Montana Mule Deer Mismanagement

[Gerald Martin]

 

[WanderWoman]

I don't think changing season structure is going change harvest rates. People that want to harvest are going to harvest, unless they are totally incompetent.
Lowering harvest rates is not a high priority of mine for season structure change.I have two main reasons and some lesser reasons for changing season structure. What I want is more of a random harvest and less of a selective harvest. As many have stated, it is not as easy to fill your tag when the bucks are not rutting and concentrated on winter range or hay fields. Hunters will still have their opportunities, but will risk tag soup if they try to be too selective. More young four point live, more older two and three points die. The more random the harvest, the better. Better for the deer herd, better for hunters long term.
Changing season structure, may not change the harvest rate, but it will change where the harvest occurs. Shooting a buck at the base of the mountain on winter range, not going to happen nearly as often. Driving around the river and creek bottoms in Eastern Montana is not going to be nearly as effective in Oct as it is in Nov. Changing where the harvest is the biggest reason why we need to change season structure. Since the farther up the mountain and the farther from the river and creek bottoms, the more likely the land is public, season structure change will result in more harvest on public and less on private. Lowering harvest rates is way down the list and likely will not happen any way.

I don’t really know how you get less of a selective harvest than there already is with deer and elk. Selective harvest is what happens with sheep. There is no way across the state that deer harvest is significantly selective (biologically) when comparing the number/relative rarity of large mature bucks to actual harvest. Also, not sure how to get less selective when the most vocal hunting consensus shames people for shooting smaller bucks. I also don’t know how an earlier season would necessarily ensure to survival of younger 4-pts vs older 2- to 3-pts. Assuming older deer are smarter, they’re more likely to evade harvest regardless of headgear.

I also thought part of the criticism for MT’s mismanagement was too many deer taken on public land (hence changes in doe tags), but is that not the case now, or a misunderstanding?

If someone wants more age class and larger antlers in a deer population, more bucks need to survive, and the population needs the nutrition/habitat to reach their potential. And then it’s a balance of competition, CWD, and all of the other things affecting and acting on a deer population. Season structure is only one part of that.

 

[antlerradar]

Maybe.

I keep seeing this - but are you really sure that can have an impact genetically?

1. Theres no gaurantees that the bigger antlered buck that doesnt get shot automatically wins the right to breed. Ive seen otherwise.
2. The buck that has poor antlers might have great genetics - mothers nutrition while pregnant and his first year of life are bigger drivers (jim heffelfinger).
3. I doubt that taking the "top" probably less than 10% of bucks that could grow to 190 will affect the population genetics as a whole.
4. No one has any idea what kind of genetics the does have at all at producing antlers.

I would think thered bios/research out there that would confirm that if true. Do you know of any?

Nothing to do with changing genetics. All about giving the bucks that all ready have the potential to grow bigger antlers the same chance at growing old as the ones with poor potential.

 

[rogerthat]

I don’t really know how you get less of a selective harvest than there already is with deer and elk. Selective harvest is what happens with sheep. There is no way across the state that deer harvest is significantly selective (biologically) when comparing the number/relative rarity of large mature bucks to actual harvest. Also, not sure how to get less selective when the most vocal hunting consensus shames people for shooting smaller bucks. I also don’t know how an earlier season would necessarily ensure to survival of younger 4-pts vs older 2- to 3-pts. Assuming older deer are smarter, they’re more likely to evade harvest regardless of headgear.

I also thought part of the criticism for MT’s mismanagement was too many deer taken on public land (hence changes in doe tags), but is that not the case now, or a misunderstanding?

If someone wants more age class and larger antlers in a deer population, more bucks need to survive, and the population needs the nutrition/habitat to reach their potential. And then it’s a balance of competition, CWD, and all of the other things affecting and acting on a deer population. Season structure is only one part of that.

I think you simply make hunting harder to get a less selective harvest. For example if we were all packing trad gear we are way more likely to shoot whatever we can get to 20 yards or less from. By allowing rut hunting with a rifle for a long period of time we have made it as easy as possible which allows us to “window” shop for the “biggest” buck we can find. Which to @antlerradar point often may not be the oldest buck but could be a younger buck with those awesome genetics. By shifting the season dates you are making it harder. Lots of great discussion in this thread.

Now the truth be told your points are spot on, besides on hunttalk I don’t believe there’s much desire to make mule deer hunting harder in Montana and that’s why any change is hard and will likely need to be incremental. Changing season structure is not even remotely socially or politically palatable in my view. Not allowing doe harvest on public lands and getting rid of 2500 nr orphaned tags are two great changes instituted recently within our existing framework. Hunttalk folks in general need to change their mindset. Being right and affecting positive change are two wildly different things.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Not allowing doe harvest on public lands and getting rid of 2500 nr orphaned tags are two great changes instituted recently within our existing framework.

NR doe licenses have been cut as well under SB 231 in 2023. That has resulted in another roughly 3K licenses cut just between 2023 & 2024. Now NR's can only purchase 2 B tags if they hold a B10 or B11, and 1 if they do not.

 

[golfer]

I think you simply make hunting harder to get a less selective harvest.

Well if you can slow down the social media folks who put out how to do this and that, application service folks, technology advancement such as turrets, waypoint setting binos, etc, get rid of onX you may just be able to make it harder imo. But let’s be real it’s 2026 and no one wants to earn something the hard way. Just my two cents.