MT upland opener reports

OntarioHunter

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 11, 2020
Messages
3,721
I hunted outside of Great Falls last week. Similar to your findings, birds are very concentrated around water because of limited feed away from it.

We never saw a single Hun, and sharp tails were somewhat scarce as well. This is an prolonged after affect of the huge snows a couple of years ago, and then drought on top. Very few of the snow berry bushes had any fruit.
Try the Wood Bottoms at Loma next time you're up that way. I used to do well for Huns there although it seems to get a lot more hunters in recent years. Great habitat on the edge of grain fields all the way round the valley. You can spend all day working it. Be careful where the field runs out to the river. That cutbank is really something. Had a shot at a rooster there last fall and pulled it at the last second when I realized what a mistake it would have been if Ellie had jumped over that cliff. The cutbank on the other side of the river is downright spectacular.
 
Last edited:

OntarioHunter

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 11, 2020
Messages
3,721
Are you F’ing kidding me? You literally just posted a link to a paper illustrating the negative impacts of Russian olives and why they should be removed from eastern Montana.

I really can’t comprehend you’re thinking. You’ll listen to biologists/scientists on climate change and a select few other topics, but not on basic ecology and habitat? Unless you misinterpret the paper, apparently. Makes no sense. But I guess I’m just a biologist. What do I know 🤷🏻‍♀️

I’m done. Butchering calls.

@theat beautiful pics! Looks like some great hunts.
FYI Ms Biologist, just how concerned is the state of Montana about the evil Russian olive? Well, not that concerned it seems. In fact, it's in the least concerned category of all noxious weeds. In fact, it's not a noxious weed at all.


Montana Noxious Weed Information​

Montana Noxious Weed List​

Montana Noxious Weed List (February 2017)
Updated 2020 flipbook of Montana's Noxious Weeds

Priority 1A:​

These weeds are not present or have a very limited presence in Montana. Management criteria will require eradication if detected, education, and prevention.
...

Priority 3: Regulated Plants (NOT MONTANA LISTED NOXIOUS WEEDS)​

These regulated plants have the potential to have significant negative impacts. The plant may not be intentionally spread or sold other than as a contaminant in agricultural products. The state recommends research, education and prevention to minimize the spread of the regulated plant.
  • Cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum)
  • Hydrilla (Hydrilla verticillata)
  • Russian olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia)
  • Brazilian waterweed (Egeria densa)
  • Parrot feather watermilfoil (Myriophyllum aquaticum or M. brasiliense)
 
Last edited:

Hunting Wife

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2014
Messages
3,094
Location
Almost North Dakota, not quite Canada
FYI Ms Biologist, just how concerned is the state of Montana about the evil Russian olive? Well, not that concerned it seems. In fact, it's in the least concerned category of all noxious weeds. In fact, it's not a noxious weed at all.


Montana Noxious Weed Information​

Montana Noxious Weed List​

Montana Noxious Weed List (February 2017)
Updated 2020 flipbook of Montana's Noxious Weeds

Priority 1A:​

These weeds are not present or have a very limited presence in Montana. Management criteria will require eradication if detected, education, and prevention.
...

Priority 3: Regulated Plants (NOT MONTANA LISTED NOXIOUS WEEDS)​

These regulated plants have the potential to have significant negative impacts. The plant may not be intentionally spread or sold other than as a contaminant in agricultural products. The state recommends research, education and prevention to minimize the spread of the regulated plant.
  • Cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum)
  • Hydrilla (Hydrilla verticillata)
  • Russian olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia)
  • Brazilian waterweed (Egeria densa)
  • Parrot feather watermilfoil (Myriophyllum aquaticum or M. brasiliense)
Yes, as I posted quite a while ago, it is a regulated plant in Montana. Thanks for the confirmation. It is also listed as noxious in several Montana counties, and multiple western states. It continues to be petitioned for inclusion on the state level.

You like to lecture others about maturity while behaving like a child yourself. Nearly every thread you participate in is a derailment of bitterness and negativity.

I’d rather keep the natives…prairie sandreed, blue bunch wheatgrass, blue grama, sideoats grama, little bluestem, big bluestem, purple three awn, prairie junegrass, porcupine grass, Indian rice grass, green needle grass, needle and thread, purple prairie clover, silver leaf scurfpea, bread root scurfpea, painted milk vetch, echinacea, liatris, blanket flower, winter fat, rabbit brush, and yes non-invasive native willows and cottonwoods. Plus hundreds of other species that make the prairies amazing. But I have a feeling you wouldn’t have a clue if you were amongst those species or not. I’d also rather keep all the native wildlife that depend on those species than manage to their detriment just to propagate a non-native bird or give miserable old bastards a tree to sit under. The pheasants would be perfectly fine without them.

It’s a shame you lack a shred of understanding or appreciation of native species. In fact you seem downright hostile towards them, as well as any biologist who doesn’t agree with your view of nature. I’m betting your “essentially second BA” wasn’t in ecology. But thanks for the education. Ya learn’d me.
 

SnowyMountaineer

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 11, 2009
Messages
3,463
Location
WY
Ok, I’m dumb and don’t know the reference. Hit me with it, and bring some levity to this train wreck. I beg you.
You’re not, it’s niche…he’s a very coarse but lovable futbol player/coach in a current Apple TV series. Problem is basically every sentence he says includes the f word, makes it tough for family forum programming. 🙂
 

OntarioHunter

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 11, 2020
Messages
3,721
Yes, as I posted quite a while ago, it is a regulated plant in Montana. Thanks for the confirmation. It is also listed as noxious in several Montana counties, and multiple western states. It continues to be petitioned for inclusion on the state level.

You like to lecture others about maturity while behaving like a child yourself. Nearly every thread you participate in is a derailment of bitterness and negativity.

I’d rather keep the natives…prairie sandreed, blue bunch wheatgrass, blue grama, sideoats grama, little bluestem, big bluestem, purple three awn, prairie junegrass, porcupine grass, Indian rice grass, green needle grass, needle and thread, purple prairie clover, silver leaf scurfpea, bread root scurfpea, painted milk vetch, echinacea, liatris, blanket flower, winter fat, rabbit brush, and yes non-invasive native willows and cottonwoods. Plus hundreds of other species that make the prairies amazing. But I have a feeling you wouldn’t have a clue if you were amongst those species or not. I’d also rather keep all the native wildlife that depend on those species than manage to their detriment just to propagate a non-native bird or give miserable old bastards a tree to sit under. The pheasants would be perfectly fine without them.

It’s a shame you lack a shred of understanding or appreciation of native species. In fact you seem downright hostile towards them, as well as any biologist who doesn’t agree with your view of nature. I’m betting your “essentially second BA” wasn’t in ecology. But thanks for the education. Ya learn’d me.
Yes, more than anything in the world I'd love to live in the 19th century, but it's not realistic. We have to work with reality and reality is the world is changing. I'm a retired naturalist but one who also lives in the real world. I would rather focus my attention on ecological problems that pose genuine threats, not ones that may or may not possibly be slightly more of an ecological threat than their benefit. I'll fix my sights on zebra muscles and rusty crayfish and the like. Those are real threats. Disasters. No benefit whatsoever. Ask any black Angus cow on a hot drought afternoon how much of a disaster a grove of shady Russian olive is. Or ask the rancher who has to haul a little less water to them. Ask any pheasant or sharptail if they prefer scrounging for sparce sunburned native grass seeds or plucking fruit in the protective cover of Russian olive trees. Russian olive is exotic but it's only an ecogical pest in the eyes of the beholder. Thankfully the powers that be at the state level are realistic enough to weigh the benefits against the detriments ... and accept reality. They are approaching this "threat" with eyes wide open. The manager of the bird refuge approaches it with a closed mind.
 

OntarioHunter

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 11, 2020
Messages
3,721
The introduction of ringneck pheasant, like the introduction of starlings and English sparrows, was undertaken with the usual undue carelessness of the nineteenth century. The thing that made them different is that though pheasants altered the natural ecosystem, they did not alter it to the significant detriment of other plants and animals in it. In fact, they filled a niche created by settlement and agriculture. The prairie chicken was pushed out by farming and the pheasant moved in to fill the slot. I look on the introduction of Russian olive somewhat in the same light. Though its impact is not always without cost, have the benefits to the CURRENT evolving prairie ecosystem at least balanced the detriments? What about balancing potential future benefits as that ecosystem evolves due to global warming?

Thanks to global warming and exponential human growth, the prairie ecosystem, like every other one on the planet, IS changing whether we like it or not. We can focus our conservation efforts on guiding those changes where the "invasions" are most impacting ... or we can waste our time and money and, more importantly, credibility tilting at windmills in an effort to recreate a purified 19th century world that is now and forever will be lost. The only way we're going back is if a couple dozen billion people and 75% of the world's fossil fuels disappear overnight. Sadly for the plants and animals of this once beautiful planet, I don't see Armageddon happening any time in the distant future. So earth gets to die a slow and painful and thorough death instead.
 

Hunting Wife

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2014
Messages
3,094
Location
Almost North Dakota, not quite Canada
A selection of pertinent literature for those who like information.







Page 119 in the following- meta analysis of impacts of woody encroachment on grassland nesting birds.




 

neffa3

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 17, 2015
Messages
7,585
Location
Wenatchee
You’re not, it’s niche…he’s a very coarse but lovable futbol player/coach in a current Apple TV series. Problem is basically every sentence he says includes the f word, makes it tough for family forum programming. 🙂
Like trailer park boys?
 

brockel

Well-known member
Joined
May 13, 2016
Messages
3,429
Location
Baker,MT
Seems like pheasants are more plentiful in eastern MT.
In NW MT, I'm seeing mostly solitary old roosters...wonder if some broods failed with the summer drought?
I hunt every morning Mondays-Fridays for 3-4 hours, quietly moving into blocking position when the lab gets birdy.

Hunting solo and in silence in fun.
View attachment 201270

Cool pheasant country
 
Top