MT ELK, Changing it up?

rogerthat

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 29, 2015
Messages
646
You can use Quentin Kujalas quote from 2012 in your email about what increased numbers did to hunting and elk populations.


“According to Quentin Kujala, a Wildlife Bureau official for Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks, increased archery hunter numbers caused ripple effects that splashed beyond conflicts over individual animals. Growing hunting pressure on public land pushed elk onto private property. That made the animals off-limits for many archers. It also made them harder to reach during the general rifle season, when, unlike the archery season, tags were limited.”
Was that quote about a specific unit?
 

Greenhorn

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2000
Messages
9,035
Location
MONTANA
Wait, are they still actively changing the proposed season structure WHILE it's our for public comment?
I bet they are claiming a "mistake" or a "typo".. hence the word correction in the link. I also bet it was intentional, in hopes that everybody commented on that nugget and not "unlimited" impact. Can you imagine how many private land bowhunters called in screaming about that - maybe directly to the governor himself.
 

neffa3

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 17, 2015
Messages
7,430
Location
Wenatchee
I bet they are claiming a "mistake" or a "typo".. hence the word correction in the link. I also bet it was intentional, in hopes that everybody commented on that nugget and not "unlimited" impact. Can you imagine how many private land bowhunters called in screaming about that - maybe directly to the governor himself.
GD that is slimy.
 

Redside

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 13, 2016
Messages
315
Is there any wording about having to make it 1st choice? I know there were people at the meeting asking for that. I couldn't find anything.
 

Greenhorn

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2000
Messages
9,035
Location
MONTANA
It's clear they can't get anything right. We are hosed. The 700-20 is under the 702, 704, 705 heading. I think they "mean" the 799 permit. Who knows what they mean. It's intentional to distract comments from the "unlimited" archery permits.
 

neffa3

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 17, 2015
Messages
7,430
Location
Wenatchee
 

Beignet

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2021
Messages
524
Location
Missoula
Is there any wording about having to make it 1st choice? I know there were people at the meeting asking for that. I couldn't find anything.
Seemed like MOGA in particular is lobbying to make it first or second choice so their clientele might have a backup if they don’t draw another marquee rifle tag.
 

MTHunter1321

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 10, 2015
Messages
440
Location
Great Falls, MT
I bet they are claiming a "mistake" or a "typo".. hence the word correction in the link. I also bet it was intentional, in hopes that everybody commented on that nugget and not "unlimited" impact. Can you imagine how many private land bowhunters called in screaming about that - maybe directly to the governor himself.
Similar to this little nugget that’s yet to be addressed by anyone in FWP. Also happens to be the unit for the N Bar…hoping I can address it at the Region 5 zoom call next week.
 

Attachments

  • C00EEE09-113E-41D0-8B1E-FE392FFB8A14.jpeg
    C00EEE09-113E-41D0-8B1E-FE392FFB8A14.jpeg
    6.2 MB · Views: 55

Greenhorn

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2000
Messages
9,035
Location
MONTANA
Similar to this little nugget that’s yet to be addressed by anyone in FWP. Also happens to be the unit for the N Bar…hoping I can address it at the Region 5 zoom call next week.
Silly little details, no big deal, move along now..
 

Big Fin

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2000
Messages
15,540
Location
Bozeman, MT
Similar to this little nugget that’s yet to be addressed by anyone in FWP. Also happens to be the unit for the N Bar…hoping I can address it at the Region 5 zoom call next week.
That's complete BS. Absent some FWP explanation we've yet seen and that I doubt we'll see, this is using the mechanisms of a state agency to repay favors and create immense added property value to a private party, all with a currency of a public-trusteed resource.
 

Trap

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 17, 2021
Messages
432
If the FWP wants to get rid of more elk, than they need to make it easier for the hunter to accomplish this. I harvested my first bull elk on public land on October 24th, the 2nd day of the firearm season, don't get me wrong, I was totally stoked to fill my tag on the second day of the season and being the second day hunting for elk in my life, I think someone should be able to get a second tag, if they want one, I feel a hunter that has harvested one has a better chance of harvesting another...
What? Are you serious? Me and my son both got our elk on our first day of elk hunting this year. Should we be able to shoot 3 elk then?
Since we have a better chance of killing elk? Lol how many elk does 1 hunter need to kill in a season? I couldn’t tell if you were being sarcastic but I hope you were.
 

JLS

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 26, 2012
Messages
15,155
Location
Almost Arkansas…..
What? Are you serious? Me and my son both got our elk on our first day of elk hunting this year. Should we be able to shoot 3 elk then?
Since we have a better chance of killing elk? Lol how many elk does 1 hunter need to kill in a season? I couldn’t tell if you were being sarcastic but I hope you were.
Pretty sure he already could get a second tag.
 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
100,414
Messages
1,587,689
Members
31,514
Latest member
Dukester
Top