MT Shoulder Season Public Comment

[RobG]

Rob, thanks for your input. I agree with you and believe we are on the same page. Regarding the "criteria" the commission uses to decide on a shoulder season, do you know where I could find it? I'd be curious to give it a look. Unfortunately there is no perfect answer for this delima, however, I believe as sportsmen it is our responsibility to make a lot of noise in an effort to protect Montana elk from commercialization, which in my opinion is exactly what will be the end result from the shoulder seasons.

There are links to all the details down at the bottom of this page http://fwp.mt.gov/hunting/seasons/elkShoulder.html

 

[----]

Gardiner meeting is tonight, anyone attending the rodeo?

 

[mtmiller]

I will be at the Havre one this evening.

 

[Ben Lamb]

If anyone wants to meet up in Helena on 1/20 before the meeting, let me know and I can find a space for us to share comments, etc.

 

[katqanna]

I'm going to the one in Conrad tomorrow night, then hit Bozemans when I get back on the 19th.

Had an interesting talk with a guy that works at a ranch and outfits yesterday and again this morning. He is pissed about this, saying the wildlife need to come first and that the sportsmen better start demanding heads or they are going to lose their wildlife. He is going to one of the meetings tonight.

I still havent received any of my elk shoulder season public comments (the ones submitted before the Oct commission meeting that I had requested 3 times from Helena FWP wildlife), nor the recent request of any statements physically submitted at the Oct and Dec commission meetings on this subject by organizations.

 

[----]

If anyone wants to meet up in Helena on 1/20 before the meeting, let me know and I can find a space for us to share comments, etc.

Is there more of a 'big picture' conversation at the Helena meetings? or is it pretty well the stuff for that area?

 

[Ben Lamb]

Is there more of a 'big picture' conversation at the Helena meetings? or is it pretty well the stuff for that area?

My understanding is that it's mostly geared towards local districts, but MWF is encouraging folks to comment as broadly as they want. I think that makes a lot of sense.

 

[Nameless Range]

This isn't directly related to shoulder seasons but this a regional concern I plan on bringing up in Region 3. I'll limit my rant to one district, but I could expand this rant to others:


I have a real problem with the proposals to a District I grew up hunting - District 350.

According to a map made by FWP in June of last year, District 350 was 1-200 Elk over objective. During the 2015 hunting season for one week District 350 was opened up as a shoot-a-cow-on-your-general tag area. I know a veritable slaughter occurred, and wonder how many cows were taken.I'm sure it was between 1-200, and I wouldn't doubt it was closer to 100 than 1 for that week. Now, before FWP call-outs to report harvest happened, they propose that in the 2016 a hunter be able to shoot a cow the entire season on their general tag - for a district that was barely over objective and aggressively managed the season prior, and a district for which the harvest statistics had yet to be returned! How can they justify that?

Forget the fact that "Objectives" are kind of garbage and forget the fact 350 doesn't have much production Agriculture that would suffer due to Elk numbers. 350 is heavily roaded, and I mean heavily.

Two things:

1. An entire season of cow hunting off general tag will bring a massive increase of hunters to the district, and they will road hunt and slaughter the elk. If it snows I wonder if an elk will be left in the district.

2. You can shoot a mule deer buck using your general A tag in this area. The increased presence of hunters looking for cows will really harm an already tedious mule deer population. Oh yeah, did I mention they are also bringing back some Muley B tags.

 

[Nameless Range]

Well it seems we have lost a week's worth of comments.

The meeting in Helena last night was interesting. Lots of opposition to Shoulder Seasons, and the fact that archers and bird hunters will be sharing the field with Shoulder Season hunters seemed to alarm some people. Shoulder seasons aside, there seems to be trend to combine HDs and manage them as Elk Management Units (EMUs) under the argument that because elk move from one HD to the other, they should manage all HDs the same. In my opinion, especially in the districts where I live (335,318) the FWP needs to manage more with a fine tooth comb - they are busting out a rake.

I met a fellow HuntTalker(Ben Lamb), and that was good. As has been said before FWP has a tough job to do. One more day to submit comments.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Great to meet you, NR.

Overall, you nailed it. About 25-30 people in total showed up with some very good comments. Rep. Flynn had some good suggestions as well - especially staggering the season so critters & people get to take a week off and recuperate.

If you haven't submitted comments yet, that's a good one to include. I would imagine that landowners will be tired of the constant pressure from hunters, especially around Christmas, and it doesn't make sense to just through a season open for 10 weeks without consideration to what it will do to the animals in the dead of winter.

Don't forget to CC the commission as well: [email protected]

 

[The Hedgehog]

Great to meet you, NR.

Overall, you nailed it. About 25-30 people in total showed up with some very good comments. Rep. Flynn had some good suggestions as well - especially staggering the season so critters & people get to take a week off and recuperate.

If you haven't submitted comments yet, that's a good one to include. I would imagine that landowners will be tired of the constant pressure from hunters, especially around Christmas, and it doesn't make sense to just through a season open for 10 weeks without consideration to what it will do to the animals in the dead of winter.

Don't forget to CC the commission as well: [email protected]

Does that email address get all 5 commissioners?

 

[Ben Lamb]

Does that email address get all 5 commissioners?

Yes.

Be courteous, gaybow.

 

[RobG]

- especially staggering the season so critters & people get to take a week off and recuperate.

Can you elaborate on what the suggestion was? I know skipping hunting days can help harvest by allowing the animals back onto the property, but if the land is private then the amount of "break" can be controlled by the landowner.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Can you elaborate on what the suggestion was? I know skipping hunting days can help harvest by allowing the animals back onto the property, but if the land is private then the amount of "break" can be controlled by the landowner.

The concept is to close the season entirely for a week - 2 weeks rather than leave it wide open. Example:

Last day general rifle - close until Dec. 9. Run season from 12/9 - 12/23, close from 12/24 - 12/28, etc.

If FWP develops a regional shoulder season structure, you can tailor it to meet the needs of landowners, hunters & provide critters the rest they need to redistribute and calm down.

Not that much different than our old whitetail place.

 

[The Hedgehog]

Given the goal of shoulder seasons, I'm confused to why there's any partial support at all, tweaks, or suggested improvements, etc. ??? Here's a giant piece of crap - how can we improve it??

No thanks.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Just my perspective: FWP is going to move forward with some kind of shoulder season. The votes do not exist to stop it at the commission level. Therefore, I'd rather work to make the seasons as good as they can possibly be rather than not participate.

If you're not at the table, you're usually what's for dinner.

 

[katqanna]

Just in case the other posts dont get restored, I am partially reposting what I posted last night, the 2015 Elk Shoulder Season pilot project public comments. Reading through them, I have some concerns, there are some comments labeled Agreed (not typing all those out again) that should have been Disagree or Undecided and some Undecided that should have been Disagree.

Also, someone wanted my SB 245 veto email from Bullock stating he mandated this elk shoulder season proposal.

 

[BuzzH]

Just my perspective: FWP is going to move forward with some kind of shoulder season. The votes do not exist to stop it at the commission level. Therefore, I'd rather work to make the seasons as good as they can possibly be rather than not participate.

If you're not at the table, you're usually what's for dinner.

That's the problem...MFWP does what it wants at the expense of the resource and hunters are just expected to bend over. The "seat at the table" you refer to Ben, is actually nothing more than "damage control" on railroaded policy. Sorry, but that's not offering a seat at the table, that's asking sportsmen to clean up an FWP caused train wreck with a teaspoon.

True to form, hunters oblige the MFWP and Commission by agreeing to the short-sighted "vision" that the MFWP has, then wonder why hunting in Montana has turned into total dogchit on public lands in the last 10 years.

Trust me, the downhill slide that Montana hunting is on is just getting started...there's a wide open slope with NOTHING to get in the way of the race to the bottom.

Its a complete tragedy what is going on in Montana right now. There is NO hunting, for any species in Montana, that is better now than it was 25 years ago. I don't see it getting anything but worse either.

Collaboration doesn't, and hasn't, existed in Montana for a long time. The results of that are now very apparent...worse hunting, less access, less wildlife, thousands of leftover NR tags, etc. etc. etc.

I know, lets blame it on wolves, weather, and the bad economy.

Funny thing is that Wyoming sells over 1K leftover cow elk tags in a single unit, in less than 30 minutes of going on sale...apparently the economy must be different just across a state line. Even more strange is the Montana cant sell BULL permits????

Huh, I wonder why?

 

[Ben Lamb]

Buzz,

I don't disagree with a lot of what you are saying, but I'm not inclined to sit back and do nothing. Shoulder seasons are moving forward, so I'm going to continue to try and protect elk and the public trust as best I can rather than sit back and do nothing.

For me, this isn't the end of the issue, just the beginning. It's time Montana figured out how to manage elk better. Elk are a political weapon to ride roughshod over the agency. I'm sick of it and I think most Montanans are too.

 

[airlocksniffer]

I'm emailing a dedicated comment outside of the website. Let me know what you think prior to hitting send:

Good Afternoon,

I am writing as a concerned citizen regarding the proposed elk shoulder seasons. From what I understand, elk numbers are over “objective" in many hunting districts in Montana and FWP is piloting a shoulder season program in select HD’s and moving toward a massive implementation for the 2016 season. There are a number of reasons I think this is a poor idea:

1. The conclusion that elk are over “objective” is not based on carrying capacity but based on landowner tolerance or dare I say politics. That is not sound management of our state resources. Per page 55, point #5 in the EMP:

"Elk populations in portions of some EMUs may be almost entirely inaccessible to hunters during the general hunting season or accessible to only a few hunters. To avoid over-harvest of accessible elk on public lands or private lands open to hunting, the* inaccessible elk may not be included in objective numbers.* Trend count number objectives may include only elk normally accessible to general hunting (if they are a distinct segment), though hunter access negotiations will continue. Elk occupying these refuges may be counted separately where practical (if they are a distinct segment) and sub-objectives established that could be operative if access negotiations are successful. If significant harvest of these refuge elk is possible with special management at some times and locations, they should be included in objective levels.”

Based on the number of districts being recommended for shoulder seasons, I find it hard to believe that the inaccessible elk are not being counted as part of “over objective” calculation.

2. Elk are considered over objective on private lands. This is because of lack of access. My belief is that if landowners are not willing to provide better access to disperse herds during the general seasons via the block management program, it is not the responsibility of FWP nor my tax dollars to assist in the harvest of those elk.
3. Additional hunting of elk prior to and after the general seasons will put undue stress on the elk. This will be over 6 months of hunting for these animals.
4. Additional rifle hunting during archery season could prove unsafe for archery hunters and other stakeholders.
5. This may be incorrect but landowner’s have the ability to pick which hunters get access and can charge a fee for access. If the goal is reduction of the elk herd, this should not be allowed.

I would argue that the following ideas would have as great of an impact on reducing objective numbers as shoulder seasons:

1. Allow cow elk harvest with a general tag, either for a portion or all of the general season.
2. Allow an additional cow elk tag to be purchased for areas over objective.
3. Provide better access to harbored elk herds via the block management program or other means.
4. Allow cow elk to be harvested during the youth hunt in areas over objective.
5. Continue with game damage and management hunts as needed. Perhaps giving sportsmen the option to automatically register for the roster hunts when purchasing a general elk license would help with cow elk harvest in HD’s that are over objective.

Long term, the EMP need to be re-written to redefine objective numbers based on the work of FWP biologists. Of course landowners should be part of that process but those objective numbers should be primarily based on the work of the biologists. Determining appropriate objective numbers should not be political.

If the shoulder seasons will proceed despite the negative public comment, please consider the following:

1. Any district over objective should only allow cow harvest during both the general season and shoulder season. It is unfair for a landowner to lease out or charge trespass fees for the bulls during the general season only to request assistance from FWP to reduce the cow numbers.
2. Do not allow shoulder season hunts to take place on public land. This defeats the purpose of dispersing cows from private land.
3. Do not allow shoulder season hunts during archery season. Perhaps FWP could expand game damage hunts but allowing anybody with a general tag to hunt elk during archery season will have a negative effect on archers.
4. Allow 1-2 week cool off periods between general and shoulder seasons. This will give elk a much needed break before they are hunted again.

Please consider the above points, shared by many fellow hunters, when deciding whether to fully implement the planned shoulder seasons.

Kind Regards,
John Nasset
Helena, MT