Montana public land B&C mule deer
- Thread starter DFS
- Start date
seeth07
Well-known member
Nope, need to take it off and then have it officially scored. That's how I knew and figured that score wasn't a legit number nor offical
406dn
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2019
- Messages
- 2,036
A long time ago now, I killed a fairly nice bull caribou that was still in velvet. Whether or not he'd make any book didn't and doesn't matter to me. I choose to have him mounted with the velvet on. It's still mostly on, pulling apart from drying in a couple of spots.
If I killed a big mule deer still in the velvet, I'd rather leave him as I killed him, even if it would have made the book, absent the velvet.
If I killed a big mule deer still in the velvet, I'd rather leave him as I killed him, even if it would have made the book, absent the velvet.
Dude chill...
Raisin Bran
Well-known member
I have hunted clear across Montana over the years and have come to one conclusion. That is: I will spend my entire breathing life hunting in Montana and still will never see all that it has and hides. Lots of good hunters out there don’t “share” their scores. They admire and honor the hunt of their buck each time they look at it on the wall. I have seen many bucks shot and alive that I believe would score 190+. One or two possible 200. Some of these in the last 10 years. The live ones haunt my dreams. Here’s what I have to say to this Montana trophy debate, “Just because you think it doesn’t mean you should believe it, Go out and find it!”. Maybe I will see you out there
antlerradar
Well-known member
I had mine scored in velvet for P&Y and stripped for B&C. The difference was just over and inch. Circumference measurements went down, point length went up dew to lower base lines.Fake score then, likely to easily lose those 8 inches needed for b&c. To the op topic, not what we looking for here
seeth07
Well-known member
Cool, that's not normal though. Typically it's score is 3 to 5 percent lower so it's often 3 to 10 points less. The main beam lengths are typically which take the biggest hit since you run the tape along the outside of the beam and the thicker velvet horn results in a longer beam measurement
Anyone know or remember if Montana has always been an over the counter deer tag? Could at one time you get two? Just looking at resident populations from 1970 to now and the resident population has grown by 405,000 people. Think I read that 23% of Montanans hunt so we are talking 93150 more deer are killed a year compared to 1970. Over 1600 more per county today than in 1970 if it was split evenly which it’s not. Mule deer numbers continuing to decline but here we are in Montana extending our hunting seasons and selling doe tags business as usual.
Southern Elk
Well-known member
There’s more people hunting no doubt, but not everyone is shooting a deer per year. I’ve hunted MT for 10 years and killed 2. I won’t shoot another mule deer unless it’s bigger than the biggest one that I killed. The state should be tracking those numbers, right?
antlerradar
Well-known member
I wonder how may of the ones that shrink the most are green scored in the velvet and scored hard antlered 60 days after the velvet is striped.
In the early 60s it was 2 deer either sex otc. I believe it was that way in the late 50s
100%
And not by cold calling hunters in august
antlerradar
Well-known member
I was just a boy in the early 70's. But to answer some of you questions of what has changed.
You could get two buck tags in the early 70's
The start of leasing had yet to begin
There was very few if any billionaire mega ranches that have little to no hunting.
few people were trophy hunting, most shot the first buck they saw, many believed that the number of points was an indicator of the bucks age, so that big bodied 2 or three pointer was a better buck for the pot than the smaller bodied four point with some trash. Of course when they looked at the worn out teeth of the big old two point you could see he was not a two year old and the myth of the old buck going down hill was born.
Few hunters that got into the back county as most only put in the effort needed to kill a buck
Were I live and this could be different than other parts of the state dew to the unique geography of the area, there was very few deer on the hay fields, most deer were in the hills. Not one of the dozens of big buck hunting stories from my fathers guiding days in the 60's and 70's starts with we were driving around the meadows. This has totally reversed today. Now during November the meadows are full of deer and the hills have almost none.
Zero doe tag in the 70's as I remember.
Last edited:
When I was 12 in 1974 it turned to 1 deer either sex around here within a couple years it went to 1 buck otc. That is when we quit seeing big bucks. I don't know if that was the reason but they never came back in any numbers. Other places were different.
antlerradar
Well-known member
I need to add that at least in eastern Montana there was zero elk hunting.
shrapnel
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2015
- Messages
- 2,303
When I was a kid in the early 60’s, you could shoot 2 deer, either sex, either species. There also weren’t as many deer then as there are now.
Montana may not be what everyone wants it to be, but as a kid, I never did see an elk during hunting season, other than a dead one. At that time an elk license allowed 1 elk either sex.
Now people want to mange for hunting or for trophies. Regardless of your preference, we have more game to hunt than we ever did in the early 60’s to 1970’s.
There are deer, elk, antelope and all the rest of the game species to hunt in Montana and I’m afraid the attention to the opportunities here have brought too much attention to Montana. Management has provided more game and opportunity than there was 40-50 years ago and although it may not be perfect, it is better than it was…
Well I’m glad you didn’t strip the velvet as that bull isn’t close to book. Kenai penn?
Bring better in it was in the 60’s and 70’s might be true for guys hunting private but it certainly not true for the public land hunter. While there might be more game now then back then there is an absolute shit ton more hunters.
I would take less game and less hunters over what we have now.
We killed plenty of elk in the 70’s mainly because there were so few hunters.
406dn
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2019
- Messages
- 2,036
No, he was a mountain caribou shot in NW BC.
