Mule deer opportunity?

I’d like to think it could as well. But based on our experience of trying to get buy in on a proposal less restrictive than mentioned above, there doesn’t seem to be a lot of appetite with the FWP dept or among the majority of MT hunters to restructure opportunity into anything less than OTC general hunting through the rut.

In my opinion the status quo isn’t going to change without some bold action from folks in position to make decisions to do something good for mule deer regardless of how popular it is to the majority of MT hunters. Expectations have calcified over generations of what MT hunter consider normal opportunity. If a majority of public opinion is required before change is made it probably won’t happen any time soon.

That is discouraging to me because some of the best policy decisions in MT wildlife management history have been because decision makers had the courage to make unpopular decisions that paid off for wildlife and eventually for additional opportunities for sportsmen.
After listening to other hunters a lot in person or reading comments on line, I’m convinced that the average resident is flat out terrified of change. I’m not sure you could convince the average resident to give up one week of the season even if you could guarantee them hunting twice as good. I really don’t think at least half of resident deer hunters care about deer numbers, buck quality, or herd health as long as there is never any change to seasons or tag prices.
 
After listening to other hunters a lot in person or reading comments on line, I’m convinced that the average resident is flat out terrified of change. I’m not sure you could convince the average resident to give up one week of the season even if you could guarantee them hunting twice as good. I really don’t think at least half of resident deer hunters care about deer numbers, buck quality, or herd health as long as there is never any change to seasons or tag prices.
Sadly I think this is true. And I don't see the demographic of "average" resident changing any time soon. mtmuley
 
That is discouraging to me because some of the best policy decisions in MT wildlife management history have been because decision makers had the courage to make unpopular decisions that paid off for wildlife and eventually for additional opportunities for sportsmen.
Don't be discouraged Gerald, I a have been advocating for changing season structure to something similar to our proposal for close to thirty years. The amount of progress now is light years a head of when I started or even ten years ago.
 
If anything was to change with MD season - itd have to be about changing mule deer.

Perhaps when the "proposals" impacts elk hunters and every other user group and dates, more so than mule deer, its too much.

Closing the season for the last 2 weeks. Making the last 2 weeks limited entry. Make species specific tags with fwp to set quotas.

There are plenty of ideas around without redoing the whole season structure to benefit commercail interests associated with elk.
 
Idaho seems to have a good season structure. 2-3 week general season in October and many of the units have limited draw that goes through November. Problem is it is tough to hunt them in October and the average hunter probably wants a more casual hunt where you see a lot of deer. Idaho OTC is usually not that.
 
There are plenty of ideas around without redoing the whole season structure to benefit commercail interests associated with elk.
How in the h=== is our proposal going to benefit commercial interests associated with elk? Rifle elk season is nearly unchanged, Archery is shifted forward one week. Having the season a week earlier when bulls are by themself or in small groups, often on public land will effectively cut the archery season a week for the commercial interests on private land.
What has been disappointing is some people appose because they dislike some of the people that helped or that because anything that an individual outfitter agrees with there must be some arterial motive the pad their bottom line.
 
Last edited:
Compare that to an area like what you’ve shown here (took me a minute to clean my drool off the phone). Is it better or worse or no real difference in the end to think of how a particular management strategy or level of opportunity may affect an area that may have more B&C potential?
That big buck from 61 was shot on the 18th of Oct, earlier in the year than the current season starts and we did not have a season in SE MT that went all the way to the weekend after Thanksgiving. That did not start until about 1970.
 
I will say that I really like Idaho's season structure. In fact I would like to see fewer limited entry hunts. Limited entry just pushes displaced hunters into the increasingly crowded OTC units that remain. Limited entry is not the answer to improving mule deer numbers or trophy quality. There isn't a limited entry unit that is as good today as it was 20 years ago according to almost every post and hunting recap I've read in recent years. Think about it, whenever someone posts that they've drawn unit XX tag, many of the replys are all saying "It's not what it used to be."

Idaho placed the majority of OTC opportunity into mid October decades ago. This is probably the most difficult time to find mature bucks so it allows open opportunity while providing some protection of the resource. In my perfect world, most units would have some limited entry opportunity for later seasons coinciding with the rut, many units already do have late season limited entry opportunity.
 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
117,363
Messages
2,154,963
Members
38,198
Latest member
tfreilin
Back
Top