I agree with you. I am simply telling you what I heard from guys who make their living off of the animals in the area. You cannot deny that wolf reintroduction has negatively impacted the animal populations. I don't deny that horseShit management practices have also added pressure to the populations.
Regarding your "...continuing to pound dwindling populations comment..." what are you suggesting? Ban hunting in the Bob for 1 or more years? Cut resident and NR tags?
If I had a magic wand, I'd start by implementing a mandatory harvest reporting system in MT similar to what we have in Iowa for whitetails and turkeys. At least then you have a way to objectively and somewhat accurately track harvest trends by county and unit. This data could then be used to set reasonable objectives. I was very surprised when I was issued a paper tag without any reporting requirements after harvesting such a massive and unreal animal.
And let me be clear, I 100% believe that appropriate apex predator populations are necessary to maintain healthy populations of game animals. However, these predators have to be effectively managed and in balance with elk and deer population targets. Yes, I know MT has very liberal wolf tags for residents, but how many guys are riding or hiking 20 miles into the Bob or other wilderness areas just to hunt or trap wolves?
Lots of ground you're covering, I'll answer your questions, they're fair.
First to address the hunting in the Bob. Can we agree that hunting via humans has ALWAYS been touted as a way to "control" ungulate populations? To keep the herds healthy and "in check"? I think that's a fair statement and one I agree with.
If we believe that, I'm just curious how anyone can justify that in a duration of the hunt you made, that 8 hunters seeing 2 elk, 12 deer, yada yada, there is a biological need to hunt that herd? Is there too many elk? Are we taking "surplus animals"? How are we "helping" that herd?
That said, I'm not chastising you at all for killing an elk there, in fact congratulations, looks to be a good bull. I assume you aren't a biologist and even if you are, not paid as one in Montana. If Montana FWP and its biologists seem to think its OK to pound on those elk with OTC general tags for 11 weeks, that's what you pay them for to decide. However, crap management is then the culprit for a hugeeee part of the problem if that is being allowed to happen.
The places I hunt in Montana (my family has hunted there since the 1940's), not far from where you shot your bull, I made the decision that there simply are not enough elk there to justify killing them. Much like the Bob, its been in decline for a long, long time. Sure, some of it predators (mostly lions where I hunt most), but wolves and both grizzlies and black bears too. But, there is also a tremendous amount of pressure put on them by hunters. Before you say it, YES, I shot elk there the last several years I hunted elk there. But, its not right, or even fair, that I take advantage of those elk...I know that country (arguably) better than any human alive. I know right where I can find the bulls that occupy that country and they use very small, specific areas. They also move to those places and a vast majority of the bulls from a large geographic area congregate there. I decided my impacts on that huge geographic area were no doubt detrimental to that herd of elk. Every time I shot one, I felt guilty, like I was shooting the last buffalo. I addressed these issues in a lengthy letter I sent the FWP Director, Governor Office, and area Biologist, along with a copy of my last elk tag, explaining exactly why I would no longer participate in hunting elk in Montana until they got serious about proper management.
That was my choice, and IMO, the only reasonable and responsible thing to do. I haven't bought another elk tag there even though I qualify for the Montana Native OTC elk tag which is half price (was $80 for a NR even after I quit buying them).
I've talked at length with the biologists there for 40 years, all of them. I've heard some alarming things, as in one biologist telling me that "well, when there's hardly any elk left, killing a few of what's left is no big deal". That area had 8 observed elk the last time it was flown....YES EIGHT elk. 11 weeks of hunting justified?
Here you go...any way to possible to justify 11 weeks of OTC hunting with numbers like this?
To: Neil Andersen From: Jessy Coltrane Date: 29 May 2018 RE: Elk survey in the South Fork Flathead, HDs 140 & 150 Species: Elk Pilot: Rob Cherot and Ken Gustus Total elk observed: 202 Area: HDs 140 & 150 Observer(s): Jessy Coltrane Calves per 100 cows: 8 Date(s): 20-22 May 2018 Flight time: 9 hours Bulls per 100 cows: 6 Aircraft: Cost (@$425.00/hr): $3825 On 20- May 2017, we counted and classified elk from a helicopter in the South Fork of the Flathead River within hunting districts 140 and 150, from Youngs Creek to Dry Parks (Table 1). On 20 May 2018, Rob Cherot was the pilot, and Perry Brown and I were the observers; whereas on the 21 – 22 May, Ken Justus was the pilot and I was the only observer. Low lying meadows were fully green and snowline was high. The south facing slopes, particularly in the 2015 burn areas were also showing signs of emergent vegetation. Youngs Creek was blackened from the 2017 burn with only a few small patches of green vegetation. That drainage was relatively devoid of forage for elk. Skies were clear, and the wind was calm and conditions were optimal for sighting elk. Surveys were conducted from 0600 to 0820. Unfortunately, this year we had a prolonged winter, with deep snows and late green-up. The helicopter was not available for surveys due to conflicts with other biologists and maintenance requirements, which made it impossible to conduct surveys earlier. Spring green-up conditions were past prime for surveying, and the timing of our survey was also approaching the beginning of calving; we observed several single female elk in heavily wooded areas separate from any herd. Therefore, it appears we missed optimal timing for surveys by over a week, and due to the poor timing of the survey, I would not use these numbers in any trend analysis. We observed a total of 202 elk, with a calf:cow ratio of 8 calves to 100 cows and a bull:cow ratio of 6 bulls to 100 cows (Table 1; Figures 1 and 2). Elk were observed primarily in meadows and along the main river channel, with the exception of a few single female elk (Figures 3 and 4). Small bands of bulls were observed higher on hillsides and in thick timber. Classifying elk during the spring is relatively difficult, especially discerning bulls from cows. In addition, bulls are in smaller groups in thicker timber, making sightability low in comparison to cow/calf groups. The observed calf:cow ratio is low but similar to last year’s ratio. Bull:cow ratio is lower than observed in previous years (Figure 2).
Agree with you on mandatory harvest reporting, 100%.
Also agree 100% with predator management, and yes there are guys killing their limit of wolves in that country...I personally know one that's filled every wolf tag available to him every year since hunting started. Last I heard he had shot 5 of his 10 this year...probably a couple more by now (he doesn't trap).
