Montana May Extend 08 Elk Season

[Horn Seeker]

The last bio certainly did an injustice to 270/250 areas... he ought to be tarr'd and feather'd... the wolves have definitely had an impact... what that impact is...we aren't quite sure yet! :0)

I may treat this late season opportunity like I just got drawn for a Gardiner late hunt tag!! :0)

 

[shoots-straight]

MattK,
Historically speaking, we didn't need a migration to hunt elk in the Bitterroot. We had a local herd of elk and plenty of cover to keep us happy and in business chasing bulls. The slaughter of 2005 and again in 2007 did us in. Our local herds to it arse. Wolves have a impact but so do hunters, ATV'er, wood gutters. etc. The local elk are really reduced so we are dependant on the migratory herd. Alas the our big hole herd has been getting hammered and even next year they have a rifle season slatted for Aug. there.
He inherited the best herd around. They should be liable for what they do.

 

[ELKCHSR]

I did a run thru one of my favorite areas yesterday...

They brought wolves in this spring, there wasn't one track (including deer) that I saw crossing the roads any where (normally there will be errent elk or deer tracks spotting across the roads in these areas until the snow flies)

I have found most of the elk tracks I've run across so far are sitting around 7600-8200'

Not many hunters seem to venture out of their trucks or off their ATV's to those elevations

Hopefully I should be in them tonight or tomorrow morning

With out the snow driving them out of the mountains, they don't have much of a reason to come down as of yet...

 

[mtmiller]

Where was the wolf release this spring?

 

[Dinkshooter]

Man that does suck for the Mt guys, watching the good ones get smoked for no reason.

No one will call and report, they will all feel giddy like they got away with stealing from the man.

 

[thecrittergitter]

Extension is TOTAL BS!

I will be the first one to tell the MT FWP that all they are doing by extending this season is encouraging the lazy, poor hunting ethics that some obviously are holding tight to. I agree 100% with Greenhorn......WTF!!! Are you fuggin serious that you cant kill a stupid elk in Montana in 10 weeks!!!! That is the crown royal of laziness. In those 10 weeks of season, i saw literally hundreds of elk and passed on 32-35 legal bulls.(yes, all public land) Hey, sorry for those this offends, but if you don't kill an elk in SW Montana, you put in ZERO effort........and your rewards should be granted with ZERO elk. I'm so sick of packing elk this year, i hardly care if i see another dead one. The thing that really sucks about this bullchit extension is again what greenhorn stated, say goodbuy to next years crop of good bulls! These big bulls are going to get smoked.....I took a little trip the other night to a spot to glass right before light, glassed two of the best bulls i have seen all year. Unfortunately, i didnt' get to them before it got dark and had family committments the next morning......Guaranteed both of those bulls will be dead by next fuggin week. Some lucky road hunter in the Gravellies will i'm sure stumble upon them as they think they are safe and get smoked.......... MERRY FUGGIN CHRISTMAS to all the lazy..........:BLEEP: And to the FWP for allowing such an absurd thing to occur...........:BLEEP:

I know there is probably someone this "lazy, effortless" comment doesn't pertain to, so for that 1% of people that it doesn't................sorry. for the rest of you, have fun dealing with the 15,000 other people coming to assist you in this slaughter.

Come on weather!!!!! Need high 70's and NO SNOW TILL AFTER CHRISTMAS!!!

 

[thecrittergitter]

Extension is TOTAL BS!

I will be the first one to tell the MT FWP that all they are doing by extending this season is encouraging the lazy, poor hunting ethics that some obviously are holding tight to. I agree 100% with Greenhorn......WTF!!! Are you fuggin serious that you cant kill a stupid elk in Montana in 10 weeks!!!! That is the crown royal of laziness. In those 10 weeks of season, i saw literally hundreds of elk and passed on 32-35 legal bulls.(yes, all public land) Hey, sorry for those this offends, but if you don't kill an elk in SW Montana, you put in ZERO effort........and your rewards should be granted with ZERO elk. I'm so sick of packing elk this year, i hardly care if i see another dead one. The thing that really sucks about this bullchit extension is again what greenhorn stated, say goodbuy to next years crop of good bulls! These big bulls are going to get smoked.....I took a little trip the other night to a spot to glass right before dark, glassed two of the best bulls (both well over 300)I have seen all year. Unfortunately, i didn't get to them before it got dark and had family committments the next morning......Guaranteed both of those bulls will be dead by next fuggin week. Some lucky road hunter in next weekends circus in the Gravellies will i'm sure stumble upon them as they think they are safe and get smoked.......... MERRY FUGGIN CHRISTMAS to all the lazy..........:BLEEP:

And to the FWP for allowing such an absurd thing to occur...........:BLEEP:

I know there is probably someone these "lazy, effortless" comments don't pertain to, so for that 1% of people that it doesn't................sorry. for the rest of you, have fun dealing with the 15,000 other people coming to assist you in this slaughter.

Come on weather!!!!! Need high 70's and NO SNOW TILL AFTER CHRISTMAS!!!

 

[noharleyyet]

Extended Montana Elk Season A Success
December 30, 2008.

From Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks:

Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks has broken new ground in the use of general hunting season extensions. This year’s extension in Region 3 was the longest ever implemented by the department. It was also the first time FWP tracked daily elk harvest via telephone call-in while it was occurring in order to be responsive to concerns about over-harvest.

Based on a preliminary estimate, 1,840 elk were harvested in southwest Montana during the general season extension from Dec. 1-21.


Approximately 1,411 antlerless elk and 424 bulls were harvested across the 18 extended hunting districts. Pre-established harvest quotas were not reached in any extended area. Final harvest estimates will be determined following completion of statewide harvest surveys.


The mix of unseasonably warm and dry weather and public access difficulties prompted the decision to extend the general season in areas where elk numbers were over objective and where elk harvest was much lower than desired.


Harvest quotas for elk, with a particular focus on bulls, were set based on a five-year average harvest as determined by harvest surveys and check station data.


“Pre-established bull harvest quotas were not exceeded in any extended season area,” said Kurt Alt, Regional Wildlife Manager. “Harvest approached the bull quota, first in hunting district 314 and shortly after in the other extended areas. Ultimately, all extended areas were closed to bull hunting in response and in advance of forecasted severe winter weather.”

“FWP was conservative in applying the closures to avoid exceeding the bull quota,” added Alt.

Hunters should expect to see continued elk harvest opportunities in various areas of Region 3 through management seasons and game damage hunts until Feb. 15, 2009, including in hunting districts 360 and 362.

Hunters needed to sign up by July 15 for management season and game damage hunting opportunities through FWP’s game damage roster.

 

[The Hedgehog]

ground breaking..

 

[BuzzH]

Funny one here: "Pre-established bull harvest quotas were not exceeded in any extended season area,”

Pre-established based on what?

Purely a bullshit and uncalled for season extension and the FWP biologists can all go pound sand into the ass of their favorite landowner.

 

[noharleyyet]

can all go pound sound into the ass of their favorite (insert subject here)

I gotta remember this line next time I'm collecting a deadbeat recievable.

 

[BuzzH]

NHY,

edited...so pissed I could barely type.

424 bulls that should have made it through the season...now dead and next year the road hunters will whine that they "cant find a bull to shoot."

Un-frickin-believable.

 

[TLC]

OK, have another question for you elk hunters. guessing from the posts that this extended season is for ALL elk? next, and the main question. what does the FWP out there think a good herd number is? meaning, do they think that like here with whitetails, the best ratio is one to one for cows to bulls? seems most of the shows I have seen on elk hunting have always had a larger number of cows to bulls. what would be the best for the elk? one to one? or more cows than bulls? even when I lived in az and montana, always saw more cows than bulls.

 

[BuzzH]

TLC,

Complicated question, but I'll do my best to show you the idiocy of the MTFWP on elk management.

I'm not a biologist, but I do have a basic understanding of what constitutes a viable and healthy elk herd.

Montana in its infinite wisdom adopted an "elk management plan" that seperated MT into elk management zones. Each herd/unit/group of units, has a population objective. That all sounds good up to this point. But, the problem is that the population objectives are NOT based on any type of biology, habitat, or carrying capacity. Its a number agreed to, largely at the influence of landowners, that XXX number of elk should be present in XXX area or herd.

So, from the start you have a political machine that is driving elk management, has nothing to do with biology (in many cases, IMO...MOST cases).

I'll also admit to not being real sure on what I would call a healthy elk herd as far as bull-to-cow ratios. My personal opinion is that bull-to-cow ratios should not be the only criteria for consideration of proper management. I will say that in many areas in MT the b-to-c ratios are less than 10 bulls per 100 cows. IMO, that is NOT a healthy herd, in particular when most of the bulls in those types of herds are likely 1.5-3.5 years old.

I think that bull to cow ratios of at least 20-100 up to 40-100 are good numbers, IMO. But, I say that only if there is a percentage of those bulls that are over 7.5 years old. Its also my opinion that in a healthy herd, some of the bulls in any given unit should be dying of old age. Thats a sure way to know that you are providing everything an elk needs to live from birth to a natural death. Theres adequate winter range, summer range, hiding cover, security, etc. etc. etc.

Also, whats best for the elk is of no concern to the FWP, landowners, outfitters, and for the most part the average hunter. Only after all those other issues are "managed" does the FWP worry about whats really best for the elk.

The elk management plan was a joke from day one.

 

[JoseCuervo]

TLC,


I'll also admit to not being real sure on what I would call a healthy elk herd as far as bull-to-cow ratios. My personal opinion is that bull-to-cow ratios should not be the only criteria for consideration of proper management. I will say that in many areas in MT the b-to-c ratios are less than 10 bulls per 100 cows. IMO, that is NOT a healthy herd, in particular when most of the bulls in those types of herds are likely 1.5-3.5 years old.

I think that bull to cow ratios of at least 20-100 up to 40-100 are good numbers, IMO. But, I say that only if there is a percentage of those bulls that are over 7.5 years old. Its also my opinion that in a healthy herd, some of the bulls in any given unit should be dying of old age. Thats a sure way to know that you are providing everything an elk needs to live from birth to a natural death. Theres adequate winter range, summer range, hiding cover, security, etc. etc. etc.

My favorite one is when the bull:cow ratio gets too low, the Landowners will demand Cow hunts and cow tags to help Fish and Game get the ratio back where it should be. Ignoring the fact the herd is under objective.

 

[TLC]

thanks Buzz. appreciate the info. had a feeling that the ratio would/should be higher for elk than deer. and a completely rhetorical question here, but aren't elk somewhat of a migratory animal? and if so, how could anyone determine the proper herd size for any particular area?

you mention ages in your answer. what constitutes a mature bull? meaning optimum antler growth. 4 years? 5 years? the 7 you mention? and one last question. yeah, right. whats the normal life expectancy for an elk that does not get shot? one that dies from old age?

 

[TLC]

Jose, when you say "gets to low", are you talking about too few bulls? or cows? and if its cows, wouldn't that plan do just the opposite?

 

[BuzzH]

TLC,

Elk are migratory and thats why they are managed more by "herds" than managed by individual hunting unit.

What I'm saying is that if you can show me a browse line in any area in Montana where elk are actually over the carrying capacity of the land and harming winter range...I'd be shocked. Yet, under MT's elk management plan most all elk herds are considered "over-objective" currently. I think I said it before, but when you base population objectives on politics rather than biology...one could argue that if the objective number of elk were ONE elk in a given area and you currently had TWO elk in that unit...then that herd would in fact be "over-objective" by definition. The way MT works, you'd give out 5 tags for those 2 elk. Why? Because we'd have to make sure that outfitter bob gets 2 tags for his clients, the landowners would want one tag, and of course the average joe hunter would also want 2 tags. Whats best for the elk? Well, if we have one left at the end of the EXTENDED season, we'll figure out how to manage whats left. That is not a stretch for how things work in Montana currently.

When articles like the one NHY posted appear, it makes it sound like theres so many elk in Montana that if we dont conduct late hunts the elk are going to over-populate. Thats just pure BULLSHIT. Montana can carry way, way, way more elk than they currently have.

IMO, I dont think an elk really reaches his full potential until he's 8+ years old. I think under good conditions a bull can live to be 12-14 years old.

Wyoming considers anything older than a spike a "mature bull" on their hunter surveys, which is again CRAP.

 

[TLC]

thanks again Buzz. interesting numbers on the elk. may have to stop complaining about the way they do things here. sounds like montana is far worse than illinois. even though, we do have three types of deer here. does. bucks. and bucks with antlers less than three inches, which are then considered NOT a buck. so you can still shoot a second buck.

appreciate the info Buzz.

 

[elk_hunter]

What I'm saying is that if you can show me a browse line in any area in Montana where elk are actually over the carrying capacity of the land and harming winter range...I'd be shocked. Yet, under MT's elk management plan most all elk herds are considered "over-objective" currently.

That is a very good point. Colorado seems to be the same way in terms of their "capacity models" and politics regarding "objectives" -- and I'd reckon many other states are the same way. You are exactly right that rarely (if at all) can you find a place where elk (or deer for that matter) harm winter ranges or surpass the land's ability to sustain. I too, wonder where the biologists obtain "objective" information so they know what quotas to set for the state. Is it almost purely political with a dash of biology thrown in for good measure?

I don't know if this would help, but what if the F&G shut down (or really scaled back quotas) hunting for a few years to get populations and ratios where they should be? Of course landowners and outfitters would lobby against that, but I wonder if aside from that debacle, this is a reasonable strategy.