Montana - Time to Shake it Up?

[Gerald Martin]

I agree that environmental issues have an effect, but it is not all about the environment. If it was every deer that spent its life on the irrigated alfalfa river bottoms should be a potential record book buck at age four. That is just not the case.

I may have been a bit too obtuse with my “environmental” concerns. Most bucks don’t have the lifespan to reach their genetic potential. There’s only a small minority of bucks that have the genetic capacity to be a record book buck. Even less if the majority of all bucks get shot by 3 1/2.

I don’t think Montana’s quality has anything to do with a decline in the quality of genetics. It’s almost completely a factor of bucks getting shot before they can top out with antler growth.

 

[Gerald Martin]

So I'll be honest here. I haven't joined in the discussion much because this feeling you all have on quantity, quality and all around health of our deer populations are nothing new.

Kinda a piss poor attitude on my part, but it's arrived from years of getting kicked in the arse on the subject. With lots of wasted time to show for the efforts. Although (Bitterroot speaking ) we did get the first limited entry deer districts in the state with most sought after tags in Montana for mule deer.

I attended a "MULE DEER SUMMIT" back in (around here) 1990. it was held in Missoula Montana at the Edge water motel. There were many disgruntled deer hunters there. We just came down off the outstanding deer hunting and populations of the 1980's only to a new low that appeared to all as a catastrophic decline in everything.

Literally there were stock trucks coming back from Eastern Montana with upwards of 40 deer hanging from the stock rails on the trucks. You could kill somewhere around 5 deer each.

So my turn to testify on the "mysterious decline", and I said that IMO, it was more prevalent on the public lands as the lead contamination was thicker there as opposed to the private. Areas of private hadn't declined like those of the public and that was somehow confusing to the department personal. They basically shrugged their shoulders and said that mule deer cycles in these wild swings and if you don't kill them they die any way.

I said that IMO again, lets try something new here, and it might sound radical, but if we know that the deer populations are going to crash (as they said) that we might issue less tags, not more, as we don't know which deer would die naturally and we might keep the lows from getting so low, just as we do with the deer populations were on the increase we killed more deer to keep the populations from climbing to high to fast, and we might call this new idea, "Deer management". Of course there were many frowns coming from the department personal.

Just my .02 cents worth, as you fellas are doing some good work here and I'll join in where I can.

If 40% of deer are going to die of winter kill anyway it makes perfect sense to let hunters kill 50-60% of the population. That 10% of total population before hunting season won’t make much difference in rebuilding populations…. especially since does are generally going to have fewer fawns after a hard winter.

I never could understand that logic.

 

[WanderWoman]

I am sure that there are ways to reconcile the two, but this kind of flies in the face of all the studies that say a buck /doe ratio of one to ten is enough to get the job done.

I was thinking about this too, and that 10:100 ratio could be tied more to how mule deer tend to get a small harem of does vs. a whitetail tending a single doe at a time. If that’s the case then that ratio may be more plausible.

 

[DFS]

I was thinking about this too, and that 10:100 ratio could be tied more to how mule deer tend to get a small harem of does vs. a whitetail tending a single doe at a time. If that’s the case then that ratio may be more plausible.

Bucks that get small harems die quickly on accessible land. The bucks that have a chance of living are acting like whitetails I think there has been a shift to that behavior. It really is unfair to the species and borderline unethical to hunt muleys while they are rutting with high powered rifles with Montana’s unlimited season structure. It’s pretty straightforward stop hunting them while they rut and stop shooting does. Hunting them in October would lead to a less selective harvest maybe that ultimately helps with cwd management. Hard to be very positive with the future of mule deer. I’m glad people are at least talking about them though.

 

[antlerradar]

I was thinking about this too, and that 10:100 ratio could be tied more to how mule deer tend to get a small harem of does vs. a whitetail tending a single doe at a time. If that’s the case then that ratio may be more plausible.

Bucks that get small harems die quickly on accessible land. The bucks that have a chance of living are acting like whitetails I think there has been a shift to that behavior. It really is unfair to the species and borderline unethical to hunt muleys while they are rutting with high powered rifles with Montana’s unlimited season structure. It’s pretty straightforward stop hunting them while they rut and stop shooting does. Hunting them in October would lead to a less selective harvest maybe that ultimately helps with cwd management. Hard to be very positive with the future of mule deer. I’m glad people are at least talking about them though.

When I was young in the late 70's and 80's if you found a group of 10 or so does during November there was always a good buck close by. Now I often see groups of does during November with small bucks or even no bucks at all. One of the best bucks I have ever Shoot did exactly as Doug is describing. I was watching a group of about twenty does on a river bottom. A small three point was tending to the herd. The buck I shot shows up on the edge of the field and makes for the herd at a good pace. Cuts the hot doe out of the herd and herds her back into the hills like a whitetail. I shot him back in the hills a good mile and a half from where he picked up the doe. Even though he lived very close to my house, I only saw him one other time right at dark. Most of the time I think he spent back in some real rough juniper choked canyons. I would have never gotten him with out the rut and even then a lot of luck was involved.

 

[rogerthat]

[QUOTE="WanderWoman, post: 3713633, member: 43685]

[*]Rut hunting. I really want to hear folks’ perspectives on this, too. There’s an argument for shortening the season to cut out rut hunting. But in doing so, we are applying the bulk of hunting pressure prior to breeding. If hunters are still targeting the ‘larger’ bucks, they’re harvesting them before they get a chance to pass on their genetics. Granted there’s also the fact that these bucks would be less vulnerable and more might survive, but does that override the effect of removing a proportion of the ‘greatest’ before they breed?
[/QUOTE]

@WanderWoman

I said I was done on this thread but I want to speak to this point and then I will be done!. The vulnerability of the “large” bucks during the rut can’t be overstated with a general/otc type structure.

Since now we are talking “large” bucks, I usually shy away from this discussion since people have a tendency to stereotype and quit listening. First off I will say I hunt for meat first and for the challenge second. So call me a “trophy” hunter or “selective” or whatever I don’t care but I specifically target the oldest and largest male game animal available to me on a given tag and don’t settle. Some people on here get a little judgy about this style of hunting but I would definitely argue it’s a very low impact style with a very high time/dollar commitment to harvest ratio. Anyway that’s just how i hunt and the point I’m making is i focus on the “large” males like a laser in any season type so I feel I have a good handle on the relationship of the different season structures and big bucks.

So back to Montana and general /otc season timing that encompasses the rut, with this season structure, there is a threshold of hunting pressure (we are there in montana) where you have effectively zero “large” bucks that make it through the season on accessible lands due to how vulnerable the rut makes these big bucks to hunters. (Yes there will always be the anomaly as I’m sure someone will cite a buck or two) Further more even on non accessible private lands the path to survival can be tough for these big bucks. For example I have a friend that owns a 60 section ranch with one accessible section of state land and some limited hunting pressure on all his neighbors properties. More often bucks he passes up to “save” get shot on the neighbors or the state section due to the “vulnerability” (distance they travel, on their feet all day, visibility) of these big bucks during the rut. Point is they are extremely vulnerable to harvest with this season structure. Their only chance really is if they get lucky and hang out where no one is hunting or an area highly managed ie private lands.

Now let’s contrast that with general season during October. These same up and coming big bucks are much tougher to find. Really big old bucks (5 plus) are like ghosts Yes some get harvested in an October season but some don’t. Even with extreme amounts of pressure these big bucks which are by themselves and nocturnal figure out how to survive and are damn hard to kill. To have the highest chance for success on these late September or October hunts on the biggest of the big it takes an extreme amount of scouting time to get you in the right area and even then with lots of hunting time you probably still won’t see the big buck your after. Case in point Idaho and Wyoming. On good years you can scout up multiple big bucks to hunt for if you know what you’re doing. And I’m talking big, 180 plus. You can’t do that in Montana because the bucks just simply don’t exist.

So to make it crystal clear, with general/otc rut hunting you have effectively zero big bucks or the occasional anomaly on public land (with private quality being managed by landowners) vs non rut hunting there are always a few big bucks somewhere. So to me it always comes down to “what are your objectives?” If you want a handful of “big” bucks around in most units, then you can’t general hunt the rut, it’s literally that simple and every hardcore big buck hunter knows that.

 

[WanderWoman]

When I was young in the late 70's and 80's if you found a group of 10 or so does during November there was always a good buck close by. Now I often see groups of does during November with small bucks or even no bucks at all. One of the best bucks I have ever Shoot did exactly as Doug is describing. I was watching a group of about twenty does on a river bottom. A small three point was tending to the herd. The buck I shot shows up on the edge of the field and makes for the herd at a good pace. Cuts the hot doe out of the herd and herds her back into the hills like a whitetail. I shot him back in the hills a good mile and a half from where he picked up the doe. Even though he lived very close to my house, I only saw him one other time right at dark. Most of the time I think he spent back in some real rough juniper choked canyons. I would have never gotten him with out the rut and even then a lot of luck was involved.

That’s so interesting. I noticed something like that this year too, for the first time, but admittedly I hunt elk a lot more than I hunt mule deer generally.

I was out at a place (BMA/public land) Friday after Thanksgiving that generally holds good numbers of deer. The week before, nearby, I saw a few groups of does with bucks and good, typical rutting action. Right at first light I saw a nice buck heading to some timber with a group of does, rutting on them, but I lost them and while I found the does later, never saw him again. Saw several other good groups of does that day but no bucks with them; there would be a solitary buck bedded a small coulee or two over though. I thought that was interesting and at the time attributed to “oh I guess maybe they’re getting close to being done” but that felt odd.

 

[8andcounting]

That’s so interesting. I noticed something like that this year too, for the first time, but admittedly I hunt elk a lot more than I hunt mule deer generally.

I was out at a place (BMA/public land) Friday after Thanksgiving that generally holds good numbers of deer.

I thought that was interesting and at the time attributed to “oh I guess maybe they’re getting close to being done” but that felt odd.

I was hunting that entire week (central MT) and the rut , atleast where I was at was basically over by thanksgiving. The odd one or two still going but mostly over . I was surprised .

 

[OntarioHunter]

The problem with the long season during the rut is it allows us to be more selective, add in the advancements in technology in recent years and quality hunters can come close to culling a deer herd as effectively as I can cull cows in the corral. My father guided during the 60's and 70's, they killed some big bucks, but he will quickly tell you that they had a lot more that got away that wouldn't have today.
I would change the "hunter generally target older, bigger bucks" to hunters target bigger bucks that tend to be older. There is a difference. Not all big bucks are old and plenty of old buck have never been big. The best buck I have ever seen potential wise was 140+ as a two year old and 180 as a three year old. I have also seen bucks that lived to double digits and never grew a set of antlers better than 120. As it sits today in MT the bigger buck has almost zero chance of living past four unless he is living on private land where he is protected. The smaller buck can live on public to an older age in easten MT. @OntarioHunter's buck this year is a good example.
Managment wise the less selective we are the better. It does no good when it comes to CWD if we reduse the avrage age of harvestof the bucks at the top side of the bell curve by a year and at the same time we add years of age to the bucks on the bottome of the bell curve. This is what is happening on private land that has limited pressure.
The key is buck are less vulnerable. I can not tell you how many bucks I have seen over the years that spent most of the fall in roadless hard to hunt juniper jungles only to see them crewsing around a hay field or standing next to a road during mid Nov. It is true that we would still kill many of the bucks and most would want to kill a big one, but it would be harder too be as selective during Oct.

I'm not sure I would classify the buck I shot this year as a "small one living on public land that lived to an old age." Three big 200 lb guys worked for fifteen minutes trying to lift it into the back of a SxS. Seeing it on the skyline at about 220 yards I made a quick decision to shoot based on the height and width of the rack. Sure looked like a big one to me. I killed it on a rather narrow BMA parcel. Adjacent lands are mixed between federal, state, BMA, and posted private. Hard to say where that buck spent his life. Deer don't respect four foot four-strand barbed wire boundaries. Incidentally, after stripping the skull it appears the buck was between 5.5 and 6.5 years old. He was probably a good one to take out of the gene pool. Though his rack is wide and tall, the forks were rather short. Also, he had been injured and possibly blind in right eye. Hardly any fat on him too.

 

[antlerradar]

That’s so interesting. I noticed something like that this year too, for the first time, but admittedly I hunt elk a lot more than I hunt mule deer generally.

I was out at a place (BMA/public land) Friday after Thanksgiving that generally holds good numbers of deer. The week before, nearby, I saw a few groups of does with bucks and good, typical rutting action. Right at first light I saw a nice buck heading to some timber with a group of does, rutting on them, but I lost them and while I found the does later, never saw him again. Saw several other good groups of does that day but no bucks with them; there would be a solitary buck bedded a small coulee or two over though. I thought that was interesting and at the time attributed to “oh I guess maybe they’re getting close to being done” but that felt odd.

Especially with Thanksgiving being so early this year. In 81 my dad and I shot a 196 buck out of a herd of over twenty does on the last day of the season.
I often hear now that the rut hasn't started or the weather is effecting the rut from hunters today even in mid November. It could be just that OTC November hunting has changed the way mule deer rut over the decades.

 

[antlerradar]

I'm not sure I would classify the buck I shot this year as a "small one living on public land that lived to an old age." Three big 200 lb guys worked for fifteen minutes trying to lift it into the back of a SxS. Seeing it on the skyline at about 220 yards I made a quick decision to shoot based on the height and width of the rack. Sure looked like a big one to me. I killed it on a rather narrow BMA parcel. Adjacent lands are mixed between federal, state, BMA, and posted private. Hard to say where that buck spent his life. Deer don't respect four foot four-strand barbed wire boundaries. Incidentally, after stripping the skull it appears the buck was between 5.5 and 6.5 years old. He was probably a good one to take out of the gene pool. Though his rack is wide and tall, the forks were rather short. Also, he had been injured and possibly blind in right eye. Hardly any fat on him too.
View attachment 310951

Ontario, Your buck is a fine buck and I am happy you got him. Big is in the eye of the hunter and I have no issue with you calling a big bodied old buck a "big buck". My point is that bucks with the potential to grow over sized antlers look just as big or bigger in the field at age two. The buck looking at us in the picture is the one I was comparing your buck to. At age two he would have scored as much as the buck you took and he would have looked much bigger standing out in the field as he didn't have that 5 or 6 year old body to go with his antlers. At age three he scored over 180 gross and I severely over estimated those antlers because of the body size. I have the antlers from age three and one from age two. At age four in the picture he is in the mid 190's. He didn't make it to five, even though he lived on lightly hunted private land. Everyone was talking about him, and I should have taken him when I had the chance, but I kept thinking of his potential. I truly believe this buck at age 6+ had the potential to break the state record.

 

[antlerradar]

[QUOTE="WanderWoman, post: 3713633, member: 43685]

[*]Rut hunting. I really want to hear folks’ perspectives on this, too. There’s an argument for shortening the season to cut out rut hunting. But in doing so, we are applying the bulk of hunting pressure prior to breeding. If hunters are still targeting the ‘larger’ bucks, they’re harvesting them before they get a chance to pass on their genetics. Granted there’s also the fact that these bucks would be less vulnerable and more might survive, but does that override the effect of removing a proportion of the ‘greatest’ before they breed?

So back to Montana and general /otc season timing that encompasses the rut, with this season structure, there is a threshold of hunting pressure (we are there in montana) where you have effectively zero “large” bucks that make it through the season on accessible lands due to how vulnerable the rut makes these big bucks to hunters. (Yes there will always be the anomaly as I’m sure someone will cite a buck or two) Further more even on non accessible private lands the path to survival can be tough for these big bucks. For example I have a friend that owns a 60 section ranch with one accessible section of state land and some limited hunting pressure on all his neighbors properties. More often bucks he passes up to “save” get shot on the neighbors or the state section due to the “vulnerability” (distance they travel, on their feet all day, visibility) of these big bucks during the rut. Point is they are extremely vulnerable to harvest with this season structure. Their only chance really is if they get lucky and hang out where no one is hunting or an area highly managed ie private lands.


[/QUOTE]

This is what I am seeing also. In the 80's and even 90's I found many large bucks on public land that survived several seasons as large bucks. In the last twenty five years I only know of one very large buck that was able to do this and I strongly supect that he was only able to surive by moving to a large private parcle with nearly zero hunting during the season.

 

[cgasner1]

Ontario, Your buck is a fine buck and I am happy you got him. Big is in the eye of the hunter and I have no issue with you calling a big bodied old buck a "big buck". My point is that bucks with the potential to grow over sized antlers look just as big or bigger in the field at age two. The buck looking at us in the picture is the one I was comparing your buck to. At age two he would have scored as much as the buck you took and he would have looked much bigger standing out in the field as he didn't have that 5 or 6 year old body to go with his antlers. At age three he scored over 180 gross and I severely over estimated those antlers because of the body size. I have the antlers from age three and one from age two. At age four in the picture he is in the mid 190's. He didn't make it to five, even though he lived on lightly hunted private land. Everyone was talking about him, and I should have taken him when I had the chance, but I kept thinking of his potential. I truly believe this buck at age 6+ had the potential to break the state record.


View attachment 310964

My first buck over 180 was aged at 3.5 years old. I couldn’t believe it at the time

 

[OntarioHunter]

Ontario, Your buck is a fine buck and I am happy you got him. Big is in the eye of the hunter and I have no issue with you calling a big bodied old buck a "big buck". My point is that bucks with the potential to grow over sized antlers look just as big or bigger in the field at age two. The buck looking at us in the picture is the one I was comparing your buck to. At age two he would have scored as much as the buck you took and he would have looked much bigger standing out in the field as he didn't have that 5 or 6 year old body to go with his antlers. At age three he scored over 180 gross and I severely over estimated those antlers because of the body size. I have the antlers from age three and one from age two. At age four in the picture he is in the mid 190's. He didn't make it to five, even though he lived on lightly hunted private land. Everyone was talking about him, and I should have taken him when I had the chance, but I kept thinking of his potential. I truly believe this buck at age 6+ had the potential to break the state record.


View attachment 310964

Yes, preserving your pet deer for a state record was obviously important to you. I place a much higher value on taking a wild public land buck with a respectable set of horns. Well, he was a wild public land buck at the moment I shot him. He may have been an escapee from the pay to play McMansion "ranch" down the road. I hope so. The point being I took my respectable buck without putting any other hunter at a disadvantage to harvest what rightfully belongs to both of us. The only advantage to me was having two healthy legs and the willingness to use them.

 

[SwaggyD]

The point being I took my respectable buck without putting any other hunter at a disadvantage

Maybe not a disadvantage, but a risk? That possibility is there.

Seeing it on the skyline at about 220 yards I made a quick decision to shoot

Know your target and beyond! Amirite?!

 

[OntarioHunter]

Maybe not a disadvantage, but a risk? That possibility is there.


Know your target and beyond! Amirite?!

I know that land. I knew what lay beyond to the next skyline. Nothing. I also knew no one else was hunting on that property that day.

There is also a risk that I will get hit by a meteorite when I walk the dogs down the street this afternoon.

 

[Point Creep]

I know that land. I knew what lay beyond to the next skyline. Nothing. I also knew no one else was hunting on that property that day.
View attachment 311042
There is also a risk that I will get hit by a meteorite when I walk the dogs down the street this afternoon.

That poor deer. I cannot think of a more humiliating way for a deer to die, blind or not. To be taken by the bag of shit fire guy .. Ouch.

 

[antlerradar]

Yes, preserving your pet deer for a state record was obviously important to you. I place a much higher value on taking a wild public land buck with a respectable set of horns. Well, he was a wild public land buck at the moment I shot him. He may have been an escapee from the pay to play McMansion "ranch" down the road. I hope so. The point being I took my respectable buck without putting any other hunter at a disadvantage to harvest what rightfully belongs to both of us. The only advantage to me was having two healthy legs and the willingness to use them.

I may very well have passed on him if he was on public too. Just recently I refused to hunt an even bigger public deer because I would have rather seen a friend or his kids get him.
Not hunting him was the easy part, not looking for his sheds took will power.

 

[rogerthat]

Yes, preserving your pet deer for a state record was obviously important to you. I place a much higher value on taking a wild public land buck with a respectable set of horns. Well, he was a wild public land buck at the moment I shot him. He may have been an escapee from the pay to play McMansion "ranch" down the road. I hope so. The point being I took my respectable buck without putting any other hunter at a disadvantage to harvest what rightfully belongs to both of us. The only advantage to me was having two healthy legs and the willingness to use them.

You may have hit that deer but you completely missed @antlerradar point.

 

[cgasner1]

You may have hit that deer but you completely missed @antlerradar point.

We are better off at this point to talk about wanting a mature age class and leave antler size out of the conversation. Just because some guy on the web killed a mature dink doesn’t mean our deer are doing well