Montana mule deer rant

[SAJ-99]

My mistake. Picture updated. Location and bio updated.

Bucket up and prepare for 2023 legislative session. Look back here on HT at posts from 2021 session and expect more of the same. It’s not FWP that is the enemy. It’s a miracle they have any biologist left. Learn how the legislative process works and where the points are you will need to get involved. Expect to send emails to your rep and find those reps that might be on the fence and send them emails. Maybe make a trip or two to Helena. Find an advocacy group like Montana Wildlife Fed and sign up for emails. Maybe even send them $20 or $50. After all that, expect to still get screwed.

 

[Tlrussell]

Bucket up and prepare for 2023 legislative session. Look back here on HT at posts from 2021 session and expect more of the same. It’s not FWP that is the enemy. It’s a miracle they have any biologist left. Learn how the legislative process works and where the points are you will need to get involved. Expect to send emails to your rep and find those reps that might be on the fence and send them emails. Maybe make a trip or two to Helena. Find an advocacy group like Montana Wildlife Fed and sign up for emails. Maybe even send them $20 or $50. After all that, expect to still get screwed.

I am new on hunt talk, not to what is going on or how it works. Quite the contrary. I live in and hunt the crazies. The process is a joke.

I wonder a few things:

1. Would holding FWP to 17,000 NR Tags have a material effect on the average Joe’s experience?

2. Would having mandatory harvest reporting allow FWP more granular information to fine tune tag type and allocation?

3. Would having an annual survey of hunters help FWP focus effectively on areas of hunter concern along with their management goals?

I don’t think hunting in general experienced an exponential increase in popularity because of state(s) legislators. I therefore do not believe that the legislature is likely to do anything to combat it. Quite the contrary, they will try to exploit it. And they are.

A better question is, do the hunters of Montana, including NR, support enforcing a rule, set by, of course, the legislature for the benefit of the animal population and the people that hunt them? And, does that majority support systems and policies to better understand what is being killed, where, when and by whom?

This already exists in one state I have first hand experience with and works fantastically. Also a state with plenty of out of state pressure. I never heard anyone bitch about NR hunters there.

I once even made a suggestion to the head of that states game agency and received a reply the same day that opened a conversation that emboldened my support for that agency.

 

[brockel]

I am new on hunt talk, not to what is going on or how it works. Quite the contrary. I live in and hunt the crazies. The process is a joke.

I wonder a few things:

1. Would holding FWP to 17,000 NR Tags have a material effect on the average Joe’s experience?

2. Would having mandatory harvest reporting allow FWP more granular information to fine tune tag type and allocation?

3. Would having an annual survey of hunters help FWP focus effectively on areas of hunter concern along with their management goals?

I don’t think hunting in general experienced an exponential increase in popularity because of state(s) legislators. I therefore do not believe that the legislature is likely to do anything to combat it. Quite the contrary, they will try to exploit it. And they are.

A better question is, do the hunters of Montana, including NR, support enforcing a rule, set by, of course, the legislature for the benefit of the animal population and the people that hunt them? And, does that majority support systems and policies to better understand what is being killed, where, when and by whom?

This already exists in one state I have first hand experience with and works fantastically. Also a state with plenty of out of state pressure. I never heard anyone bitch about NR hunters there.

I once even made a suggestion to the head of that states game agency and received a reply the same day that opened a conversation that emboldened my support for that agency.

Would like to see zero public land mule deer doe tags or severely restricted unless over objective.

I don’t think fwp will ever go for a draw for mule deer unless it gets far worse and non resident tags go unsold so I’d settle for general tag October 1-31. Possibly a limited draw November rifle hunt or possibly make it a limited draw muzzleloader hunt. Get rid of the traditional season stuff in December.

I’d like to eliminate all the come home to hunt, native Montanan, I believe there’s a college student tag as well. To many people wanting their piece of the pie and that pie isn’t getting any bigger

I’d like to see mandatory harvest reporting or loss of license the following year. This data would be huge for future management (hopefully) decisions. Could be made extremely simple to do on fwp website. We already have mandatory reporting for 11 other species why not have it for fwps biggest money makers?

 

[Treeshark]

I’d like to see transferable landowner tags so NR could plan their hunts easier. This current system is a pain in the butt.

 

[brocksw]

I’d like to see transferable landowner tags so NR could plan their hunts easier. This current system is a pain in the butt.

no

 

[Treeshark]

Please?

 

[Tlrussell]

Would like to see zero public land mule deer doe tags or severely restricted unless over objective.

I don’t think fwp will ever go for a draw for mule deer unless it gets far worse and non resident tags go unsold so I’d settle for general tag October 1-31. Possibly a limited draw November rifle hunt or possibly make it a limited draw muzzleloader hunt. Get rid of the traditional season stuff in December.

I’d like to eliminate all the come home to hunt, native Montanan, I believe there’s a college student tag as well. To many people wanting their piece of the pie and that pie isn’t getting any bigger

I’d like to see mandatory harvest reporting or loss of license the following year. This data would be huge for future management (hopefully) decisions. Could be made extremely simple to do on fwp website. We already have mandatory reporting for 11 other species why not have it for fwps biggest money makers?

Would like to see zero public land mule deer doe tags or severely restricted unless over objective.

I don’t think fwp will ever go for a draw for mule deer unless it gets far worse and non resident tags go unsold so I’d settle for general tag October 1-31. Possibly a limited draw November rifle hunt or possibly make it a limited draw muzzleloader hunt. Get rid of the traditional season stuff in December.

I’d like to eliminate all the come home to hunt, native Montanan, I believe there’s a college student tag as well. To many people wanting their piece of the pie and that pie isn’t getting any bigger

I’d like to see mandatory harvest reporting or loss of license the following year. This data would be huge for future management (hopefully) decisions. Could be made extremely simple to do on fwp website. We already have mandatory reporting for 11 other species why not have it for fwps biggest money makers?

No need for penalty. You check in your game online or through the fwp app. Indiana already does all of this. Hell, after you input the county of harvest, it pulls up a map and has you drop a pin where you killed it.

 

[brockel]

No need for penalty. You check in your game online or through the fwp app. Indiana already does all of this. Hell, after you input the county of harvest, it pulls up a map and has you drop a pin where you killed it.

As long as fwp goes 100% electronic that works

 

[brocksw]

Please?

 

[520 Road Sow]

No need for penalty. You check in your game online or through the fwp app. Indiana already does all of this. Hell, after you input the county of harvest, it pulls up a map and has you drop a pin where you killed it.

I need that job managing data. That's better than OnX.

I'll mirror everyone else's comments on I'm willing to contribute and help for the cause. I just can't see a FWP that will change anything when they're being controlled by a board that is mainly outfitters. Anyone that's gonna get cut off from the tit like that isn't gonna like it.

Maybe there's something someone else that knows more on that process but hell every 2 years they need more and more tags so they can support their livelihood, business and family. So they say. So to get them to give up the hand out is quite a long shot

 

[SAJ-99]

I am new on hunt talk, not to what is going on or how it works. Quite the contrary. I live in and hunt the crazies. The process is a joke.

I wonder a few things:

1. Would holding FWP to 17,000 NR Tags have a material effect on the average Joe’s experience?

2. Would having mandatory harvest reporting allow FWP more granular information to fine tune tag type and allocation?

3. Would having an annual survey of hunters help FWP focus effectively on areas of hunter concern along with their management goals?

I don’t think hunting in general experienced an exponential increase in popularity because of state(s) legislators. I therefore do not believe that the legislature is likely to do anything to combat it. Quite the contrary, they will try to exploit it. And they are.

A better question is, do the hunters of Montana, including NR, support enforcing a rule, set by, of course, the legislature for the benefit of the animal population and the people that hunt them? And, does that majority support systems and policies to better understand what is being killed, where, when and by whom?

This already exists in one state I have first hand experience with and works fantastically. Also a state with plenty of out of state pressure. I never heard anyone bitch about NR hunters there.

I once even made a suggestion to the head of that states game agency and received a reply the same day that opened a conversation that emboldened my support for that agency.

1) probably not. The problem is unlimited general R tags. I get the point as the legislature just added the the Student permits, because lord knows every college kid needs a reason to skip class and shoot stuff. Tradition, or something. Most here were firmly in favor of killing those programs in 2021, even people who used them.

2) Sure. I think mandatory reporting is something that people can get behind and force FWP to adopt. I agree it would be a positive.

3) Yes, but surveys are expensive, so probably not annual. And they just sent one out. Let's see what the results are. Don't be surprised if they look a lot like the old survey results.

FWP answers to the governor and legislature. Those people answer to the voter.

 

[SAJ-99]

you drop a pin where you killed it.

That will never fly

 

[Tlrussell]

That will never fly

Not coordinates. They break each county down in to zones.

 

[Werty]

I was in Miles city fwp office on last Wednesday, talking to the BMA people. They basically told it was a waste of time for me to be in region 7, deer numbers are way down (which I know).
So curious which region office's are people talking too and getting told numbers are good?

I knew it was a waste of time going east, but a buddy really wanted to go, so I did!
Great camping!

 

[SAJ-99]

Not coordinates. They break each county down in to zones.

Maybe unit would be the smallest you could go for Montana. I think that is the only legit pushback from hunters on the idea of mandatory reporting. Indiana is less than 2% public land, Montana is over 30%. You have to recognize how the question of location could be perceived differently by hunters in each state. But I'm still all for the idea.

 

[Bambistew]

Any takers for $100 bet that mule deer seasons and management will be the same 10 years from now?

 

[Tlrussell]

Maybe unit would be the smallest you could go for Montana. I think that is the only legit pushback from hunters on the idea of mandatory reporting. Indiana is less than 2% public land, Montana is over 30%. You have to recognize how the question of location could be perceived differently by hunters in each state. But I'm still all for the idea.

I dont understand. How do you mean?

 

[brockel]

Any takers for $100 bet that mule deer seasons and management will be the same 10 years from now?

Hope not or things are going to be real bad

 

[SAJ-99]

I dont understand. How do you mean?

Just guessing, but 95% of people in Indiana probably hunt private land. Probably their own or maybe family or friends. Even giving GPS coordinates doesn't matter because other people can't hunt it anyway. In Montana, the number of people hunting public is much higher. Hunters spend years finding a spot that doesn't have 7 trucks at the trailhead. They don't even want to post a region in some cases, much less a unit.

A potential option would be to collect the data and not publish it and protect it from FOIA requests. That said, FWP collects this data using current method, so they already have unit harvest info (and people lie, but you can't fix that). Mandatory harvest would be more robust data set.

 

[YukonGold]

I'm on the fence about the college student discount. UM has the #1 wildlife biology program in the country (and MSU has one that's not too shabby either). I know UM has been building a sort of hunter recruitment program to help get kids into hunting and IMHO it'd be a shame to keep interested students from being able to participate because of the price of a NR tag. And not just wildlife students.

I guess if there's a way to partner that program in particular with the discounted college tag prices, I'd support that. Great way to recruit new hunters. Which I guess isn't critical for Montana, but is certainly becoming a huge issue nationwide.