MT Governor inspecting the shoulder season landscape

[RobG]

IMO - The only real way to handle this delicate situation is through a Constitutional Amendment (CA) or a Citizens Initiative (CI) that comes from the citizens of Montana. Someone or some "group" has to write a "law", get it on the ballot, and then have the citizens vote in favor of it.

For example. A CA or CI that states the wildlife of Montana can only be managed based on scientific facts and biology by biologist and/or wildlife managers with the State of Montana. Something to this affect (I think). Otherwise, you might as well accept that politics is going to be the way this topic is handled.

I hear what you are saying, but, and I could be wrong, I don't think most hunters are going to like scientific management of the wildlife known as predators .

I've thought about a CI but the reality is that hunters are going to have to compromise if they are going to come out ahead. After last session the Legislature now negotiates funding for the FWP every other session so if they don't get at least some of what they want things will get really bad for the FWP. Commissioners are the only thing keeping this from being a free-for-all and they are appointed by the Legislature too... The people who insisted on public access in exchange for late hunts got their heads handed to them with this hunt.

 

[u1299]

As a general thought I hate the shoulder seasons. I can't stomach landowners who don't allow access, or very little during the general season then want us to come in and clean up the mess they create by shooting cow elk in a shoulder season. Unfortunately our worthless GOP controlled Legislature has a total disdain for FWP and Governor Bullock, and sadly isn't leaving the Governor or we public land advocates and hunters much choice. For crying out loud if you've paid attention just a little bit you've seen the ridiculous anti-hunting anti-public land anti-FWP legislation introduced and in some cases passed over the last several legislative sessions. Bullock isn't perfect but right now with the current makeup of our legislature, he's the only thing (and I mean the only thing) standing between the perpetuation of the hunting heritage I grew up with and, well, quite frankly the path toward the privatization of our public wildlife and our public lands the GOP is hell bent on leading us towards.

 

[Rat Fink]

As a general thought I hate the shoulder seasons. I can't stomach landowners who don't allow access, or very little during the general season then want us to come in and clean up the mess they create by shooting cow elk in a shoulder season. Unfortunately our worthless GOP controlled Legislature has a total disdain for FWP and Governor Bullock, and sadly isn't leaving the Governor or we public land advocates and hunters much choice. For crying out loud if you've paid attention just a little bit you've seen the ridiculous anti-hunting anti-public land anti-FWP legislation introduced and in some cases passed over the last several legislative sessions. Bullock isn't perfect but right now with the current makeup of our legislature, he's the only thing (and I mean the only thing) standing between the perpetuation of the hunting heritage I grew up with and, well, quite frankly the path toward the privatization of our public wildlife and our public lands the GOP is hell bent on leading us towards.

Bullock is no savior. He is the one that mandated FWP to institute the shoulder seasons. The last line of defense is gone from a political standpoint. It's time for Sportsmen to band together and pass a Constitutional Initiative taking back biological control of game animals.

 

[airlocksniffer]

Bullock is no savior. He is the one that mandated FWP to institute the shoulder seasons. The last line of defense is gone from a political standpoint. It's time for Sportsmen to band together and pass a Constitutional Initiative taking back biological control of game animals.

No, but his hand may have been forced by SB42.

 

[mtmander]

I wonder if there was a vote on the shoulder season what the results would be ? On this site definitely against it but I see a lot of positive input from papers etc.

 

[Deleted member 20812]

I wonder if there was a vote on the shoulder season what the results would be ? On this site definitely against it but I see a lot of positive input from papers etc.

I think you would be surprised how many MT hunters are giddy that Galt opened his ranch up so they could go shoot cows.

Note the comments about motels in WSS being full. That used to happen the last few days of the season, every year in WSS when Galt opened his ranch up for two or three days for everyone to come in and shoot cows.

Putting a cow in the freezer seems to be a much higher priority for many Montana residents than a host of other things.

 

[Big Fin]

I think you would be surprised how many MT hunters are giddy that Galt opened his ranch up so they could go shoot cows.
...............

Putting a cow in the freezer seems to be a much higher priority for many Montana residents than a host of other things.

A friend and I were talking the other day about this stuff. He opined that if Montana was down to 3 remaining elk, there would be 3,000 hunters willing to apply for tags to kill them. Not sure if that would be the case, but so often, we as hunters can be a huge contributor to the problems we complain about. Look at how many people were happy to shoot one of the 2,200 pregnant cow elk in Gardiner during the huge decline in the Northern Herd. And most of those same people proclaimed the wolves eat all the elk; all 2,200 cows and their would-have-been calves.

My prediction, if shoulder seasons are expanded, is:

1. We will kill a lot of elk in January that spend most of September and October on public lands.

2. Bull to cow ratios will increase for a couple years, due to a bunch of cows being shot in January, allowing the bull to cow ratios to artificially improve. Some will proclaim this as a success and use it to justify the decision.

3. Starting in three years total bull numbers will start falling off the table due to half of the fetuses in those cows killed being bulls.

4. Hunter success in general seasons will go down substantially as fewer bulls are recruited to the population.

5. Elk numbers on inaccessible private land will generally be about the same and they will still get counted, incorrectly under the EMP, in the FWP objectives.

6. Hunters will then be even more pissed at the private landowners who provided some sort of sanctuary that kept even more elk from getting killed. These hunters will say landowners are "harboring" all the elk; elk that don't want to get shot to hell and realize where the safe zones are.

7. Hunters who shot the crap out of cow elk and now cannot find a bull will blame the wolves.

Wish it was different, but I am confident enough in what will happen under extended seasons that I am willing to put it in print right now so it can be held against me in five years. We have seen it happen many times in other places in the state; Gardiner, Upper Madison, Unit 410.

When we extended the general season in 2008, I still had a tag. I refused to go out and hunt that extended season as my personal protest against what I thought was a dumb idea. I know a lot of people who did, and that is up to them, not me. I refuse to participate in these shoulder seasons as my form of protest against them. I know some will, and I am fine with that; it is their tag and their decision. I would encourage hunters to at least think about the impact of participating in these hunts, while wanting better science-based management. Probably over simplification on my part, but letting yourself be used as an agent in the process makes it pretty hard to change the process. Here on HT, I suspect I am preaching to the choir.

I do know that it will be hard for me to listen to anyone blaming wolves in those units that are part of shoulder seasons now or in the future. I will have to just walk away when such comments are made, for fear of a long string of expletives coming from my mouth that I might later regret. The wolves in the case of shoulder seasons are driving pickup trucks and carrying center fire rifles.

 

[Chucknduck]

The wolves in the case of shoulder seasons are driving pickup trucks and carrying center fire rifles.

This has been the case since they lowered the the elk objective numbers and started all the either sex seasons, extended seasons, and b tags. This has been the case for 10 years. I can't stand people that blame the wolves for eating all the elk in the ruby but every year their hunting camp kills 6-10 cows a year there.


Galt quoted that the elk are starting to act like elk and not livestock. They are dispersed into small heards and staying in the timber.

If he thinks that is normal behavior for winter migratory elk he's dumber than a box of rocks. Glad that article painted him as a great savior for hunters and access. That article was full of BS in every sentence

 

[Deleted member 20812]

You pretty much nailed it Randy. District 410 is the canary in the coal mine, and look what happened to it? Exactly what you described. Remember how wildly popular the cow hunts were there in the mid 2000s?

I agree with every single one of your points.

My solution is to go to Wyoming instead.

 

[HighWildFree]

Ironically this website left out the cost to hunt on his ranch. I was in that area ice fishing last weekend and talked to a local that basically said the shoulder season is a bunch of b.s politics. Elk aren't stupid animals and quickly found the new havens during this shoulder season... which includes some of the Galt Ranch that he won't open up.

This year the Galt Ranch had 52 hunters opening week and last I heard it was about $10K for a chance to pop an elk off his pivots opening week. That does not include the money he makes for leasing rights to two other outfitters at over $100,000 each. Bill Galt makes a lot of money off these elk. Yet he and his brother are the most vocal opponents of elk in the valley. Forgive me, but I have little sympathy for their problems.

 

[The Hedgehog]

Things in MT are going to be drastically different, very soon, when it comes to "quality" hunting. Residents who enjoy a great public land elk hunting experience, might have to recalibrate their definition of quality to align with those who are plumb happy to shoot a wintering cow or one in August with a spotted calf at it's side on somebody's ranch, so they can "fill the freezer" or "get their elk" "with family." yada yada yada..

YNP is a great example of how quickly things can change when you mix unmanaged predators with tons of hunting at the same time.

 

[Straight Arrow]

YNP is a great example of how quickly things can change when you mix unmanaged predators with tons of hunting at the same time.

And look what happened when FWP proposed to employ good wildlife management principles to first of all get the bull to cow ratio increased (largely to appeal to the trophy elk hunter, but also to further stabilize population and continue nurturing the herd back to more desirable, increased numbers). FWP seemingly is taking criticism from all directions. I am fairly certain FWP will capitulate to the armchair biologists and the political pressures, so the solution will not necessarily be in the best interests of the elk.

My cynicism is growing as the political wildlife management trend continues with the shoulder seasons and with what I expect to be the decision regarding HD 313.

 

[bigskyblueman]

This year the Galt Ranch had 52 hunters opening week and last I heard it was about $10K for a chance to pop an elk off his pivots opening week. That does not include the money he makes for leasing rights to two other outfitters at over $100,000 each. Bill Galt makes a lot of money off these elk. Yet he and his brother are the most vocal opponents of elk in the valley. Forgive me, but I have little sympathy for their problems.

Indeed, and over decades it's millions of dollars, and as several of his former guides have expressed to me, '' the elk paid for that helicopter."

 

[RobG]

A friend and I were talking the other day about this stuff. He opined that if Montana was down to 3 remaining elk, there would be 3,000 hunters willing to apply for tags to kill them. Not sure if that would be the case, but so often, we as hunters can be a huge contributor to the problems we complain about. Look at how many people were happy to shoot one of the 2,200 pregnant cow elk in Gardiner during the huge decline in the Northern Herd. And most of those same people proclaimed the wolves eat all the elk; all 2,200 cows and their would-have-been calves.

My prediction, if shoulder seasons are expanded, is:

1. We will kill a lot of elk in January that spend most of September and October on public lands.

2. Bull to cow ratios will increase for a couple years, due to a bunch of cows being shot in January, allowing the bull to cow ratios to artificially improve. Some will proclaim this as a success and use it to justify the decision.

3. Starting in three years total bull numbers will start falling off the table due to half of the fetuses in those cows killed being bulls.

4. Hunter success in general seasons will go down substantially as fewer bulls are recruited to the population.

5. Elk numbers on inaccessible private land will generally be about the same and they will still get counted, incorrectly under the EMP, in the FWP objectives.

6. Hunters will then be even more pissed at the private landowners who provided some sort of sanctuary that kept even more elk from getting killed. These hunters will say landowners are "harboring" all the elk; elk that don't want to get shot to hell and realize where the safe zones are.

7. Hunters who shot the crap out of cow elk and now cannot find a bull will blame the wolves.

Wish it was different, but I am confident enough in what will happen under extended seasons that I am willing to put it in print right now so it can be held against me in five years. We have seen it happen many times in other places in the state; Gardiner, Upper Madison, Unit 410.

When we extended the general season in 2008, I still had a tag. I refused to go out and hunt that extended season as my personal protest against what I thought was a dumb idea. I know a lot of people who did, and that is up to them, not me. I refuse to participate in these shoulder seasons as my form of protest against them. I know some will, and I am fine with that; it is their tag and their decision. I would encourage hunters to at least think about the impact of participating in these hunts, while wanting better science-based management. Probably over simplification on my part, but letting yourself be used as an agent in the process makes it pretty hard to change the process. Here on HT, I suspect I am preaching to the choir.

I do know that it will be hard for me to listen to anyone blaming wolves in those units that are part of shoulder seasons now or in the future. I will have to just walk away when such comments are made, for fear of a long string of expletives coming from my mouth that I might later regret. The wolves in the case of shoulder seasons are driving pickup trucks and carrying center fire rifles.

I hope you are wrong about the elk population taking a nosedive but you are probably right. As you know I don't have a big problem with controlled late hunts while the populations are high, but these wide open shoulder seasons just break my heart. And now that WSS is raking in the hunter money they aren't going to want them to go away.

My son shot an elk this morning on a game damage hunt. That I do that hunt may sound hypocritical, but populations are still high in spite of these hunts, mostly because they are so controlled. He had fun, we had to work pretty hard (got skunked yesterday). We walked 2-3 miles glassing coulees. We blew a few stalks before we got in front of a few stragglers. He learned to appreciate elk and hunting and working to accomplish something. If they turn it into a shoulder season it will be hard to get him on a ranch unless it is wide open to every idiot wanting to do some herd shooting, not to mention I don't want to be a part of an effective elk culling program. This new season can't be a good thing for hunters. I think the hunting community is going to have to make some compromises or unlimited late hunting will become the norm.

 

[The Hedgehog]

Congrats to you and your son. I've been on a ton of late season hunts that were plenty fun, mostly bulls but some cows. Back when Turner had them on the D and when Gardiner had just tons of elk. I didn't think they were out of line at the time, but it seemed there was no shortage of elk at all compared to today. Last late season hunt I was on was in 2006.

 

[shoots-straight]

A friend and I were talking the other day about this stuff. He opined that if Montana was down to 3 remaining elk, there would be 3,000 hunters willing to apply for tags to kill them. Not sure if that would be the case, but so often, we as hunters can be a huge contributor to the problems we complain about. Look at how many people were happy to shoot one of the 2,200 pregnant cow elk in Gardiner during the huge decline in the Northern Herd. And most of those same people proclaimed the wolves eat all the elk; all 2,200 cows and their would-have-been calves.

My prediction, if shoulder seasons are expanded, is:

1. We will kill a lot of elk in January that spend most of September and October on public lands.

2. Bull to cow ratios will increase for a couple years, due to a bunch of cows being shot in January, allowing the bull to cow ratios to artificially improve. Some will proclaim this as a success and use it to justify the decision.

3. Starting in three years total bull numbers will start falling off the table due to half of the fetuses in those cows killed being bulls.

4. Hunter success in general seasons will go down substantially as fewer bulls are recruited to the population.

5. Elk numbers on inaccessible private land will generally be about the same and they will still get counted, incorrectly under the EMP, in the FWP objectives.

6. Hunters will then be even more pissed at the private landowners who provided some sort of sanctuary that kept even more elk from getting killed. These hunters will say landowners are "harboring" all the elk; elk that don't want to get shot to hell and realize where the safe zones are.

7. Hunters who shot the crap out of cow elk and now cannot find a bull will blame the wolves.

Wish it was different, but I am confident enough in what will happen under extended seasons that I am willing to put it in print right now so it can be held against me in five years. We have seen it happen many times in other places in the state; Gardiner, Upper Madison, Unit 410.

When we extended the general season in 2008, I still had a tag. I refused to go out and hunt that extended season as my personal protest against what I thought was a dumb idea. I know a lot of people who did, and that is up to them, not me. I refuse to participate in these shoulder seasons as my form of protest against them. I know some will, and I am fine with that; it is their tag and their decision. I would encourage hunters to at least think about the impact of participating in these hunts, while wanting better science-based management. Probably over simplification on my part, but letting yourself be used as an agent in the process makes it pretty hard to change the process. Here on HT, I suspect I am preaching to the choir.

I do know that it will be hard for me to listen to anyone blaming wolves in those units that are part of shoulder seasons now or in the future. I will have to just walk away when such comments are made, for fear of a long string of expletives coming from my mouth that I might later regret. The wolves in the case of shoulder seasons are driving pickup trucks and carrying center fire rifles.

There you are Peter. I knew you were inside.

 

[shoots-straight]

I kinda feel like the boy who cried wolf to often, only to finally have the wolf show up, and nobody will believe me.

I screamed that this would come to a hunting district near you around 11 years ago. Now the guy that did his best here in the Root, is doing what he can for the rest of the state.

I know he's not doing this out of malice for elk, but rather the consummate company man doing what the leaders want.

Remember the objectives are to end up sitting around 90,000 head of elk. At least a reduction of 60,000 give or take.

Let the good times roll! For now.

 

[----]

I'm pretty sure 90,000 is if all units are at objective.

Being as it would take a miracle to get some units up to anywhere near objective, and that FWP is supposed to manage to BELOW objective, we could be looking at a lot less than 90,000 elk.

 

[tjones]

Give s guy a chance to kill an elk most will take it. Brace yourself for less opportunity in the future

Lived through Fin's 1-7 in 2004-2009-and the HD's have not recovered yet.

 

[AH_14]

Dear Governor Bullock,
Is it possible there are more pressing issues in Montana than whether or not Bill Galt has a couple hundred too many elk on his pristine Montana ranch? I think he may be able to afford a little extra hay from an area landowner if he needs it!
Load up in the helicopter and lets take a quick spin around the ranch.....Yep, what a FIRST WORLD PROBLEM!!!