Montana on the Upswing?

[Bambistew]

Conditions seemed to be prime, and season is a week later. Next year will be further down the toilet after the high harvest this year. I'd put money on it.

Montana is a fun place to hunt, less fun if you think you can kill mature deer.

 

[bigsky2]

Conditions seemed to be prime, and season is a week later. Next year will be further down the toilet after the high harvest this year. I'd put money on it.

Montana is a fun place to hunt, less fun if you think you can kill mature deer.

Unfortunately next year we have the later season dates again so we will have another week of rut slaughter.

 

[timmy]

It’s more than just a loss of quality of deer to me, it’s loss in quality of hunt. I have lived here almost all my life so it annoys the hell out of me I know the potential it has. There are plenty of good places to hunt still southeast Montana just isn’t one of them imo. I’ve filled that gap with other hunts but still burns me when I go out in my backyard and see what it has become. I’ve accepted it isn’t going to change yet I still complain about it. And the off-season is here!

 

[mtmuley]

Two more days... mtmuley

 

[EYJONAS!]

Take a cow save a buck

 

[RuralMT]

I've been reading through this post and I've noticed a handful of things. First, there's hostility to shooting younger bucks. Second, shooting does (I'm assuming they're being legally taken?) seems to aggravate people. Third, shooting a mid-range buck, that could survive to become a big buck, is apparently frowned upon. Here's my question. According to this post, Montana deer-hunting is not on the upswing. Where does that leave a much-maligned meat-hunter like myself? If I read this post correctly, I can only shoot an ancient giant, which doesn't exist according to this post. Am I to starve? I'm at a point in my young life where venison is invaluable to my survival. Yet I feel like this forum might judge me for that.

 

[timmy]

If its legal who are we to judge. Fire away.

 

[Deleted member 20812]

If its legal who are we to judge. Fire away.

The reality is, individual choices by hunters isn’t going to have a large scale affect. Not unless you’re talking a huge property

 

[brockel]

I've been reading through this post and I've noticed a handful of things. First, there's hostility to shooting younger bucks. Second, shooting does (I'm assuming they're being legally taken?) seems to aggravate people. Third, shooting a mid-range buck, that could survive to become a big buck, is apparently frowned upon. Here's my question. According to this post, Montana deer-hunting is not on the upswing. Where does that leave a much-maligned meat-hunter like myself? If I read this post correctly, I can only shoot an ancient giant, which doesn't exist according to this post. Am I to starve? I'm at a point in my young life where venison is invaluable to my survival. Yet I feel like this forum might judge me for that.

Shoot what you want and be happy with what you shoot. My bitch is with the people that complain about deer numbers dropping yet filling their pickups full of does. My bitch is with the guys complaining that the buck quality just isn’t there anymore yet they will dump a young buck with potential last week of season because they “have to fill their tag”

 

[antlerradar]

well said Brockel.
In my opinion once you start passing on legal bucks you are no longer a meat hunter but a trophy hunter that likes to eat venison.

 

[RuralMT]

In my opinion once you start passing on legal bucks you are no longer a meat hunter but a trophy hunter that likes to eat venison.

I completely agree. This validates my decision to pull the trigger. After successfully stalking to within range of a group of does, a trophy was the last thing on my mind; big or not, completing the hunt on whatever buck was dogging them, was. Given the number of scrapes and rubs I came across this season, I have no doubt the bigger bucks are out there. It's just a matter of finding them in the jungles of NW MT.

If studies definitively proved that passing on forkies led to a healthier population and bigger deer, then I'd likely pass for the sake of the herd. However, I read an extensive study done in Texas and they argued rather persuasively that culling out the smaller deer allows the already-proven genes of bigger bucks to be past on to the next age-class. The jury is out; and while it's out, I'll continue to hunt and capitalize on the opportunities presented to me, like this year's forkie. I'll accept the criticism, but as ya'll are well aware, his back straps simply melt in the mouth like butter. Quality meat is what I'm chasing!

 

[BuzzH]

I completely agree. This validates my decision to pull the trigger. After successfully stalking to within range of a group of does, a trophy was the last thing on my mind; big or not, completing the hunt on whatever buck was dogging them, was. Given the number of scrapes and rubs I came across this season, I have no doubt the bigger bucks are out there. It's just a matter of finding them in the jungles of NW MT.

If studies definitively proved that passing on forkies led to a healthier population and bigger deer, then I'd likely pass for the sake of the herd. However, I read an extensive study done in Texas and they argued rather persuasively that culling out the smaller deer allows the already-proven genes of bigger bucks to be past on to the next age-class. The jury is out; and while it's out, I'll continue to hunt and capitalize on the opportunities presented to me, like this year's forkie. I'll accept the criticism, but as ya'll are well aware, his back straps simply melt in the mouth like butter. Quality meat is what I'm chasing!

Any study done in Texas is suspect, IMO. You cant compare the game farm situation in Texas to public land deer in Montana, in particular whitetails in NW Montana that never see an agricultural field their whole life. They are about as similar to one another as an aardvark is to an orangutan. I also don't know how a hunter is to know if a forked horn whitetail will, or will not, be a trophy buck? I can say with a high level of confidence, after hunting nearly 4 decades for WT's in NW Montana that a vast majority of bucks there are spikes or very small 2-3 points their first year. Based on that, I can conclude with a high level of confidence, some of the best bucks I've killed were likely spikes or 2 points their first year. I believe most any buck can grow into a buck that most anyone would consider a very good/trophy buck given the ability to reach 4-5 years old.

I don't have any problem with people shooting any buck they want, you paid your money, your tag your hunt no reason to justify it to anyone.

But, I don't think its correct to justify killing a 2 point WT buck in NW Montana by saying its making a healthier deer herd based on some study on a game farm in Texas either.

Another thing I've always wondered if a person is really a meat hunter, is there more or less meat on a 1.5 year old deer or a 4.5 year old deer?

 

[RuralMT]

Any study done in Texas is suspect, IMO. You cant compare the game farm situation in Texas to public land deer in Montana, in particular whitetails in NW Montana that never see an agricultural field their whole life.

But, I don't think its correct to justify killing a 2 point WT buck in NW Montana is making a healthier deer herd based on some study on a game farm in Texas either.

Oh no doubt. There are simply too many variables for an accurate comparison. But until a similar study is done in a similar area (or until I'm shown such a study), it's about all I have to go off of, other than opinion. And I agree with the uncertainty of what that little buck might grow up to become; however, if a little buck and a big buck are standing side-by-side, I also know that if I shoot the little one, the bigger one will be left to do the breeding. My justification for shooting him wasn't based on herd-dynamics; it was based on a personal need. I merely referenced to TX study to indicate that some people, in certain regions, advocate culling.

 

[BuzzH]

Oh no doubt. There are simply too many variables for an accurate comparison. But until a similar study is done in a similar area (or until I'm shown such a study), it's about all I have to go off of, other than opinion. And I agree with the uncertainty of what that little buck might grow up to become; however, if a little buck and a big buck are standing side-by-side, I also know that if I shoot the little one, the bigger one will be left to do the breeding. My justification for shooting him wasn't based on herd-dynamics; it was based on a personal need. I merely referenced to TX study to indicate that some people, in certain regions, advocate culling.

I think that human hunting largely reflects what happens by other predators. There's simply a lot more younger bucks on the landscape, meaning any predator, human or otherwise, will have more chances to kill younger deer. Plus, the younger deer are dumb as a post. As bucks get older, they get smarter and there's just less of them. Lots of science to support that.

In the case of public land whitetails in NW Montana, I don't find it troubling at all that a majority of the harvest is on 1.5-2.5 year old deer. There are enough slipping through the cracks that there are still good numbers of older deer to give a person that's looking for an older/better deer ample opportunity.

I don't feel the same way about mule deer that are highly vulnerable on public land. In those situations, I just don't think many deer slip through the cracks and very, very few make it to 6+ years old. That's where actual management has to happen and where Montana is really falling down. You just cant pound on public land mule deer bucks for weeks and weeks on end during the entire rut and expect to have any age class structure worth a shit.

 

[Big Fin]

This is a very interesting discussion to follow.

I killed my first buck in southeastern Montana in 1993, a mule deer buck, probably a 3.5 year old, and for my impressions at that point in my hunting life, a nice 4x4. I had my wife and a three year-old kid along with me. Much like it did when I pulled into the motel parking lot in Forsyth with that buck in my truck bed, I suspect taking that buck now would raise some eyebrows as to "Why didn't you let it grow?" Even at that time, there were comments of "Deer hunting here has really went to hell in the last ten years."

That skull is on the wall in my shop and it is one of the fondest memories of my hunting times with a young family. Hearing Matthew, who was outfitted with snotcicles running and ruddy cheeks from the cold and wind, proclaim, "Dad, that's a whopper, you better shoot 'em" rings in my mind today, as if it was yesterday.

Since that time I have hunted eastern/southeastern Montana many, many, times. Hunting pressure has been about the same, though easing during tough economic times and increasing during better economic times. During the 1990's you made next year's motel reservations in Miles City, Forsyth, Broadus, and elsewhere before you left the current year. A lot of private lands that were open to hunting or enrolled in the Block Management Program are now closed to public hunting. Public land does seem more crowded.

I have not taken a mule deer in SE MT since 1993, though I have chased a few I had hoped to shoot. They just escaped. I've taken three friends who have shot mule deer bucks in SE MT, none of them big bucks, and all three were as happy as could be with the outcome. None of them had the least concern about antlers.

I have taken plenty of whitetails in SE MT since that time. I have grown more fond of chasing whitetails there than mule deer. Given the harshness of two of the last three winters, I've not hunted there last year or this year, and I suspect I will not hunt there for a few more years, or until such time the deer numbers have a chance to recover from hard winters.

Antlerradar makes a good point about the quality of deer hunting in other parts of the state being a driving factor in residents traveling to eastern Montana. I can provide observations from where I live and hunt elk. The mule deer hunting in SW MT is nowhere near what it was when I moved here in 1991. I cannot name a single area in Region 3 where the mule deer hunting has improved, or even stayed the same.

As a result, many residents go elsewhere for better deer hunting, both mule deer and whitetail. I know some who make annual treks to SE MT, some to NE MT, some to Central MT, all being areas they feel provides better deer hunting than what they have within 100 miles of home. If the hunters in Regions 1 and 2 feel the same, I suspect those hunters would travel to find better hunting on their $16 general deer tag.

Following the super harsh winter of 1996-97, hunters pressured FWP to do something different for mule deer. Huge pressure from hunters resulted in cuts to doe tags in Region 7, though FWP made it clear they did not think it was necessary. That is when we went to limited entry units in some areas; Bridgers, Snowcrests, Lima Peaks, etc.

The rest of Region 3 (and I think parts of Region 2) was placed on a "Validate system" for mule deer hunting. You had to pick the unit you wanted to hunt mule deer and that is where you were hunting mule deer for the entire season; no traveling to hunt mule deer outside of the area you validated for. If you wanted to hunt mule deer the Big Belts, you had to validate for that area prior to season starting. If you wanted to hunt mule deer the Tobacco Roots, you had to validate for that area. Whitetail hunting was exempted from this system.

My mind is slipping as to how this worked in Regions 5, 6, and 7. If I recall properly, I think if you made up your mind in advance to validate for a unit, you could not hunt eastern MT. If word got out that eastern MT had great conditions and the hunting was really good that year, you couldn't hunt mule deer in SE MT if you had validated for mule deer in a Region 3 unit, say the Gallatin Range. Hopefully someone of my age and better memory can confirm or deny how that operated in Regions 5, 6, and 7 during that time.

FWP stopped that program when they felt mule deer had "recovered" to acceptable levels. Though I'm not a biologist, my anecdotal observations never noticed a recovery of mule deer in the validation units. If anything, the mule deer are even lower than following that terrible winter or 1996-97, which was followed by another terrible winter in 2000-01. FWP cited "complexity" and lack of enforcement/compliance as negatives to the validation program. Considering MT has written the book on complexity, that seems a bit hollow to me.

If the surges in hunting pressure in SE MT are the result of traveling residents seeking better deer hunting than what is near home, maybe it is time for FWP to reconsider a validation program for mule deer. Experience shows that changing anything related to mule deer in Montana is akin to changing the orbit of planets. FWP would say in the 1990s. "To have more mule deer you need to kill more mule deer." Seems if that was the case, today we would be awash in mule deer.

Compared to neighboring states, MT has always shied away from actually managing species in a district, whether deer, elk, or antelope. It has always been done with state-wide or region-wide policies; almost a "one size fits all." Until that changes, it is impractical to think that MT is going to have a different mule deer scenario than what has been for sixty years. "If you always do what you've always done, you'll always get what you always got."

Montana has 1,070,000 residents as of June 2019. In 2000, the population was 894,000. How many of these 176,000 new residents buy deer tags? I suspect a pretty good percentage. Does a 20% increase in the resident population correlate to a 20% increase in resident deer tag sales? How is hunting pressure on public land amplified when a 20% increase in tag sales is combined with a 20% (probably higher) decrease in private lands open to hunting?

I don't have answers to those, but I am quite confident that resident population increase requires some reassessment of how MT manages elk, deer, and antelope. I am also quite confident that MT FWP will resist most of those changes. I am completely confident, based on experience, that any effort to change even the slightest aspects of deer hunting will bring some vocal resident hunters out of the woodwork to protest whatever change might be proposed.

Back to the original point of this thread. I haven't hunted SE MT for a couple years, so I rely on locals as the true barometer of whether this is an upswing or a one-year spike. History, at least in my near-30 years as a resident deer hunter, shows there are spikes of improvement along a many decade trend of slow decline. Those spikes seem to correlate with years of excellent weather/conditions that result in optimal antler growth. Given how Montana manages mule deer, I suspect this observation being made by some is a spike more than an upswing. I hope I am wrong.

 

[Fsmith]

This is a very interesting discussion to follow.

I killed my first buck in southeastern Montana in 1993, a mule deer buck, probably a 3.5 year old, and for my impressions at that point in my hunting life, a nice 4x4. I had my wife and a three year-old kid along with me. Much like it did when I pulled into the motel parking lot in Forsyth with that buck in my truck bed, I suspect taking that buck now would have would raise some eyebrows as to "Why didn't you let it grow?" Even at that time, there were comments of "Deer hunting here has really went to hell in the last ten years."

That skull is on the wall in my shop and it is one of the fondest memories of my hunting times with a young family. Hearing Matthew, who was outfitted with snotcicles running and ruddy cheeks from the cold and wind, proclaim, "Dad, that's a whopper, you better shoot 'em" rings in my mind today, as if it was yesterday.

Since that time I have hunted eastern/southeastern Montana many, many, times. Hunting pressure has been about the same, though easing during tough economic times and increasing during better economic times. During the 1990's you made next year's motel reservations in Miles City, Forsyth, Broadus, and elsewhere before you left the current year. A lot of private lands that were open to hunting or enrolled in the Block Management Program are now closed to public hunting. Public land does seem more crowded.

I have not taken a mule deer in SE MT since 1993, though I have chased a few I had hoped to shoot. They just escaped. I've taken three friends who have shot mule deer bucks in SE MT, none of them big bucks, and all three were as happy as could be with the outcome. None of them had the least concern about antlers.

I have taken plenty of whitetails in SE MT since that time. I have grown more fond of chasing whitetails there than mule deer. Given the harshness of two of the last three winters, I've not hunted there last year or this year, and I suspect I will not hunt there for a few more years, or until such time the deer numbers have a chance to recover from hard winters.

Antlerradar makes a good point about the quality of deer hunting in other parts of the state being a driving factor in residents traveling to eastern Montana. I can provide observations from where I live and hunt elk. The mule deer hunting in SW MT is nowhere near what it was when I moved here in 1991. I cannot name a single area in Region 3 where the mule deer hunting has improved, or even stayed the same.

As a result, many residents go elsewhere for better deer hunting, both mule deer and whitetail. I know some who make annual treks to SE MT, some to NE MT, some to Central MT, all being areas they feel provides better deer hunting than what they have within 100 miles of home. If the hunters in Regions 1 and 2 feel the same, I suspect those hunters would travel to find better hunting on their $16 general deer tag.

Following the super harsh winter of 1996-97, hunters pressured FWP to do something different for mule deer. Huge pressure from hunters resulted in cuts to doe tags in Region 7, though FWP made it clear they did not think it was necessary. That is when we went to limited entry units in some areas; Bridgers, Snowcrests, Lima Peaks, etc.

The rest of Region 3 (and I think parts of Region 2) was placed on a "Validate system" for mule deer hunting. You had to pick the unit you wanted to hunt mule deer and that is where you were hunting mule deer for the entire season; no traveling to hunt mule deer outside of the area you validated for. If you wanted to hunt mule deer the Big Belts, you had to validate for that area prior to season starting. If you wanted to hunt mule deer the Tobacco Roots, you had to validate for that area. Whitetail hunting was exempted from this system.

My mind is slipping as to how this worked in Regions 5, 6, and 7. If I recall properly, I think if you made up your mind in advance to validate for a unit, you could not hunt eastern MT. If word got out that eastern MT had great conditions and the hunting was really good that year, you couldn't hunt mule deer in SE MT if you had validated for mule deer in a Region 3 unit, say the Gallatin Range. Hopefully someone of my age and better memory can confirm or deny how that operated in Regions 5, 6, and 7 during that time.

FWP stopped that program when they felt mule deer had "recovered" to acceptable levels. Though I'm not a biologist, my anecdotal observations never noticed a recovery of mule deer in the validation units. If anything, the mule deer are even lower than following that terrible winter or 1996-97, which was followed by another terrible winter in 2000-01. FWP cited "complexity" and lack of enforcement/compliance as negatives to the validation program. Considering MT has written the book on complexity, that seems a bit hollow to me.

If the surges in hunting pressure in SE MT are the result of traveling residents seeking better deer hunting than what is near home, maybe it is time for FWP to reconsider a validation program for mule deer. Experience shows that changing anything related to mule deer in Montana is akin to changing the orbit of planets. FWP would say in the 1990s. "To have more mule deer you need to kill more mule deer." Seems if that was the case, today we would be awash in mule deer.

Compared to neighboring states, MT has always shied away from actually managing species in a district, whether deer, elk, or antelope. It has always been done with state-wide or region-wide policies; almost a "one size fits all." Until that changes, it is impractical to think that MT is going to have a different mule deer scenario than what has been for sixty years. "If you always do what you've always done, you'll always get what you always got."

Montana has 1,070,000 residents as of June 2019. In 2000, the population was 894,000. How many of these 176,000 new residents buy deer tags? I suspect a pretty good percentage. Does a 20% increase in the resident population correlate to a 20% increase in resident deer tag sales? How is hunting pressure on public land amplified when a 20% increase in tag sales is combined with a 20% (probably higher) decrease in private lands open to hunting?

I don't have answers to those, but I am quite confident that resident population increase requires some reassessment of how MT manages elk, deer, and antelope. I am also quite confident that MT FWP will resist most of those changes. I am completely confident, based on experience, that any effort to change even the slightest aspects of deer hunting will bring some vocal resident hunters out of the woodwork to protest whatever change might be proposed.

Back to the original point of this thread. I haven't hunted SE MT for a couple years, so I rely on locals as the true barometer of whether this is an upswing or a one-year spike. History, at least in my near-30 years as a resident deer hunter, shows there are spikes of improvement along a many decade trend of slow decline. Those spikes seem to correlate with years of excellent weather/conditions that result in optimal antler growth. Given how Montana manages mule deer, I suspect this observation being made by some is a spike more than an upswing. I hope I am wrong.

Could never fault any hunter for any buck with a young family. After all that’s what spikes the young ones interest. Need meat sure fill a B tag. But 7 b tags? I’ve been a resident of eastern MT for 5 years now, I travel throughout the region extensively for work and interact with many residents from the generations before me. Yes, the general consensus with the “larger” bucks this year reflects the better forage throughout the fair weather months during antler growth. Many are saying they haven’t seen the landscape this “green” this deep in the year since at least 1975.
I grew up as a whitetail hunter in northern Wisconsin so maybe I’m not informed enough on the subject. In my experience no matter the size of the state big or small, when there’s major changes in geography and habitat a one size fits all approach doesn’t work.

 

[brockel]

Having the whole family there for a hunt sure takes a front seat to the size of the animal. My wife shot a deer this year that had a lot of potential and could have been a really solid buck in a couple years. She’s as happy as can be with him and couldn’t care less about the potential that deer had. She usually shoots the spindly horned 3points we have around here.

 

[Sytes]

I've been reading through this post and I've noticed a handful of things. First, there's hostility to shooting younger bucks. Second, shooting does (I'm assuming they're being legally taken?) seems to aggravate people. Third, shooting a mid-range buck, that could survive to become a big buck, is apparently frowned upon. Here's my question. According to this post, Montana deer-hunting is not on the upswing. Where does that leave a much-maligned meat-hunter like myself? If I read this post correctly, I can only shoot an ancient giant, which doesn't exist according to this post. Am I to starve? I'm at a point in my young life where venison is invaluable to my survival. Yet I feel like this forum might judge me for that.

Select few will judge you regardless the subject... as with any action in life, especially on an internet forum. Take it with a grain of salt and evaluate what you find reasonable info, be it from an arrogant one or others who share their opinions in a receptive manner.

On note of the topic, with respect to the area I'm most familiar:

Check stations in Olney, Libby (Canoe Gulch), and Thompson Falls saw more hunters and more harvested white-tailed deer than last year.

For opening weekend - Rifle:

Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks :: Slightly Below-Average Harvest for Northwest Montana Big Game Opener

fwp.mt.gov

 

[HighWildFree]

Antlerradar makes a good point about the quality of deer hunting in other parts of the state being a driving factor in residents traveling to eastern Montana. I can provide observations from where I live and hunt elk. The mule deer hunting in SW MT is nowhere near what it was when I moved here in 1991. I cannot name a single area in Region 3 where the mule deer hunting has improved, or even stayed the same.

As a result, many residents go elsewhere for better deer hunting, both mule deer and whitetail. I know some who make annual treks to SE MT, some to NE MT, some to Central MT, all being areas they feel provides better deer hunting than what they have within 100 miles of home. If the hunters in Regions 1 and 2 feel the same, I suspect those hunters would travel to find better hunting on their $16 general deer tag.

I've heard it said in several places that this is what FWP expects. That hunters will self-regulate moving from poor hunting units to better ones, which in theory will let the poor units recover as hunting pressure shifts. But given the lack of recovery in the western units and the downward trend of mule deer across the West it will be interesting to see what happens when the bottom falls out of eastern MT.

I would like to see a state-wide unit specific deer tag and a 3 week season.

 

[BuzzH]

I've heard it said in several places that this is what FWP expects. That hunters will self-regulate moving from poor hunting units to better ones, which in theory will let the poor units recover as hunting pressure shifts. But given the lack of recovery in the western units and the downward trend of mule deer across the West it will be interesting to see what happens when the bottom falls out of eastern MT.

I would like to see a state-wide unit specific deer tag and a 3 week season.

I've heard that too, and I think it applied in the 1960's when traveling across Montana was a 55 mph affair in a truck that felt like it was about to fly apart at 50 mph.

But, in 2019, when traveling 320 miles is a 4 hour deal, information is at every hunters fingertips, etc. etc. and over 1 million people in Montana...its tougher and tougher to self-regulate by moving. The places you move to are already being hunted by someone else. Montana is not immune to the shrinking world, even though the MTFWP seems to think it is and manages like its still 1950.