Montana - Time to Shake it Up?

[MTTW]

I guess im skeptical. Do you have proof?

I was told feed wasnt a limitation

If you have ever spent time on what used to be mule deer winter range in sw Mt it is completely obvious. There is nothing left to eat when elk numbers are high.

Read the Tex Creek mule deer study.
Read what MTFWP has to say about it.
Read the link in the post above yours.
I am not sure what you would consider "proof," there is not much of that to be found if you don't believe the scientists and if you never saw this country before it was covered with elk.

 

[Forkyfinder]

If you have ever spent time on what used to be mule deer winter range in sw Mt it is completely obvious. There is nothing left to eat when elk numbers are high.

Read the Tex Creek mule deer study.
Read what MTFWP has to say about it.
Read the link in the post above yours.
I am not sure what you would consider "proof," there is not much of that to be found if you don't believe the scientists and if you never saw this country before it was covered with elk.

Not long ago - i was chastised for suggesting commercial overgrazing is a major contributing problem for deer/elk populations that could be higher.

Why are the elk in the district solely to be the problem - and not rangw management?

 

[antlerradar]

Not long ago - i was chastised for suggesting commercial overgrazing is a major contributing problem for deer/elk populations that could be higher.

Why are the elk in the district solely to be the problem - and not rangw management?

Likely because deer and cattle are not concentrated on winter range at the same time for the most part.

 

[MTTW]

Not long ago - i was chastised for suggesting commercial overgrazing is a major contributing problem for deer/elk populations that could be higher.

Why are the elk in the district solely to be the problem - and not rangw management?

It all depends on where you are talking about, I suppose. In most winter range areas near me the snow blows off the low ridges exposing feed and piles up in between. The elk by the hundreds eat the exposed feed to the 1 inch tall. Many of the mule deer stay up in the timber for the most part and go from tree to tree eating the available food for as long as they can. They will drop lower if it gets really cold, clear below the elk into peoples' yards or to the river bottom. They never get fat. Harsh winters really hurt them.

There are far less cattle grazing the forest and the private in this area than when I was a kid.
I don't blame our mule deer problems on any one thing and believe that all of the detrimental factors listed in the posts above are legit. The problems vary from one area to another, and I think it is best to concentrate on making the changes that are doable rather than wishful thinking or focusing on our personal pet peeves. The area where I spend a lot of time would benefit from predator reduction, but realistically it will be very limited if it ever happens at all. Elk numbers could be lower and would help some, but they have been trying to reduce elk numbers around here for years with little success. I don't see that changing.

I believe that we should regulate ourselves first. We simply can't keep increasing hunter pressure on a declining population and expect any other change to make much of a difference.

 

[Forkyfinder]

Likely because deer and cattle are not concentrated on winter range at the same time for the most part.

Asking to learn/understand - how does that work? Especially in SE MT or the Breaks when theres less elevation change to cleanly define winter/summer. Are the deer/elk on the winter range later?

I feel like unelastic approaches (not wanting to slash opportunity in example) while things change like numbers, drought, and bad winters is just going to result in highs and lows like this. Hard to be quick changing for a lot of reasons.

 

[Forkyfinder]

It all depends on where you are talking about, I suppose. In most winter range areas near me the snow blows off the low ridges exposing feed and piles up in between. The elk by the hundreds eat the exposed feed to the 1 inch tall. Many of the mule deer stay up in the timber for the most part and go from tree to tree eating the available food for as long as they can. They will drop lower if it gets really cold, clear below the elk into peoples' yards or to the river bottom. They never get fat. Harsh winters really hurt them.

There are far less cattle grazing the forest and the private in this area than when I was a kid.
I don't blame our mule deer problems on any one thing and believe that all of the detrimental factors listed in the posts above are legit. The problems vary from one area to another, and I think it is best to concentrate on making the changes that are doable rather than wishful thinking or focusing on our personal pet peeves. The area where I spend a lot of time would benefit from predator reduction, but realistically it will be very limited if it ever happens at all. Elk numbers could be lower and would help some, but they have been trying to reduce elk numbers around here for years with little success. I don't see that changing.

I believe that we should regulate ourselves first. We simply can't keep increasing hunter pressure on a declining population and expect any other change to make much of a difference.

Great point about it being specific. It really would come down to drainages even within areas. Its hard to correlate a bio study with totally different landscape/ecoglogy...

 

[8andcounting]

https://fwp.mt.gov/binaries/content/assets/fwp/montana-outdoors/our-point-of-view/2024/dmma24.pdf

News release from FWP today

 

[mtlilguy]

Asking to learn/understand - how does that work? Especially in SE MT or the Breaks when theres less elevation change to cleanly define winter/summer. Are the deer/elk on the winter range later?

A cow's winter range and deer/elk winter range are in different places. Ranchers will keep them closer to home and/or in easily accessible pastures for feeding and calving. Deer and elk like breaks topography and/or secluded areas with browse/grass close by.

 

[ismith]

Probably time to go to draw only for mule deer, as much as I hate to say it.

 

[Stone_Ice_1]

https://fwp.mt.gov/binaries/content/assets/fwp/montana-outdoors/our-point-of-view/2024/dmma24.pdf

News release from FWP today

How do we know what mule deer hunters and others see and want? We ask with surveys, and we listen when people come into our offices and show up at public meetings.


Ba ha ha ha ha. This is the quote that is highlighted in big bold letters in the article. None of these things are true. Surveys are an absolute joke. Public meetings they come with an agenda and stick to it regardless of what they hear.

 

[antlerradar]

Asking to learn/understand - how does that work? Especially in SE MT or the Breaks when theres less elevation change to cleanly define winter/summer. Are the deer/elk on the winter range later?

I feel like unelastic approaches (not wanting to slash opportunity in example) while things change like numbers, drought, and bad winters is just going to result in highs and lows like this. Hard to be quick changing for a lot of reasons.

@mtlilguy said it best, Ranchers don't tend to winter cattle on good deer winter range. Pine trees, Cows and deep snow don't mix well in SE MT. There are of course exceptions, but for the most part even then the cows tend to stick close to the feed ground and don't venture back into the rough stuff where the best winter range is.
During the spring and summer Cows tend to avoid the best winter range too. Lets face it, Cows are fat and lazy, walking up steep and rocky hills is just not for them if they can avoid it. Even if cows do get into the better winter range during the spring and summer, they are most likely stuffing there gut with grass and not the shrubs that deer will be eating during the winter. Even if the cows do happen to eat some of the shrubs it is not necessarily a bad thing. The shrub still has time in the growing season to regrow some new growth before winter and that new growth will be more nutritious.
Elk on the other hand are more than willing to get into the rough stuff and eat the shrubs that deer need during the winter when there is no chance to regrow new growth and the elk can get to food that deer can not reach. I do not think that elk are near the issue on winter range in SE MT that they are in Western MT. We are not short of quality winter range and on easy winters like this one elk and deer can winter just about anywhere with out issue. Even on the tough years elk don't really need to concentrate on the best deer winter range to survive.

 

[sclancy27]

Not long ago - i was chastised for suggesting commercial overgrazing is a major contributing problem for deer/elk populations that could be higher.

Why are the elk in the district solely to be the problem - and not rangw management?

I think range management is an issue, but just saying it is "overgrazing" is way too simple. If you look at the history of some of the big WMA's, they were able to increase winter range production by grazing cattle at certain times of the year. It's a timing and intensity thing with cattle that can either improve that range for wildlife or make it tough on wildlife, hence the "management".

 

[Eric Albus]

One of the things I worry about with the soon to be mule deer committee is that there is going to be a push to help mule deer by shooting more bull elk. I will do my best to derail that bad way forward.

Need to be more cow elk harvested, NOT bulls. I will help as much as I can on that front, and cograts to you for making the committee too!

 

[Forkyfinder]

I think range management is an issue, but just saying it is "overgrazing" is way too simple. If you look at the history of some of the big WMA's, they were able to increase winter range production by grazing cattle at certain times of the year. It's a timing and intensity thing with cattle that can either improve that range for wildlife or make it tough on wildlife, hence the "management".

I dont disagree - it was an over simplification.

I do feel that there are many people who are pushing a war on elk to save the deer wont succeed in saving deer...

 

[Ben Lamb]

I dont disagree - it was an over simplification.

I do feel that there are many people who are pushing a war on elk to save the deer wont succeed in saving deer...

This is a great point.

It's also a part of the conversation around how we use the lands that are open to hunting, and what the conventional wisdom says versus the non-conventional. Placing more pressure on elk on private through increased cow opportunity isn't a bad thing, as is limiting cow hunting opportunity on public. We've seen what the inverse scenario does for elk over the last 20-40 years, and there's a chance to increase accessible lands once we remove the antler component to things. That doesn't mean ceding antler harvest to only those who can pay, but it does mean that everyone recognizes that hunting is more than just recreation, and that there's a relationship between landowners and hunters that needs to strengthen in order for that to become more of an everyday occurrence rather than the anomaly.

 

[Forkyfinder]

This is a great point.

It's also a part of the conversation around how we use the lands that are open to hunting, and what the conventional wisdom says versus the non-conventional. Placing more pressure on elk on private through increased cow opportunity isn't a bad thing, as is limiting cow hunting opportunity on public. We've seen what the inverse scenario does for elk over the last 20-40 years, and there's a chance to increase accessible lands once we remove the antler component to things. That doesn't mean ceding antler harvest to only those who can pay, but it does mean that everyone recognizes that hunting is more than just recreation, and that there's a relationship between landowners and hunters that needs to strengthen in order for that to become more of an everyday occurrence rather than the anomaly.

Absolutely.

 

[Eric Albus]

This is a great point.

It's also a part of the conversation around how we use the lands that are open to hunting, and what the conventional wisdom says versus the non-conventional. Placing more pressure on elk on private through increased cow opportunity isn't a bad thing, as is limiting cow hunting opportunity on public. We've seen what the inverse scenario does for elk over the last 20-40 years, and there's a chance to increase accessible lands once we remove the antler component to things. That doesn't mean ceding antler harvest to only those who can pay, but it does mean that everyone recognizes that hunting is more than just recreation, and that there's a relationship between landowners and hunters that needs to strengthen in order for that to become more of an everyday occurrence rather than the anomaly.

Ben,
Great observations. I’ll take it a step further and say hunting is WAY more than recreation.
It is part of mankind’s responsibility to manage wildlife responsibly, and have something worthy of being passed down to future generations.
What we are working on is a way different model, learning from past management strategies that may have been great when implemented, but changing landscape with new ownership, unchecked predator populations, unlimited hunting pressure for months on end, I can keep going but I’ll stop here. We need drastically new management strategies if we’re to have anything for the future.