8 years old) would be 28-30%. That is with the absolute lowest annual mortality rate. Given that, I'm suspect of the data he quoted.

As an aside, I think it's important to redo a lot of those studies to get information that isn't 40-50 yrs old (before rangefinders, 600-1000 yard shots, SxS, etc. etc. etc.)

As another aside, those pie charts really explain where our deer populations are now. You would assume female deer are harvested under a normal distribution, perhaps biased towards younger deer. In 2021 only 20% of the harvested deer were 2.5 or younger. That speaks to an absence of multiple age classes....not freaking good.

 

[Forkyfinder]

I haven't seen the particular data he quoted. I believe that certain years 50% of the harvest is 4x4 or better is real, I would have to dig into the numbers to see how they have varied over the last 20 years.

Given that I don't know the data he is referencing, there is some data I am familiar with that would shed doubt on it. I'm sure some are familiar with the book "Ecology and Management of Mule Deer and White-tailed deer in Montana". It represents the bulk of the studies from the 70's-90's from FWP and grad students that sort of define the management strategy. Within this book, they have measured annual mortality for mule deer bucks across various ecotones. As is logical, higher annual mortality from hunting is seen in more open areas and lower in more wooded areas (Eastern MT vs Western MT basically). I am not looking at the numbers right now, but I know that the basement for annual mule deer buck mortality (hunting + others) in Eastern MT is around 40%, which means that 60% survive a year. Based on those numbers you would expect only 12-13% of bucks to reach 4.5 years old from an age class. The aggregate of bucks over 4.5 (until the age class gets so small it's basically 0, which happens around 8 years old) would be 28-30%. That is with the absolute lowest annual mortality rate. Given that, I'm suspect of the data he quoted.

As an aside, I think it's important to redo a lot of those studies to get information that isn't 40-50 yrs old (before rangefinders, 600-1000 yard shots, SxS, etc. etc. etc.)

As another aside, those pie charts really explain where our deer populations are now. You would assume female deer are harvested under a normal distribution, perhaps biased towards younger deer. In 2021 only 20% of the harvested deer were 2.5 or younger. That speaks to an absence of multiple age classes....not freaking good.

In 2021, according to aging at the check in stations, 60 percent of deer are 4.5 or older, thats the place i think he got it. Although its not quite statistically correct - no idea why they include "unknown" there. Still though, 29% of total (4.5 and older) to 75% (25% unknown removed) of all less unknown is still almost 40 percent of all bucks harvested were older than 4.5. All of those tech items were around in 2021. Thats exactly what FWP will say, im sure.

Wouldnt you expect the mortality rate to vary by age, sex, and source by age, significantly? I get taking 1 x .6^4=12.9% but it seems like theres gotta be more to it than that.

Until theres concrete data out there all of it is going to be very hard to prove change is required.

 

[ismith]

It would take a miracle to correct what has happened to Montana’s mule deer herd. Unfortunately I think its near total destruction is inevitable.

 

[rogerthat]

Still working my way through the pod. Alright fessup fellas, which one of you guys asked Robbie if he thought a five week general season rut rifle hunt was ethical? . I might have used the word sporting but I think it’s a valid question also I would encourage you guys to get on his podcast as soon as you could.

 

[rogerthat]

I would add the age data he referenced I can confirm is the voluntary Cwd data that has been being collected. You voluntarily bring your deer head in and they grab your adenoids and a tooth for lab aging. I will try to post a snapshot of the region 7 data when I can. FWP might make you do a foia to get it. Good thing I got my hands on it when I was accidentally added to a top secret signal chat.

Going off memory 45% of bucks harvested in region 7 in this data set we’re 4.5 or older. 39% of bucks harvested on public lands were 4.5% or older in region 7. Pretty unbelievable data. This would indicate some of the best mule deer hunting in the western United States is occurring in region 7.

I think the question is whether this data is statistically accurate and non-biased considering it is collected for Cwd purposes (not assessing harvested age class) and voluntary. I really feel the data set fit the narrative so they are running with it. Because I can say the hunting on public is far from the best in the west from personal experience in several other states. Hell maybe most of them besides Washington unless your using apples for a big bull.

 

[bigsky2]

Still working my way through the pod. Alright fessup fellas, which one of you guys asked Robbie if he thought a five week general season rut rifle hunt was ethical? . I might have used the word sporting but I think it’s a valid question also I would encourage you guys to get on his podcast as soon as you could.

I know I’ve never asked him if he thought it was ethical but I do remember making a comment on his forum that it’s debatable whether hunting rutting mule deer in open country with long range rifles is sporting or not.

 

[8andcounting]

This is exactly why I always Hunttalk is not a good representation of the majority of Montana hunters.

And , I’m guessing there’s some (not alot on this site) keyboard warriors that key the talk but when it comes down to it they would argue against change . Because of possible opportunity loss

 

[8andcounting]

Nothing is gonna change in Montana as far as opportunities go . Residents won’t allow it and the as far as NR go the state can’t afford to cut them

 

[sclancy27]

In 2021, according to aging at the check in stations, 60 percent of deer are 4.5 or older, thats the place i think he got it. Although its not quite statistically correct - no idea why they include "unknown" there. Still though, 29% of total (4.5 and older) to 75% (25% unknown removed) of all less unknown is still almost 40 percent of all bucks harvested were older than 4.5. All of those tech items were around in 2021. Thats exactly what FWP will say, im sure.

Wouldnt you expect the mortality rate to vary by age, sex, and source by age, significantly? I get taking 1 x .6^4=12.9% but it seems like theres gotta be more to it than that.

Until theres concrete data out there all of it is going to be very hard to prove change is required.

I would add the age data he referenced I can confirm is the voluntary Cwd data that has been being collected. You voluntarily bring your deer head in and they grab your adenoids and a tooth for lab aging. I will try to post a snapshot of the region 7 data when I can. FWP might make you do a foia to get it. Good thing I got my hands on it when I was accidentally added to a top secret signal chat.

Going off memory 45% of bucks harvested in region 7 in this data set we’re 4.5 or older. 39% of bucks harvested on public lands were 4.5% or older in region 7. Pretty unbelievable data. This would indicate some of the best mule deer hunting in the western United States is occurring in region 7.

I think the question is whether this data is statistically accurate and non-biased considering it is collected for Cwd purposes (not assessing harvested age class) and voluntary. I really feel the data set fit the narrative so they are running with it. Because I can say the hunting on public is far from the best in the west from personal experience in several other states. Hell maybe most of them besides Washington unless your using apples for a big bull.

Do you have access to the data? If so, PM me.

The more I look at and think about that comment, I really see 2 potential issues with the data.

The first, you touch on above, some sort of bias that causes people to submit older deer in a higher frequency then younger deer. A quick check on that would be compare the male age data to the female age data. If you look at the pie charts above, they are pretty similar. That causes me to think that the CWD sampling is random and fairly represents the age structure.

The second issue, really just a comment, is 2021 is a snapshot at a point in which the mule deer population in eastern MT is rapidly shrinking. This can skew perceptions if we are just looking at snapshots, which this data represent. If we have large age classes from 2015-2017 (populations were maxing out at this point) and smaller age classes 2019, 2020, and 2021 you can get situations like this that do not represent the overall trend. Which is why it's important to look at years of data and trends than it is to look at a particular "snapshot in time". I'd like to see, for example 2024 data and be able to compare it, and then 2025, 2026, etc.

 

[Forkyfinder]

Do you have access to the data? If so, PM me.

The more I look at and think about that comment, I really see 2 potential issues with the data.

The first, you touch on above, some sort of bias that causes people to submit older deer in a higher frequency then younger deer. A quick check on that would be compare the male age data to the female age data. If you look at the pie charts above, they are pretty similar. That causes me to think that the CWD sampling is random and fairly represents the age structure.

The second issue, really just a comment, is 2021 is a snapshot at a point in which the mule deer population in eastern MT is rapidly shrinking. This can skew perceptions if we are just looking at snapshots, which this data represent. If we have large age classes from 2015-2017 (populations were maxing out at this point) and smaller age classes 2019, 2020, and 2021 you can get situations like this that do not represent the overall trend. Which is why it's important to look at years of data and trends than it is to look at a particular "snapshot in time". I'd like to see, for example 2024 data and be able to compare it, and then 2025, 2026, etc.

I get exactly what you mean - i couldnt really find any longer age term data - so If theres better data on it - would love to see/share it. The only thing that does exist or that i could find was 4 point harvest data. That would/could get effected on the quality of forage that year as well, so again, not a great indicator of age class. Its also a very big assumption to take a group rate die off (that includes fawn predation for example) and apply it to the same deer at different ages/years and conclude thats how many are on the landscape as i pointed out earlier. Do you have any data to drive the point to that says there is a definitive age class problem?

I was feverishly forky googling (cause i honestly couldnt understand/accept his statement as statistically true) and its tough to find much for long term data. Let alone data without sample bias, sample size/scale issues, or decent accuracy (i.e. cementium vs looked at by an intern).

Ultimately, any argument that will be compelling/convincing enough to drive change is going to have be based on data. Ideally, using data that can prove your point. Or, in the abscence of that, proving that their data and associated long term understanding is flawed. They dont agree with the anecdotes and opinions (of a minority), and the science is on their side (from their perspective) for keeping seasons as they are. Thats my takeaway from the podcast, unfortunately.

 

[sclancy27]

I get exactly what you mean - i couldnt really find any longer age term data - so If theres better data on it - would love to see/share it. The only thing that does exist or that i could find was 4 point harvest data. That would/could get effected on the quality of forage that year as well, so again, not a great indicator of age class. Its also a very big assumption to take a group rate die off (that includes fawn predation for example) and apply it to the same deer at different ages/years and conclude thats how many are on the landscape as i pointed out earlier. Do you have any data to drive the point to that says there is a definitive age class problem?

Age class is a social issue. I'm not making an argument that there is a "problem" biologically there since there is no data I'm aware of that says it matters biologically. I'm just pointing out that a snapshot in time may not represent what happens over the long term.

I was feverishly forky googling (cause i honestly couldnt understand/accept his statement as statistically true) and its tough to find much for long term data. Let alone data without sample bias, sample size/scale issues, or decent accuracy (i.e. cementium vs looked at by an intern).

Ultimately, any argument that will be compelling/convincing enough to drive change is going to have be based on data. Ideally, using data that can prove your point. Or, in the abscence of that, proving that their data and associated long term understanding is flawed. They dont agree with the anecdotes and opinions (of a minority), and the science is on their side (from their perspective) for keeping seasons as they are. Thats my takeaway from the podcast, unfortunately.

I agree, data is the only way forward.