Montana mule deer rant

Maybe they should only allow recurve bows and flintlock muzzleloaders with roundballs for about 10 years. lol

That will separate the men from the boys quickly and it will also allow the population to bounce back...
No chance. It’s all about opportunity. Right now we get the opportunity to reminisce about the times when there were a decent population of mule deer running around as we work on killing the few left. Good times!
 
Today I did a predawn drive from Ashland to Belle Fourche. Twenty one deer on the side of the road total. That is a pathetic number of deer for that drive. Montana's mule deer hot spot is just about dry.
Early last fall I was amazed by the amount of deer I saw driving 112 from Hulett to the state line. Must’ve been hundreds on that short little stretch of WY. Equally amazed and dismayed by the lack of deer I saw from Alzada to I-90.
 
I am from North Dakota and have enjoyed coming out to MT to deer hunt over the years. Have hunted a few different spots in regions 4, 6, and 7. Actually have a general tag for this year as well, but 410 cow tag is the priority and I wont have a problem with not filling the deer tag this year. I'm not going to get the urge to shoot whatever I see during the last week, just because. Would have been content with just the Cow tag if the dates on the draws allowed for knowing ahead of the deer draw.

Even I cringed when seeing and talking with all the hunters who seemed to have 2-4 deer tags each. I don't think half of them even knew the specific or different regulations applied to each one. I just don't understand why any game and fish thinks its a good idea to allow so many tags to be held by each individual. Your now actively trying to appeal to the hunter who prioritizes killing as many animals as possible. The hunter who wouldn't view the trip or hunt worthwhile with just 1 tag in their pocket, but now with 2-3+ tags.... that's worthy enough to make the effort to head out and do it.

Its Greed. Greed by the state who must want all the tag dollars$$ no matter the cost, and Greed by many of the hunters who can't be satisfied with 1 tag.
 
fish and game must need the income from the doe tags, i cant believe there is any commonsense data, that supports harvesting does on public land
maybe theres enough does on some private land that need thinned as needed,,,

until a buck tag goes up in price enough to offset all the doe tags that should be eliminated, will it ever change,
how many sportsmen would pay 50.00 for a deer tag and 100.00 for an elk tag, or double those prices, or what ever the price would need to be.
with $5.60 diesel, $50,000.00 pickups every were you look, average home price in the state $400,000.00 maybe,
shouldnt tags and license also go up a substantial amount,,,,,
 
I'm sure F&G is really hurting so bad they have to sell 20,000 doe tags at $8 to make ends meet. haha Pure greed I tell ya.

Looked at harvest stats the other day. Looks like for every 3 mule deer bucks a doe is shot. What was interesting to know, is that there is about 3x as many deer hunters as there are mule deer bucks. :D Nothing to see here folks, all good
 
until a buck tag goes up in price enough to offset all the doe tags that should be eliminated, will it ever change,
how many sportsmen would pay 50.00 for a deer tag and 100.00 for an elk tag, or double those prices, or what ever the price would need to be.

I would pay it for an elk tag. I would not pay $50 for a deer tag the way things are right now. If things are fixed for the better absolutely I would
 
Are mule deer viewed as a money-maker (hunting) or a money-loser (livestock competition) by landowners, in general?
 
I'm sure F&G is really hurting so bad they have to sell 20,000 doe tags at $8 to make ends meet. haha Pure greed I tell ya.
Agreed. Even if half those tags are sold to NR at $75 or whatever a pop, the overall revenue isn’t exactly a game changer to FWP’s annual budget. There’s something else afoot that isn’t financial greed from FWP.
 
Are mule deer viewed as a money-maker (hunting) or a money-loser (livestock competition) by landowners, in general?
Regardless of the "in general" answer, in my experience there is high variability in the views. Pretty much anything that lowers its head and eats grass is competition (eating money) to a cattle-raising landowner...Deer, elk, antelope, APR bison, prairie dog,...Some accept that as a cost of doing business, some as an opportunity to lease to hunter/outfitter, some take a few for friends and family, some sign up for BM, some just like animal watching.
 
Are mule deer viewed as a money-maker (hunting) or a money-loser (livestock competition) by landowners, in general?
Most of the old ranchers I know in SW MT, view wildlife as a menace to their operation. The only thing they hate more than wildlife are hunters, but most will allow some hunting to thin out the animals. Elk are pretty hard on stuff, in their defense from destroying fences and haystacks to just plain competition for grass/feed. There aren't a lot of old ranchers anymore though, at least where I grew up, most of those places are run as a hobby ranch, for the investment potential of the property, or the current owners like the wildlife and don't have livestock.

To be fair though, without landowners curbing hunting, there wouldn't nearly as many elk/deer in MT.
 
Back
Top