Mule deer opportunity?

[huntin24/7]

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.

 

[mtmuley]

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

 

[antlerradar]

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.

 

[huntin24/7]

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.

That’s encouraging. Thanks for all your work on this.

 

[Forkyfinder]

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.

 

[nrpate05]

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.

 

[antlerradar]

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.

 

[antlerradar]

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.

 

[Frequently Banned Troll]

Why is 270 held as the standard of mule deer quality in Montana? mtmuley

I don’t know nuthin about 270 but I did receive 2 pics in the last day of 2 bucks taken there by different lady hunters in the last few days and both are real big, one being 225.

 

[idelkslayer]

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.

 

[antlerradar]

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?

Thinking about this last night, We can not over look that some of those big Rosebud County bucks in recent years have come from the mine were both access and weapons are limited. If you compare the amount of land in the mine to the county as a whole it is a very disproportionate number.

 

[Tmbrgost]

Thinking about this last night, We can not over look that some of those big Rosebud County bucks in recent years have come from the mine were both access and weapons are limited. If you compare the amount of land in the mine to the county as a whole it is a very disproportionate number.

This area/county is a perfect example of limited access helping grow mature bucks into their full potential. This example proves the need for limiting tags in more accessible public areas that in turn will provide bigger deer opportunity, eventually.

 

[Straight Arrow]

I don’t know nuthin about 270 but I did receive 2 pics in the last day of 2 bucks taken there by different lady hunters in the last few days and both are real big, one being 225.

FWP check station photo of happy successful HD 270 mule deer huntress.

 

[Frequently Banned Troll]

View attachment 391333

FWP check station photo of happy successful HD 270 mule deer huntress.

Well that makes THREE ladies now this fall

 

[DFS]

View attachment 391333

FWP check station photo of happy successful HD 270 mule deer huntress.

Case in point why net BC score is meaningless that buck won’t net good but it’s still big.

 

[Frequently Banned Troll]

View attachment 391333

FWP check station photo of happy successful HD 270 mule deer huntress.

Serious question - would that one be legal on the 3x permit?

 

[idelkslayer]

I suddenly remembered this video put out by the Idaho Fish and Game earlier this year as a part of a larger series on Mule Deer Management. They pull information from studies done all over the west. There are many interesting and sometimes counterintuitive findings about how different managment strategies impact deer herds, Buckoe ratios, Fawnoe ratios, trophy quality, etc. It is worth a watch for anyone trying to understand mule deer. I included some time stamps with what I think are some of those interesting tidbits.

Time Stamp 2:20

This chart shows a comparison of B : D ratios in Colorado and Montana between limited hunts and general hunts. It is no surprise that B : D ratios are higher in the limited hunts. That’s good right? Well, maybe.

Time Stamp 3:07

This chart shows B : D ratios in a handful of Idaho units and also compares limited units to general units. As expected, the limited hunts have higher B : D ratios, although in some cases it is not a dramatic difference. The biologist takes the time to mention that the average B : D ratio in the general units is 23:100. The average in the limited hunts is 29:100.

That seems like a small difference considering the amount of opportunity that is sacrificed. Of course, specific units are higher or lower than those averages and a case-by-case analysis would be necessary to determine if each individual limited entry hunt is worth keeping around.

Time Stamp 5:40 – 6:45

It is worth listening to this entire section. Here the IDFG biologist compares a general season structure to a limited season structure and how it affects hunter numbers, total buck harvest and trophy buck harvest. (The only measurable metric of trophy quality is %4 pt in the harvest. While not exact, and not all 4 pts are trophy size, it does provide a trend line).

It is no surprise that the limited scenario has higher success rates. However, look at how many 4-pt bucks are harvested in each scenario, it is nearly the same. The only thing that the limited scenario accomplished was to prevent 3,750 people from the opportunity to hunt and takes away the ability to harvest 625 bucks that will now die of non-hunting related causes. How can that be? Wouldn’t killing fewer bucks mean more big bucks in the future? The answer is yes but it is much less than you might think. The biologist explains this in subsequent slides.

Time stamp 7:19

This slide discusses mule deer buck survival rates and demonstrates why you can’t “bank” or save yearling bucks for the future. It is important to understand that the survival rates used in this slide are based on non-hunting related mortality. The biologist’s example uses a year class of 1.5 year old bucks numbering 5,500 individuals, only 2,750 will live to age 2.5. That is to say that half will die between age 1.5 and 2.5. Hunting harvest is compensatory to that mortality. Meaning that hunting does not increase that number. Those bucks are going to die anyway, so hunters might as well be the ones killing them.

In the example shown in the slide, a trophy management plan would prevent the harvest of 3,500 bucks from that age class that won’t live to reach trophy size anyway. It means that we force thousands of hunters to sit out for a minor improvement in numbers of older bucks.

Time Stamp 9:00

This slide shows the average B&C score of bucks from age 1.5 to age 10. The curve is basically flat after age 4.5. Managing for bucks older than 4.5 does not have any appreciable impact on trophy size. I would love for Idaho to start a program of aging as many harvested deer as possible.

Time Stamp 9:35 and 10:13

Now this one is interesting. It is based on a Colorado study linked below that also came up recently in another thread. This study found in multiple different units and trophy management scenarios that high B : D ratios had a negative impact on fawn:doe (F : D) ratios. Meaning that herd productivity goes down as B : D ratios go up. The reduction observed in Colorado was as high as a 7 fawns per 100 does. Environment is still the highest predictor of herd productivity but this indicates that managing for high B : D ratios will actually reduce fawn production. How much does 7 fawns per 100 does every year matter in the long run? Is it a lot? I’m not sure but it isn’t nothing.

https://nsojournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2981/wlb.00012

 

[antlerradar]

Serious question - would that one be legal on the 3x permit?

I would argue it should, but if I had the tag I would not risk it.

 

[Randy11]

Serious question - would that one be legal on the 3x permit?

No, all points other than eye guards are counted. There have been some really cool bucks killed on that tag though.

The vast majority of the big (200"+) mule deer that come out of 270 have nontypical configuration and cheaters like this. Maybe that's the case everywhere, but I don't think tracking BC entries does a great job of reflecting the management success.