Montana ram harvest analysis for fun/conversation

sacountry

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 29, 2011
Messages
833
Location
NW Montana
Couldn't help but notice that it appears Region 1 didn't produce a B+C ram this year. Not to say they aren't there, I know I should have tagged one. I also noticed that there are only three rams with at least one 17" base harvested this year in the whole state. So I was curious to look at the Montana harvest data of "monster" rams over time. Here's the harvest data of rams with at least one 17" base over the last 20 years:

2000 = 2
2001 = 2
2002 = 1
2003 = 2
2004 = 2
2005 = 8
2006 = 7
2007 = 4
2008 = 4
2009 = 7
2010 = 3
2011 = 6
2012 = 7
2013 = 5
2014 = 3
2015 = 4
2016 = 3
2017 = 12
2018 = 10
2019 = 5
2020 = 3

Begs the question, what the heck happened in 2017 and 2018? And if one assumes an average age of 7, what was happening weather/feed wise in the spring/summer of 2010 and 2011? Obviously not a biologist, just throwing this out there because the data intrigues me.
 
Last edited:
Some people use data to determine things that are undefinable. For instance; if you counted all the people that had diabetes, and 8 out of 10 had blue eyes, some would say that if you have blue eyes you are more likely to have diabetes than someone with brown eyes. There is no quantitative data to support that, it is just comparing 2 different characteristics that aren’t necessarily associated.

I would just consider the base size of the sheep killed over the time period is nothing more than what the measurements show. A biologist may differ, but it appears to me to be a number of sheep compared to a measurement of the horn base...
 
I will also toss out human factors may be involved. Perhaps a new person was measuring the rams for F&G for a couple of years starting in 2017 or a revision on how to measure rams took place in 2017 that got reversed in 2019. Or data entry was flawed. If was related to nutrition and weather over the years leading to 2017/18 then would expect a slight increase in 2015/16 and then a milder decrease in 2019/20.
 
Win
Couldn't help but notice that it appears Region 1 didn't produce a B+C ram this year. Not to say they aren't there, I know I should have tagged one. I also noticed that there are only three rams with at least one 17" base harvested this year in the whole state. So I was curious to look at the Montana harvest data of "monster" rams over time. Here's the harvest data of rams with at least one 17" base over the last 20 years:

2000 = 2
2001 = 2
2002 = 1
2003 = 2
2004 = 2
2005 = 8
2006 = 7
2007 = 4
2008 = 4
2009 = 7
2010 = 3
2011 = 6
2012 = 7
2013 = 5
2014 = 3
2015 = 4
2016 = 3
2017 = 12
2018 = 10
2019 = 5
2020 = 3

Begs the question, what the heck happened in 2017 and 2018? And if one assumes an average age of 7, what was happening weather/feed wise in the spring/summer of 2010 and 2011? Obviously not a biologist, just throwing this out there because the data intrigues me.
Winter of 2010-11 was harsh, but if I remember right the summer was a very moist summer with great amount of forage throughout many areas.
 
Some people use data to determine things that are undefinable. For instance; if you counted all the people that had diabetes, and 8 out of 10 had blue eyes, some would say that if you have blue eyes you are more likely to have diabetes than someone with brown eyes. There is no quantitative data to support that, it is just comparing 2 different characteristics that aren’t necessarily associated.

I would just consider the base size of the sheep killed over the time period is nothing more than what the measurements show. A biologist may differ, but it appears to me to be a number of sheep compared to a measurement of the horn base...
I'll always put the caveat out there of not having a bio degree in sheep, but there does appear to be a cyclical trend within the large ram data. Consider the following years as upticks in large ram harvesting.....

2005/2006 = 15
2011/2012 = 13
2017/2018 = 22

If there is a 6 year cycle to the large ram harvests, we could have some banner years coming in 2023/2024.
 
Some people use data to determine things that are undefinable. For instance; if you counted all the people that had diabetes, and 8 out of 10 had blue eyes, some would say that if you have blue eyes you are more likely to have diabetes than someone with brown eyes. There is no quantitative data to support that, it is just comparing 2 different characteristics that aren’t necessarily associated.

I would just consider the base size of the sheep killed over the time period is nothing more than what the measurements show. A biologist may differ, but it appears to me to be a number of sheep compared to a measurement of the horn base...
I don't disagree with a lot of what you point out, but the pattern described here in '17-18 is too profound for me to ignore. Yes, many factors (e.g. hunter selection, hunting conditions, etc) can affect harvest patterns and influence this data, but I can't just write it off.
A lot of cool research out of the mule deer world now indicates that a buck's antler size (throughout its life!) is strongly influenced by the body condition of its mother the winter before it is born. Haven't kept up with any similar sheep research, but it makes me think there are some underlying factors that contribute to these patterns. Like others have suggested, I think that climate, either early in life or during gestation might be important.
 
Some people use data to determine things that are undefinable. For instance; if you counted all the people that had diabetes, and 8 out of 10 had blue eyes, some would say that if you have blue eyes you are more likely to have diabetes than someone with brown eyes. There is no quantitative data to support that, it is just comparing 2 different characteristics that aren’t necessarily associated.

I would just consider the base size of the sheep killed over the time period is nothing more than what the measurements show. A biologist may differ, but it appears to me to be a number of sheep compared to a measurement of the horn base...
There is a very strong correlation from the measurement of the horn base to the ram ending up scoring high enough to make the B&C record book. I think that is what a lot of people use to consider a "trophy" animal. This is much more so for sheep than just about any other species that I can think of. Even more than pronghorn which also get 4 mass measurements. There is a lot more variation on the mass measurements on pronghorn though especially above the prong. 17" bases on a sheep is almost a sure thing on making it into the record book unless there is some freak thing going on with it somewhere else. Even if it is double broomed that just moves the other mass measurements farther up the horn and doesn't really hurt the score as bad as you would initially think.

Of course I'm not even a pretend expert on Bighorn Sheep. The closest I've gotten to them is holding some skull caps waiting at the taxidermist.
 
I'll always put the caveat out there of not having a bio degree in sheep, but there does appear to be a cyclical trend within the large ram data. Consider the following years as upticks in large ram harvesting.....

2005/2006 = 15
2011/2012 = 13
2017/2018 = 22

If there is a 6 year cycle to the large ram harvests, we could have some banner years coming in 2023/2024.

I have around 30 points accumulated for sheep, I might be a benefactor of one of those big bighorns in that time frame if that is the case. As a possible consumer, I hope for some veracity to those numbers...
 
There is a very strong correlation from the measurement of the horn base to the ram ending up scoring high enough to make the B&C record book. I think that is what a lot of people use to consider a "trophy" animal. This is much more so for sheep than just about any other species that I can think of. Even more than pronghorn which also get 4 mass measurements. There is a lot more variation on the mass measurements on pronghorn though especially above the prong. 17" bases on a sheep is almost a sure thing on making it into the record book unless there is some freak thing going on with it somewhere else. Even if it is double broomed that just moves the other mass measurements farther up the horn and doesn't really hurt the score as bad as you would initially think.

Of course I'm not even a pretend expert on Bighorn Sheep. The closest I've gotten to them is holding some skull caps waiting at the taxidermist.

That could be the evolution of our bighorns here in the state, I don’t know. I do know that when I got mine in 1990, it was 16 inches at the base and at 6 1/2 years old, it still scored 182 6/8” Lester Kish shot a 200+ ram that same year that was older than mine and had 15 inch bases, so that possibility of the continued growth due to feed and genetics may be a factor.

All I know is that I deserve another sheep, it has been 30 years...

FA2B51D6-1015-494B-9F1C-3EFAF3572FF4.jpeg
 
By itself, the information is mostly just a curiosity.
This data should be compared with herd density, yearly weather trends and extremes and of course, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation.
 
Have a lot of points but being an old fart not expecting to draw. Only put in for one zone that I know the entire lay of the country. Will continue to apply as long as I can walk. MTG
 

Forum statistics

Threads
110,807
Messages
1,935,136
Members
34,886
Latest member
tvrguy
Back
Top