Montana Elk Management Survey Results

[Elky Welky]

An interesting read. The universally stated problem is crowding. The results are quite similar to the mule deer survey regarding hunter satisfaction overall.

https://fwp.mt.gov/binaries/content...k/resident-elk-hunter-survey-summary-2023.pdf

 

[SAJ-99]

Things that stand out...

The average age of respondents was 51 years (median age was 54 years)

and this table.

 

[Elky Welky]

I'd be very interested in knowing what folks who know more about these things can infer from those two points. I'm not surprised more respondents were older, simply because they are more likely to check their mail and take the time to send something back. But is there more to learn from that?

And that table is a gold mine. Too few elk on public, too many on private.

 

[SAJ-99]

I'd be very interested in knowing what folks who know more about these things can infer from those two points. I'm not surprised more respondents were older, simply because they are more likely to check their mail and take the time to send something back. But is there more to learn from that?

And that table is a gold mine. Too few elk on public, too many on private.

Mean and Median are pretty close but clearly skewed in the distribution (median higher than mean). If 51ish is average and distribution is normal, it assumes there are equal numbers of people hunting that are over 80 as there are under 20, just round numbers. It just shows that hunters are getting older, ie, more in the 50-79 than the 20-49. I made this point on the other post, "lace up the boots and go deep" is a saying that doesn't apply to a lot of Montana hunters and it gets harder to distribute hunters over a landscape.

Even too few elk overall, but too many on private. Opportunity is good (87%), but not on private (48%). Too many hunters (60%), but 69% prefer less restrictions. To be fair, there is nothing requiring people to think how the problems may be related or how to fix them. Montanas love their opportunity. I don't know how FWP manages to this survey.

 

[Elky Welky]

I don't know how FWP manages to this survey.

It's really just more data to incorporate into the new EMP.

 

[Labman]

Here is what I took away from it:
“Overall, 73 percent of the respondents from this survey are satisfied with elk management in Montana.”
That means nothing will change. I’d hate to see how bad it has to be for +50% to say they are not satisfied.

 

[SAJ-99]

It's really just more data to incorporate into the new EMP.

Agree, just wonder what could be incorporated in the EMP to make elk move from private to public while maintaining opportunity.

 

[Badlandcat]

Agree, just wonder what could be incorporated in the EMP to make elk move from private to public while maintaining opportunity.

Million-dollar question.
Until MT FWP deicides to work together with BLM and the forest service on improving habit(food) and providing security for elk on public lands the elk will stay on private.
The amount of land that has been bought solely for elk hunting across the state in the last 6-7 years is stagging.
That alone will ensure elk will stay on inaccessible private for the future.

 

[antlerradar]

Million-dollar question.
Until MT FWP deicides to work together with BLM and the forest service on improving habit(food) and providing security for elk on public lands the elk will stay on private.
The amount of land that has been bought solely for elk hunting across the state in the last 6-7 years is stagging.
That alone will ensure elk will stay on inaccessible private for the future.

No amount of habitat improvement will be enough to keep elk on pubic if we don't stop shooting them almost non stop for five months of the year.

 

[huntin24/7]

Here is what I took away from it:
“Overall, 73 percent of the respondents from this survey are satisfied with elk management in Montana.”
That means nothing will change. I’d hate to see how bad it has to be for +50% to say they are not satisfied.

I think a high percentage of residents here will respond favorably to elk and deer management as long as they can buy an otc tag and have a long season every year regardless of anything else.

 

[Nameless Range]

Million-dollar question.
Until MT FWP deicides to work together with BLM and the forest service on improving habit(food) and providing security for elk on public lands the elk will stay on private.
The amount of land that has been bought solely for elk hunting across the state in the last 6-7 years is stagging.
That alone will ensure elk will stay on inaccessible private for the future.

A large portion of the new EMP speaks to interagency collaboration in the name of habitat. With a 3,000,000 acres of national forest in western Montana about to engage in travel planning, and a fair amount of money generally to engage in habitat projects out there - we will see if it’s all talk.

That said, though I would agree that public land habitat is generally not as good as much on private, I think the year-round herds of talking monkeys hammering the places are the chief reason for the difference in distribution.

 

[atlas]

I think fewer cow hunts on public would be a great start to making elk feel safer on public.

 

[Pagosa]

I think pick your weapon. Shorten rifle season to two 10 day periods, and the rifle hunter only gets to pick one season. It’s not feasible to hunt for 11 weeks anymore. It’s too much on the landowners/wardens dealing with hunters for that long of season.

I never did know there was a survey occurring

 

[Deleted member 20812]

No amount of habitat improvement will be enough to keep elk on pubic if we don't stop shooting them almost non stop for five months of the year.

Everyone should read this about 100 times, and then re read it.

Habitat improvement with the current season structure is putting lipstick on a pig.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Here is what I took away from it:
“Overall, 73 percent of the respondents from this survey are satisfied with elk management in Montana.”
That means nothing will change. I’d hate to see how bad it has to be for +50% to say they are not satisfied.

I'm not surprised by this number in the least.

Most folks want to have the opportunity to go hunting. That's a natural thing. Even if they don't get an elk, it's good to be out and partaking in the activity, be in the outdoors and surrounded by wildlife.

But that level of satisfaction is not corelating with the desired management outcomes that are determined by Commission rule and the law. FWP can't ignore the latter in favor of the former.

As @Nameless Range pointed out, the new EMP gives a lot of tools to FWP relative to how they engage in habitat work. FWP traditionally had staff dedicated to just this, working with the feds on planning, commenting on transmission corridors, etc. But that alone isn't going to improve habitat on public land.

THere is a significant federal investment in habitat projects right now through the infrastructure bills and the inflation reduction bills. That funding generally needs a match in order to actually get boots on the ground, fires set, Tordon sprayed and mechanical and biological treatments in place.

SB 442 had that. As a way to implement the new EMP, SB 442 would have given FWP the ability to use tens of millions of dollars for habitat improvement, and not just commenting.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Everyone should read this about 100 times, and then re read it.

Habitat improvement with the current season structure is putting lipstick on a pig.

I disagree about the lipstick on a pig comment solely because the habitat treatments will take about as long as it takes to get meaningful season reform done. So they should compliment each other well at the right moment.

 

[Deleted member 20812]

I disagree about the lipstick on a pig comment solely because the habitat treatments will take about as long as it takes to get meaningful season reform done. So they should compliment each other well at the right moment.

You are correct, so long as people understand the success of one is entirely contingent upon the other.

 

[geewhiz]

My goodness there is no end to the whining on this site.


Somebody give me the cliff notes of why we are unsatisfied with elk management in montana.

 

[Badlandcat]

No amount of habitat improvement will be enough to keep elk on pubic if we don't stop shooting them almost non stop for five months of the year.

Your 100% correct.

 

[Deleted member 20812]

Somebody give me the cliff notes of why we are unsatisfied with elk management in montana.

Are you satisfied?