More LE units montana

[Killergaurd]

I don't know if this has every been tried or acceptable on this site but is there any one with knowledge or some pull to get more limited entry units in montana. I have gone to many FWP meetings and I have brought this up with no result. I don't know if it would be as simple as printing off a sheet for people to sign directly from here. Acourse there would be great detail and specifics, hopefully done by someone other than me. Looking at draw odds in MT I don't think we would have a problem with getting people on board. My only input would be to pick a unit with very little private land or little as possible. I know the number one excuse is it displaces hunters. A simple answer would be make it like the elkhorns or breaks. I know the spike killing in the elkhorns opposes a trophy unit and the breaks bow tag dilutes the unit but a price to pay to keep everyone happy.

 

[mdunc8]

Half the state, maybe more, is already limited...

 

[tjones]

First things first.

Convince FWP elk management is more important then hunter opportunity.

Next get more hunters engaged in the process. Tentative season proposals for the 2018-2019 are being worked on NOW. If you wait until the public meetings start you are to late.

 

[BuzzH]

Killerguard, I see where you're going...and where you're trying to get.

I think you're asking the wrong question though. The right question is "How do we get elk back on Public land"?

Its my contention, that if you didn't pound elk flat for 11 weeks on public land, you wouldn't need to go LQ or create more LQ units.

Management needs to focus on how Montana can get elk back on public land, and keep them on public land...while still providing opportunity.

A good place to start is to stop allowing 11 weeks of non-stop pressure...good luck with asking the average sportsman in Montana to give up a single day of opportunity.

But, keep in mind, that in the general OTC units near my house in Laramie we have an elk population of 5500+ 42 bulls per 100 cows, and 49 calves per 100 cows. We have a 30 day archery season, a 14 day rifle season...that's it for bulls.

Funny thing is, you don't need 11 weeks to find an elk to shoot either.

 

[Pagosa]

I hate to even post because I don't want it to explode into another MT FWP bashing. But Buzz is probably correct, even though I don't like his negative posts about the MT FWP. Montana does need to micro manage the elk herds and minimize elk getting pushed onto private lands. The six week archery season and five week rifle seems to minimize harvest overall for the public land hunter.
Reading the harvest reports and individual EMPs it doesn't match. For example I can't see the reason in issuing 250 cow tags in a unit that has a estimated population of 1200-1500, same as three years ago when there were 25 cow tags issued. Or how can 1255 hunters harvest 221 branched bulls when there is a post season bull to cow ratio of 12-15 bulls/100 cows in the same unit mentioned above?
I've only been a resident for four years in Montana, so I don't have the lifelong experience of the hay day elk populations in the 90s and early 2000s. I have hunted Montana as a nonresident four other times between 2001 to 2006, and Colorado quite a lot as a resident. The management difference and hunting experience between Colorado and Montana is light years apart. I don't think the average Montana hunter has much say in the hunting opportunities provided by our state, but gets to pick up the leftovers, and told how great it is. I don't think making more limited units would help as much as season limiting the archery season to 3-4 weeks with a 3 week break to the rifle season and doing a split between the early and late rifle seasons, and stop the over harvest of cows. Colorado did this type of season structure in the early 90s with good success. I'm afraid polictics is too much at pay in Montana.

 

[Killergaurd]

I just thought maybe we could get a bunch of guys to make a push for a couple more limited entry units. I know there are guys on here that are smarter than I and would have the knowledge and experience to make that attempt. Oh well it was worth a shot. As for the elk sanctuarys (private land) it will only continue. FWP, forest service, BLM all cater to private. Private land owners get the best of both worlds pay to play and cash from the goverment for elk/ deer damage. Until FWP manages for the public it will be the same.

 

[Killergaurd]

Not to rant or bash FWP but MT has a longer season than 11 weeks. Private land owners lease out there property which is there right to make a little money. But then turn around and get money from FWP for all the game damage on there property. So FWP comes up with a shoilder season to solve the private land problem. Brilliant. At least the private land owner is in compliance and allowing hunting and will recieve aid from FWP.

 

[hobbes]

I've only been here 6 years myself and was in Colorado for 5 prior to that. I have no interest in more LE units, and I sure as heck don't want to go to Colorado's season structure. In addition, the FWP bashing does get old, especially when it's at the hands of nonresidents. What exactly is the "average" Montana hunter. Apparently they aren't as enlightened as some.

 

[bigsky2]

I think we need more LE mule deer units than we do elk units.

 

[montanza]

I think we need more LE mule deer units than we do elk units.

This!!!^^^

 

[tjones]

I just thought maybe we could get a bunch of guys to make a push for a couple more limited entry units. I know there are guys on here that are smarter than I and would have the knowledge and experience to make that attempt. Oh well it was worth a shot. As for the elk sanctuarys (private land) it will only continue. FWP, forest service, BLM all cater to private. Private land owners get the best of both worlds pay to play and cash from the goverment for elk/ deer damage. Until FWP manages for the public it will be the same.

Pushing for more LE elk units is not a new idea. Happens every biannual season setting period. Happening right now. Getting guys to sign a petition or something similar will do no good. Getting with bios now, right now, might. Most wait till the proposals come out then wonder why they can't change anything.

Non resident or not Buzz speaks the truth about FWP.

Management for 10 bull per 100 and being happy is nuts.

 

[Bugle 'Em In]

Sadly, 10 bulls per 100 elk would be an improvement in the HD I frequent. I'd love for MT to make some sort of a change in management strategy.

 

[phutch30]

I hate to say it to but for once I agree with Buzz. But I wouldn't blame FWP, every time they try do change the structure hunters or politics shuts them down. Having said that, there are A LOT of elk available on public land if a person knows where to look and is willing to get out of their truck and walk.

The other thing to consider

1. soon as an area goes to limited entry u can more or less forget about hunting it, look at the draw odds of any even so so limited unit.
2. where are the hunters that generally hunted that unit going to go? just adds more pressure to surrounding units pushing elk into the limited unit or private land where only a few can hunt

 

[Deleted member 28227]

I hate to even post because I don't want it to explode into another MT FWP bashing. But Buzz is probably correct, even though I don't like his negative posts about the MT FWP. Montana does need to micro manage the elk herds and minimize elk getting pushed onto private lands. The six week archery season and five week rifle seems to minimize harvest overall for the public land hunter.
Reading the harvest reports and individual EMPs it doesn't match. For example I can't see the reason in issuing 250 cow tags in a unit that has a estimated population of 1200-1500, same as three years ago when there were 25 cow tags issued. Or how can 1255 hunters harvest 221 branched bulls when there is a post season bull to cow ratio of 12-15 bulls/100 cows in the same unit mentioned above?
I've only been a resident for four years in Montana, so I don't have the lifelong experience of the hay day elk populations in the 90s and early 2000s. I have hunted Montana as a nonresident four other times between 2001 to 2006, and Colorado quite a lot as a resident. The management difference and hunting experience between Colorado and Montana is light years apart. I don't think the average Montana hunter has much say in the hunting opportunities provided by our state, but gets to pick up the leftovers, and told how great it is. I don't think making more limited units would help as much as season limiting the archery season to 3-4 weeks with a 3 week break to the rifle season and doing a split between the early and late rifle seasons, and stop the over harvest of cows. Colorado did this type of season structure in the early 90s with good success. I'm afraid polictics is too much at pay in Montana.

I had this debate with Buzz on a previous thread but couldn't find the data he was citing... can you direct me to where you found the bull to cow ratio? I have know doubt Buzz is right I just could never find the source.

 

[Killergaurd]

I am guilty of bashing the fwp. They have it coming to a point. Resident or non resident it is public land. If they want to spend good money on poor hunting quality so be it. I know its not the bio he is a good dude. It is the politic$. I hate to say it but phutch u do have valid points. I just look at the draw odds and it is obvious that primo tags are in high demand.

 

[BuzzH]

I had this debate with Buzz on a previous thread but couldn't find the data he was citing... can you direct me to where you found the bull to cow ratio? I have know doubt Buzz is right I just could never find the source.

Call the biologist in the area you're looking into...they have it all. I just got the info. for the gravely range a few days ago...sad.

Like Pagosa is pointing out, their data is severely lacking...and it doesn't add up or make sense. Nobody holds them accountable for their crap/fictitious numbers.

Elk hunting in Montana under the current season structure will not sustain itself. The proof is what has happened to the quality of elk hunting on public land, its dismal. There is a huge push by a lot of people to get access to private, the last place elk have to escape the on-slaught of pressure. If there is success in accessing those private land elk...its all over.

I was talking to a friend of mine the other day about elk and public land. He had a conversation with a friend of his, about the Bob Marshal and how few elk are there. The comment was made, that, "well, there never were many elk in the Bob"...that struck me as pretty funny.

The Bob used to be some of the best elk hunting in the State, and there were a lot of elk in there, and people killed a lot of elk in there. But, they've been hunted so hard, for long, to a person that doesn't remember the 70's, 80's...and what it was like, they actually believe that elk were always this low in number there.

Its the perception of the "new normal"...and that includes not only hunters, but the biologists that "manage" the game. Many have no recollection, or even a way to know, what it used to be.

So the lie gets told that there never were many elk in the Bob, and pretty soon its undisputed fact...and many that don't know better, they start believing that and spreading the lie. Meanwhile, the Bob has about 1/4 of the elk it should, the few elk left, continue to be pounded for (more than 11 weeks)...and we call that the "new normal".

Its sad, and like my friend and I discussed, the MTFWP does not like people that remember what it was like to actually have elk to hunt on public land, or that have hunted the State for 40+ years. They would just as soon we die and they can continue on with their version of the "new normal". Selling their BS data that doesn't add up, and continue to not change a thing, becomes much easier when you don't have people around that know better.

The wasted potential in Montana is staggering...and you wouldn't need LE to improve things, big-time. Sadly, a vast majority of MT hunters just lack the stones to change course.

The "new normal" is accepted policy and business as usual continues.