Montana Mule Deer Mismanagement

[Forkyfinder]

Anyone have pop data from 80s-2014?

Fwps website starts at 2014.

 

[Frequently Banned Troll]

No one. I got nervous because I saw you post in here, but really I just found you’re an excellent artist. After I died laughing and peeing myself a little I decided to read more….



Oh…I nominated you to make Randy’s next T-Shirt design, so don’t be surprised if you hear from him soon.

My artistic talent is highly desired by those who have an appreciation for authenticity and nature. Tell Randy I’ll comp the T-shirt design.

About the crybaby button - I don’t believe you. Don’t worry QSB won’t threaten a lawsuit if you fess up. I don’t believe he has me on ignore either.

I offer major value. In the subject of mule deer and even elk..

 

[Lostinthewoods]

My artistic talent is highly desired by those who have an appreciation for authenticity and nature. Tell Randy I’ll comp the T-shirt design.

About the crybaby button - I don’t believe you. Don’t worry QSB won’t threaten a lawsuit if you fess up. I don’t believe he has me on ignore either.

I offer major value. In the subject of mule deer and even elk..
View attachment 371072

I had no idea you enjoyed clogs. You seem more like a teva sandals type of guy.

 

[brockel]

Anyone have pop data from 80s-2014?

Fwps website starts at 2014.

I don’t believe fwp even has that. Or the last time I asked they didn’t or didn’t care to look. Was a few years ago though.

 

[Forkyfinder]

I don’t believe fwp even has that. Or the last time I asked they didn’t or didn’t care to look. Was a few years ago though.

Foia time

 

[rogerthat]

I don’t believe fwp even has that. Or the last time I asked they didn’t or didn’t care to look. Was a few years ago though.

I’m pretty sure they have it but it might take some digging and effort. The 10 year look backs get the focus. I think most any state in the west doing a 45 year look at population for about any mule deer herd is a fugly trend.

 

[Schaaf]

Perhaps mature bucks is referring to the size of the neck roasts.. it’s all about the meat.View attachment 371015

One of the funniest most shocking parts of all of this is when you off hand mentioned in your testimony that deer seasons were closed during the rut in the early 1900’s and everyone ran with that as “apart from the early 1900’s..” and did no fact checking on the claim, proceeded to make an amendment on the bill and included it in a resolution.

I’ve got multiple years of regulations from the 60’s and 70’s that show 75%+ of deer districts closing before the rut.

 

[brockel]

I’m pretty sure they have it but it might take some digging and effort. The 10 year look backs get the focus. I think most any state in the west doing a 45 year look at population for about any mule deer herd is a fugly trend.

I actually had only asked for 2000s and on at the time. This was 4-5 years ago

 

[DFS]

I actually had only asked for 2000s and on at the time. This was 4-5 years ago

Washing the data every 10 years is a sure fire way to keep the best unit in the west on track. I’m not sure it matters though there were high counts in 2015 and I didn’t ever see them come back from the 2010-2012 winters.

 

[Carnage2011]

I support those that are working off of this forum to enact change. I don’t support that the group here excluded NGOs and biologists from their meeting and planning—I think that was a mistake that has already cost you. Fortunately, we have a commission process that will give everyone a voice. How the mule deer group approaches it will determine how much anyone listens.

What exactly do you think having NGO’s involved in the process would have done? Other than the work that @shoots-straight and his group did in the Bitterroot I can’t think of a time where an NGO in MT had a forward facing proposal regarding season structure. For the most part they are good with legislative issues and some access issues but as far as season structure goes I can’t imagine they’d be much of a benefit. Also, several of the people involved are members of NGO’s and have served on boards as well. I think the commission hears from those groups enough that they have an opinion of them one way or another. Leaving them out of it seems like a good idea in my eyes.

 

[Forkyfinder]

I actually had only asked for 2000s and on at the time. This was 4-5 years ago

I don’t believe fwp even has that. Or the last time I asked they didn’t or didn’t care to look. Was a few years ago though.

Washing the data every 10 years is a sure fire way to keep the best unit in the west on track. I’m not sure it matters though there were high counts in 2015 and I didn’t ever see them come back from the 2010-2012 winters.

Montana's mule deer population, harvest success, and hunter trends revealed // GOHUNT. The Hunting Company

If you're thinking of hunting Montana for mule deer, this giant data story is a must read to help you narrow down where to hunt! Access region by region breakdowns that take a look at harvest, residency and much, much more

www.gohunt.com

 

[Forkyfinder]

 

[DFS]

It wasn’t that many years ago they had record counts in a couple public land flight areas. With staff turning over and a shifting baseline things changed .

View attachment 371106

Montana's mule deer population, harvest success, and hunter trends revealed // GOHUNT. The Hunting Company

If you're thinking of hunting Montana for mule deer, this giant data story is a must read to help you narrow down where to hunt! Access region by region breakdowns that take a look at harvest, residency and much, much more

www.gohunt.com

I never saw the 2015 spike that that graph shows.

 

[Gerald Martin]

It wasn’t that many years ago they had record counts in a couple public land flight areas. With staff turning over and a shifting baseline things changed .
I never saw the 2015 spike that that graph shows.

How tightly were your boots laced that year? They were probably in the next canyon.

 

[Carnage2011]

It wasn’t that many years ago they had record counts in a couple public land flight areas. With staff turning over and a shifting baseline things changed .
I never saw the 2015 spike that that graph shows.

I felt like I definitely saw a decent bump in deer numbers around 17-18 but I can’t say if that was just in the areas I hunt or not.

 

[DFS]

@Forkyfinder i can’t remember the years exactly but it was between 2010-2012 we had back to back bad winters. The better bucks were already gone by then but we had deer still before that point, from my perspective. That is around the time that Newburg came in as well, this had a big impact. There was an incredible antelope herd that was on the forest and they got hit hard with winter. The wildlife manager claims they migrated but most likely they died imo. I got out a fair amount back then and there were dead deer everywhere. I went to the meetings and was told things were looking good and they aren’t into knee jerk reactions. 40:100 buck to doe ratio for mule deer. The public was asking them to do something. They didn’t. Several years later they made it mule deer buck only for the A tag. A miraculous comeback was made I think in 2015 maybe 2016 (I didn’t see it) and 11k doe tags were offered with 7 tags per person if they wanted them. One of the areas I liked to hunt had a group of North Dakotans that liked to use them. Those deer are gone. It’s a shell of what it used to be. People out here are pissed and MTFWP is getting the blame for it, rightfully so. The only positive change I’ve seen for mule deer in my lifetime is the commission overriding what the biologists suggested with private land only mule deer doe tags. It’s sad how we treat our mule deer in region 7.

 

[Forkyfinder]

@Forkyfinder i can’t remember the years exactly but it was between 2010-2012 we had back to back bad winters. The better bucks were already gone by then but we had deer still before that point, from my perspective. That is around the time that Newburg came in as well, this had a big impact. There was an incredible antelope herd that was on the forest and they got hit hard with winter. The wildlife manager claims they migrated but most likely they died imo. I got out a fair amount back then and there were dead deer everywhere. I went to the meetings and was told things were looking good and they aren’t into knee jerk reactions. 40:100 buck to doe ratio for mule deer. The public was asking them to do something. They didn’t. Several years later they made it mule deer buck only for the A tag. A miraculous comeback was made I think in 2015 maybe 2016 (I didn’t see it) and 11k doe tags were offered with 7 tags per person if they wanted them. One of the areas I liked to hunt had a group of North Dakotans that liked to use them. Those deer are gone. It’s a shell of what it used to be. People out here are pissed and MTFWP is getting the blame for it, rightfully so. The only positive change I’ve seen for mule deer in my lifetime is the commission overriding what the biologists suggested with private land only mule deer doe tags. It’s sad how we treat our mule deer in region 7.

Doesnt it seem like the population and harvest parallel?

I have a difficult time throwing the numbers out totally if the harvest tracks well with population numberw.

 

[Hunting Wife]

I haven’t followed this thread much, but did see some of the discussion/questioning about biases in the age sampling. Apologies if someone else already mentioned this but I didn’t want to wade through all the arguing.

But from what you guys were saying, the age data being referenced were tooth cementum data collected from CWD sampled individuals? If this is true, it’s quite possible there is a sampling bias against younger age class animals, as most states don’t bother collecting CWD samples from 1-2 year olds. Or they are at least way lower priority. Not sure if Montana is following that strategy, but it would not surprise me.

Just a point for thought. Carry on.

 

[rogerthat]

I haven’t followed this thread much, but did see some of the discussion/questioning about biases in the age sampling. Apologies if someone else already mentioned this but I didn’t want to wade through all the arguing.

But from what you guys were saying, the age data being referenced were tooth cementum data collected from CWD sampled individuals? If this is true, it’s quite possible there is a sampling bias against younger age class animals, as most states don’t bother collecting CWD samples from 1-2 year olds. Or they are at least way lower priority. Not sure if Montana is following that strategy, but it would not surprise me.

Just a point for thought. Carry on.

I think Montanas system is to submit all voluntary provided samples for Cwd testing and part of that is to pluck a tooth and submit to Matsons to build an age profile of the Cwd positive and negative samples. So the bias would have to be from the decision of the hunters when deciding to have their buck tested. The ages 100% indicates an age structure of the deer tested for Cwd. I think the question is whether the age data can it be used to and does this age structure indicate overall harvest age structure? Thoughts on the voluntary nature of the sampling?

 

[Hunting Wife]

I think Montanas system is to submit all voluntary provided samples for Cwd testing and part of that is to pluck a tooth and submit to Matsons to build an age profile of the Cwd positive and negative samples. So the bias would have to be from the decision of the hunters when deciding to have their buck tested. The ages 100% indicates an age structure of the deer tested for Cwd. I think the question is whether the age data can it be used to and does this age structure indicate overall harvest age structure? Thoughts on the voluntary nature of the sampling?

My gut feeling is that collecting samples for a specific purpose (CWD) that has a well-documented and publicized age bias, then trying to use those data for a second purpose (to represent the age structure of the population at large) may not be the best sampling strategy for that second purpose. Though I get the temptation because sampling and testing samples is labor and money intensive.

I am not a stats/study design expert by any means. But I talk to a lot of hunters and I collect samples if they want it done. Most people I talk to are familiar with the research, and in my experience they are much more likely to want it sampled if it is older and they think it might be a good candidate or more likely to have CWD. So yes, I think there is potential bias in who volunteers a sample.