MTLabrador
Well-known member
Too many domestics close by, but it would be perfect country for them. The big snowies would too.
Possible Change to Montana Unlimited Sheep
- Thread starter bigsky2
- Start date
BuzzH
Well-known member
More than one State has sheep tags to apply for.
There is a MTWSF conservation committee working with MTFWP to hopefully rectify some of the issues in the unlimiteds. Hopefully Tabor gives them a chance.
Whether people that hunt the UL get bonus points or not won’t fix what the issues are. His idea isn’t bad but it’s not a fix.
My view on what the issues are:
-There are laws and regulations regarding curl and the time period to check in rams. FWP has done a horrible job enforcing these laws. They’ve plugged two sub legal rams in the last three years.
- Updating the Quota status on time. When I killed my ram, the season ran a day longer than it should have.
This year I stood next to a person that killed a ram that closed a unit, as he called it in at 11:45 AM. The hotline was not updated until the following evening, again allowing the season to run a day long. These are two examples but are not the only two times.
FWP needs to step it up and treat this like the special, only place in the country opportunity that it is.
These are not whitetail does, they’re bighorn rams.
- A 48 hr reporting requirement and an additional 48 pending closure window is too long. This standard has been in place since the days you needed to physically hike out and use a land line telephone to report your ram.
Today’s tech allows for same day reporting and unit closure the following day and it allows for everybody hunting to acquire a device for a reasonable price that allows them to know about this, regardless of cell service.
Shorten the reporting and closure window.
Hunter numbers aren’t too far off what they’ve been historically- maybe. It’s hard to know because FWP struggled to quantify or communicate real tag sales.
It’s convoluted between people that “applied” and were “successful” and then followed through with actually buying the license and those who did not. There are also those who flat out purchase a license OTC with no application.
Last I heard, requests to straighten this out to get a real number are met with confusion, but not data.
Whether people that hunt the UL get bonus points or not won’t fix what the issues are. His idea isn’t bad but it’s not a fix.
My view on what the issues are:
-There are laws and regulations regarding curl and the time period to check in rams. FWP has done a horrible job enforcing these laws. They’ve plugged two sub legal rams in the last three years.
- Updating the Quota status on time. When I killed my ram, the season ran a day longer than it should have.
This year I stood next to a person that killed a ram that closed a unit, as he called it in at 11:45 AM. The hotline was not updated until the following evening, again allowing the season to run a day long. These are two examples but are not the only two times.
FWP needs to step it up and treat this like the special, only place in the country opportunity that it is.
These are not whitetail does, they’re bighorn rams.
- A 48 hr reporting requirement and an additional 48 pending closure window is too long. This standard has been in place since the days you needed to physically hike out and use a land line telephone to report your ram.
Today’s tech allows for same day reporting and unit closure the following day and it allows for everybody hunting to acquire a device for a reasonable price that allows them to know about this, regardless of cell service.
Shorten the reporting and closure window.
Hunter numbers aren’t too far off what they’ve been historically- maybe. It’s hard to know because FWP struggled to quantify or communicate real tag sales.
It’s convoluted between people that “applied” and were “successful” and then followed through with actually buying the license and those who did not. There are also those who flat out purchase a license OTC with no application.
Last I heard, requests to straighten this out to get a real number are met with confusion, but not data.
Last edited:
I like this one especially. mtmuley
WanderWoman
Well-known member
Mountain goats. They are susceptible to pneumonia bacteria like wild and domestic sheep are. I heard from the former Livingston bio that the goats in the Crazies also carry Mannheimia haemolytica. So moving sheep in there could expose them to it, or the sheep can expose the goats to something they carry, etc.
Schaaf
Well-known member
Someone needs to tell Tabor to chill out.
Gerald Martin
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2009
- Messages
- 8,359
Maybe one of those hunting forums or blogs?
Schaaf
Well-known member
Maybe someone should mention that in a podcast since it’s referenced in the most recent amendment. And by most recent, I mean until the next time I refresh my email inbox.
Just think of how loose everyone's lips would get once they punched their tag if it went OIL. Like @MTGomer said, these are rams, not whitetail does. This isn't a conventional draw tag, but going OIL with it would essentially cause a lot of hunters to treat it as such, and be much more open with their info.
Repeat hunters who spend literal years in these units are why we have a 521 Goat tag, and are responsible for the vast majority of game and non-game info (wolverines, G bears, goats, moose etc.) that FWP receives that allows them to make the most informed decisions they can. I can't overstate how big of a negative impact I believe this would cause, and have let the commission know as much each time it comes up.
Perhaps you should reach out to the Biologists and get their opinion on the matter as well.
seeth07
Well-known member
I got two points to make in regards to the idea that even the unlimited units would qualify as your OIL for sheep if Montana did move to this.
First, how many people really have been able to achieve an unlimited ram twice? Doing it once seems like a hard enough task let alone being able to get it done a second time 7 years+ later when you apply for that hunt code again.
Second, if the sheep you are going to pull the trigger on in the unlimited unit is going to be the only one you can ever shoot, don't you think that people won't be shooting sub-legal and young rams that just barely make the cut?
Schaaf
Well-known member
Well that depends on if a certain hunting writer needs his wife to shoot one for content or not.
To your first point- I can name 3 that I know that have been successful twice, and there are several more out there that I just don't know well enough to say "I know them". This number is only going to grow in subsequent years as more friends come off their wait.
To your second point- I think people should be that selective whether it's their first, their last, or somewhere in between. However, when Wisconsin WSF raffles a guided Unlimited Hunt, or you pay $1250 for a few years and travel out from Minnesota, or you just want to thump your chest because the hunt has been chalked up to "Any ram is a good ram", people will keep shooting young rams. I would counter the point and say that those that already have their first ram are the most selective of all hunters.
rogerthat
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2015
- Messages
- 2,622
I have read the amendment multiple times and I am confused as to what is even being proposed or how this amendment could be specifically implemented especially with the FWPs response on authority.
In essence- one could hunt every other year in the ULs, and if you have an Unlimited tag, you couldn't have bonus points.
I commented that I would happily give up my bonus points I've earned over the last 6 years if I trusted the commission well enough that I didn't feel like the ULs could be a thing of the past if politics, or a squeaky wheel with the commission's ear, got involved.
cgasner1
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2016
- Messages
- 1,718
I may be wrong on this but I do believe a guy could just select to opt out of using his points on the year he applied for unlimited causing you to keep your points. Then the other year you would apply with points and gain another one. Unless they are willing to address the entire system this is just a waste of time
You're correct- You can also buy OTC and then apply for points only- which the Department included in their response.
cgasner1
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2016
- Messages
- 1,718
Seems pointless unless that option goes away with all this
seeth07
Well-known member
Ok, another thought on the first point and to counter yours. If these friends are so successful, wouldn't it be great if the people that know it so well and are shooting a ram every 7 years are no longer eligible? Wouldn't that make for in the long run a few more rams on the mountain for those that have been trying hard but failing eventually fill their dream of getting a ram?
Sure- but these same guys are hunting their butts off and not just killing the first ram they come across. Like I said, they're probably more selective than everyone else. I think the success rate for those hunters that really get after it would surprise a lot of folks. First big snow storm sends a lot of guys packing. Frankly, I don't care if those guys ever get their ram. Those that hunt hard, they'll get theirs. And the handful of previously successful guys that are holding out for the top tier aren't impacting their odds of that happening.
Similar threads
