GG has been good on access, mule deer doe tags are limited and we have seen a cut in NR hunters. Something that I haven’t seen in my life so there definitely were some good things, I wish he hadn’t waded into the corner crossing issue. @WanderWoman
MT EQC to determine corner crossing as "illegal"
- Thread starter Big Fin
- Start date
WanderWoman
Well-known member
When I look at all the accomplishments of Habitat Montana prior to 2021 compared to the last 5 years, or talk with FWP staff about the access/lands projects that might have been, or think of state employee morale, recruitment, and retention (across a ton of agencies), I disagree. The B licenses doesn’t cut it imo and in five years the effects of that will be forgotten or we’ll have even more areas with high CWD prevalence. Not to mention on the opposite end of the spectrum we’re dealing with continued high quotas (archery elk, archery antelope) that greatly affect hunter crowding and public lands hunting… And how there’s this corner crossing fiasco. Can’t say I’m surprised by any of it, unfortunately.
Rack Daniels
Well-known member
That ^^^ gives a whole range of emotions….
BuzzH
Well-known member
I don't live in Montana anymore, but what I was most shocked at when talking with FWP staff is how little support they get from the top. I'm sure that's a big reason for the lack of morale, lack of retaining employees, and retention of the good people they have working there.
Giving an agency direction, not a problem. Being a heavy handed top down manager/a-hole that favors their donors over their own staff, sportsmen, Montana citizens, and wildlife...big giant problem.
I don't believe for one second that Clarks response to corner crossing is anything other than the direction she is getting from GG. What I don't understand is why anyone would continue in a position like that without the autonomy to make decisions. Being a puppet/unmanned drone in a position where you are allegedly hired to make decisions has to be maddening. The very definition of being micro-managed.
I couldn't do it, I wouldn't do it.
Giving an agency direction, not a problem. Being a heavy handed top down manager/a-hole that favors their donors over their own staff, sportsmen, Montana citizens, and wildlife...big giant problem.
I don't believe for one second that Clarks response to corner crossing is anything other than the direction she is getting from GG. What I don't understand is why anyone would continue in a position like that without the autonomy to make decisions. Being a puppet/unmanned drone in a position where you are allegedly hired to make decisions has to be maddening. The very definition of being micro-managed.
I couldn't do it, I wouldn't do it.
I been waiting since the Schweitzer administration for high quotas to be addressed. That seems consistent throughout all of them.
antlerradar
Well-known member
I think that restricting doe hunting to private land could be a good thing when it comes to CWD.
In general the deer herd on public land is lower numbers and low density where the on private the herd numbers are much higher and more concentrated. A single fifty acre alfalfa field can concentrate deer from miles around. Sure the public land deer can and will likely get CWD, it is just that the risk is low when compared to a private land hay field where the risk of spread and high prevalence is going to be much higher. When we have doe tags that are good region wide on both public and private land we are harvesting a lot of low CWD risk public land does and not nearly enough does from high risk private land. I understand that it can be difficult to gain access to private land even for doe hunting. I also under stand that it is not worth it for many hunters to put in the time and effort to build a relationship with landowners just to shoot some does. Makes for a difficult task. Given the risk of CWD though, we have to try to get more does killed in the highest risk deer populations. Hunters will simply not try to gain access to private land if the public option is available. Given the value of does to many landowners, many are simply not going to go through the effort to find doe hunters until it is too late. Going back to region wide doe tags will be not trying in regards to CWD.
I have always been told that the real risk of spreading CWD is older age class bucks and to slow the spread we need to keep the number of older bucks at a minimum. I may not like this, but if it is what is needed for CWD, so be it. We need at a least a fair population of does on public land to keep the bucks where the orange army can shoot them. If hunters shoot too many doe on public or hunting pressure moves them to private it is going to be more difficult to get older age bucks harvested. With out a good population of does on public, the bucks are going to move to private for the majority of the season. On private the buck with the better antlers will likely get shot, but the bucks with poor antlers will live to old age. I am not sure we are really trying to get older bucks shot if we are shooting does on public.
If deer numbers on public ever get to the point where additional deer are too many for the habitat, we can go back to public land doe tags. Given today's predator numbers and the frequent droughts and hard winters, I am not sure we will ever need to shoot does on public land again.
Last edited:
Rack Daniels
Well-known member
“Given todays predator numbers and the frequent droughts and hard winters, I am not sure we will ever need to shoot does on public land again.”
Sounds like California…
The older age class bucks already go to private and already die as a result of a heavy pocketbook… if the girl deer brought as much moolah in, you would be shooting more does on private…
Saving the animals or controlling disease is NOT the first topic on any big landowners farm.
The more concentrated on that alfalfa field, the better…. Let’s be real…
I’ve always heard that CWD was predominantly perpetuated by an UNNATURAL congregation and I don’t recall reading extensively about the larger bucks being the ones expanding CWD although I don’t believe it to be untrue…
Sounds like California…
The older age class bucks already go to private and already die as a result of a heavy pocketbook… if the girl deer brought as much moolah in, you would be shooting more does on private…
Saving the animals or controlling disease is NOT the first topic on any big landowners farm.
The more concentrated on that alfalfa field, the better…. Let’s be real…
I’ve always heard that CWD was predominantly perpetuated by an UNNATURAL congregation and I don’t recall reading extensively about the larger bucks being the ones expanding CWD although I don’t believe it to be untrue…
Gerald Martin
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2009
- Messages
- 9,591
FWP messaging that older age class bucks have the highest prevelancy rate of CWD infection has been consistent for at least several years. I heard it again just last month a our regional CAC meeting.
Rack Daniels
Well-known member
Like I said, I don’t believe it to be untrue….
Super easy to say
“Oop! Need to shoot that big racked buck!”
Little less convinced anyone actually hears
“Oop! There’s 400 does right here, let’s get ‘em to spread out!”
Super easy to say
“Oop! Need to shoot that big racked buck!”
Little less convinced anyone actually hears
“Oop! There’s 400 does right here, let’s get ‘em to spread out!”
Hammsolo
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 16, 2020
- Messages
- 2,829
It’s all connected to the roaming rutting bucks. Does tend to live a more pocketed life. Bucks? They need dem ladies. They’ll travel far and wide, while the does pick and choose from passing mates.
In reality, CWD will not be solved by the actions provided above. It is a tourniquet on pierced artery. We may be headed for a situation like big horn sheep. EHD is already showing the pattern in our area. We’ll need to find a cure.
In reality, CWD will not be solved by the actions provided above. It is a tourniquet on pierced artery. We may be headed for a situation like big horn sheep. EHD is already showing the pattern in our area. We’ll need to find a cure.
Forkyfinder
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2023
- Messages
- 5,786
Thats because thats what the science on the topic says.
WanderWoman
Well-known member
My point was more to the fact that a simple season/quota change doesn’t make a governor friendly to hunting and fishing.
That’s not just FWP messaging, that’s pretty much the universal understanding among biologists/agencies based on decades of data.
antlerradar
Well-known member
Back in the 80's and 90's here in eastern MT when we had better doe numbers on public, for the most part bucks didn't leave public to find does. You are only half right on those bucks dying on private. Those people with the pocket books are more that willing to pull the trigger on a buck with a nice set of antlers, but the older bucks that do not have those nice antlers get to live. On public there is a chance they get shot. Lastly those girl deer do bring in a lot of moolah. During the rut those girls attract bucks and keep them easy to kill. No one making big bucks off of bucks is going to be gungho about trimming the doe population. If we are serious about killing does on private, move the season out of the rut. This changes the economic caluclus of hunting does. Does go from a valueble money making buck decoy to just another mouth eating your crops that is costing you money.
antlerradar
Well-known member
My bad, here I was thinking I could at least lay some of the blame for turning a thread on CC into another MT mule deer thread. Looks like I have to take all of the blame or credit myself
BuzzH
Well-known member
Well, then Montana should be the case study in properly managing CWD since they kill about every buck over age 2 via constant pounding for 12 weeks.
The only way they could "manage" "older age class bucks highly susceptible to CWD" any better is with aerial gunning and poison.
Rack Daniels
Well-known member
Oh, the irony…..
Forkyfinder
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2023
- Messages
- 5,786
huntin24/7
Well-known member
They have a major lack of habitat in a large part of the state along with several bad winters in the last decade. They have some of their own management issues but nothing compared to this.
I’ll admit I didn’t really start getting informed until Gianforte was in office, but there’s plenty to complain about that has happened under his leadership.I don’t complain about fishing much it’s
pretty good. There were some good land acquisitions that he approved of. I have low standards I guess from the previous administrations throughout my life for wildlife. Point taken. Still better than when my grandpa talked about not seeing a deer in the 1940’s.I guess I will be thankful.
-As was mentioned, going away from securing perpetual conservation easements. I know of several primo ranches here in central MT that the public would have access to if this administration had any desire to secure CE’s. Look at the number of CE’s that were approved prior to GG compared to after he became governor.
-The season setting schedule and process has changed. Now the meetings are often during hunting season so they get minimal public participation.
-He’s made some real terrible commission appointments, whether it’s incompetence (not knowing what a bonus point is or how the draw works), or individuals who seem to be on the commission purely to make decisions that benefit their outfitting business. His commission was also sued for violating open meeting laws.
-From what I understand, they used to split up finalizing approving the season setting across several meetings so that they weren’t trying to cover so many species/topics in one day. This most recent season setting cycle they had so many amendments that they didn’t get to give each of them the attention they deserved.
-Its become very common for commissioners to submit amendments just days before the commission meetings which minimizes public input.
-The process for public comment during commission meetings has changed to where they basically hear as little public comment as possible. They take public comment after they have already voted on agenda items.
-When Andrew McKean was filling in as the R6 commissioner, he was not confirmed even though he was more than qualified. Instead we got the president of the Montana Stockgrowers Association which you could argue is a conflict of interest.
-Quota ranges for buck and bull permits were eliminated, which takes a lot of control away from the biologists and gives it almost solely to the commission
-Poor leadership within the department has led to years of knowledge going out the door
-All the issues with low morale within the enforcement division
-Research projects were cut under Director Temple
-Wages for bios and wardens haven’t kept up and it’s become increasingly more difficult to get good qualified candidates to take jobs within the department
The bright spots have been few and far between.
Similar threads
