Here we go again in MT...

[mmw194287]

​

​ ​

​ FWP proposes new, limited elk season structure to commission​ HELENA – Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks is looking at a handful of new strategies to better manage elk populations and improve quality hunting opportunities on public lands. FWP will propose these strategies to the Montana Fish and Wildlife Commission at its Dec. 14 meeting. In recent years, Montana has seen a dramatic increase in elk populations in many hunting districts around the state. Currently, 14 hunting districts are at least 200 percent above population objectives. Data also show an overcrowding of elk populations on private land, limiting opportunities for public land hunters. “What we know is the status quo isn’t working,” said FWP Director Hank Worsech. “So, we’re going to propose a few new strategies we think can finally help us make progress in addressing the problem, both for hunters and for landowners.” Required by law to achieve population objectives set by the Fish and Wildlife Commission, FWP proposes targeted provisions to fulfill the statutory requirement of managing to population objective, address the increasing impacts of high elk populations on Montana farmers and ranchers, and improve quality opportunities for hunters. Those numerical objectives are identified in the current elk management plan. The targeted provisions for 14 hunting districts with limited permits and over population objectives are: In all 14 hunting districts, FWP proposes to remove some or all of the limited either-sex permits. In eight of those hunting districts, where problems with distribution, population and access tend to be most acute, FWP is proposing to retain the limited either-sex permits but make them valid only on public land. In most of these districts, the permit quotas are proposed to be half of the 2021 quotas. The hunting districts proposed for this structure are: 411, 417, 426, 535 (newly proposed for 2022), 590, 702, 704 and 705. The proposal would also make a general elk license valid for either-sex elk only on private land in these eight districts. This would include the general archery and firearm seasons as well as the muzzleloader season. Early and late antlerless seasons would remain the same, and only be for antlerless elk in the districts in which they occur. All of FWP’s proposed hunting regulations are undergoing review as part of the agency’s regular, biennial season-setting process, and are subject to commission approval. If the commission approves the proposals, there will be a 30-day public comment opportunity. “We can’t keep doing the same thing over and over again and expect a different result. We have to try something different. This proposal is a new strategy we can implement for two years and see if it has the desired effect – more elk harvest, better elk availability on public lands, fewer landowner conflicts, and elk at population objective,” Worsech said. “In some hunting districts, we have broad public tolerance or outright support for limited permits, and we want to keep those in place.” By having different season types in multiple areas with similar circumstances – over population elk herds and limited either-sex permits – FWP will be able to analyze which strategy is most effective at decreasing elk numbers and moving more on to public land. In addition to this specific season proposal, a new elk plan is being developed with the help of guiding principles identified by an external working group and endorsed by the commission. The process for this new plan will include extensive public commenting opportunities. The Private Land/Public Wildlife council will also review all FWP access programs and revisit elk hunting access agreements, which provide access to private land in exchange for elk licenses and permits for the landowner. Worsech is also looking to pull together an additional citizen group to explore more ways to address issues around hunter access to private land and landowner preferences. The goal for the group will be to provide tangible recommendations FWP and the commission can implement. Also, with the availability of more federal Pittman-Robertson funds, FWP is exploring a three-fold increase of funding for its access programs. “It’s time for people to bring their best ideas forward, and I want to hear from them,” Worsech said. “Don’t just tell us what you don’t like. I want to hear your ideas to improve the situation. I hope we can all see and realize a better day for landowners, hunters and the elk resource itself.”

 

[BwanaKubwa]

Kind of hard to hit those population targets when the elk aren't hunted by the everyday hunter. I'm not sure fwp has a good option right now. I did my part though and shot 2 elk this year

 

[TheTone]

You get what you pay(vote) for

 

[S.Clancy]

In my opinion, this is just continuing the bullshit from this spring. Notice "general license will be able to harvest either sex elk on private land." Why the change? Ahhhh, you mean now outfitters in these Trophy units can have basically unlimited clientele. These same outfits that have scouted and hazed elk back onto private land via aircraft? But on public land we still have "limited tags".....I cannot wait until this administration is over in MT.

 

[bsnedeker]

In my opinion, this is just continuing the bullshit from this spring. Notice "general license will be able to harvest either sex elk on private land." Why the change? Ahhhh, you mean now outfitters in these Trophy units can have basically unlimited clientele. These same outfits that have scouted and hazed elk back onto private land via aircraft? But on public land we still have "limited tags".....I cannot wait until this administration is over in MT.

Bingo. If these landowners were so upset about elk numbers being over the ridiculously low objectives that are set (BY FWP!!!) it doesn't seem like it would be that hard for them to run the elk off onto public. Chase them on an ATV and fire a couple of shots once a week or so and this "problem" is solved.

 

[TheTone]

Or force private lands to be antlerless only. I’d bet they would have significantly less desire to harbor elk without the payday mature bulls bring in

 

[cgasner1]

I just wish the state would try and do something that doesn’t just look like a money grab for the outfitters. They honestly should go back to how it was pre shoulder season and give the ranchers a option to let people draw a number and go hunt if they want elk killed they need more people hunting


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Legend]

Cow only on private lands would send a message.

Hank is a tool. He is being used by the wealthy to force their needs on the state. He should be ashamed to call himself a Public Employee.

 

[go_deep]

Earn a bull. You have to shoot a cow on private land, register it, then you get a bull tag. Population problem on private solved.

 

[TheTone]

Earn a bull. You have to shoot a cow on private land, register it, then you get a bull tag. Population problem on private solved.

It should probably be more like 10:1 if elk numbers are really so problematic. MT is cursed with an elk management plan that was written by legislators with no real scientific basis for population numbers

 

[303TrophyHusband]

Something needs to be done out there in the 700's with elk AND deer but this isn't it.

 

[Crowmangler]

Maybe they should use state aircraft to herd the elk off of private onto public?
It seems to work pretty well in the opposite direction...

 

[mtwarden]

The proposal would also make a general elk license valid for either-sex elk only on private land in these eight districts. This would include the general archery and firearm seasons as well as the muzzleloader season. Early and late antlerless seasons would remain the same, and only be for antlerless elk in the districts in which they occur.

That's a grand idea

 

[Northpark]

I like the idea of earn a bull. Shoot a cow before you can take a bull.

Also Colorado’s ranching for wildlife program seems to work pretty well even though it’s only open to residents. I got to hunt some pretty cool private land through RFW when I lived there. It gives people a chance to draw tags for specific ranches in the public draw for cows or bulls, the ranches have to do habitat work, and the split for the specific ranch is 20% of bulltags go to the public in the draw while 80% of the cow tags go to the public draw leaving 80% of the bull tags for sale and 20% of the cow tags for sale by the ranch as hunts.

 

[S.Clancy]

I just wish the state would try and do something that doesn’t just look like a money grab for the outfitters. They honestly should go back to how it was pre shoulder season and give the ranchers a option to let people draw a number and go hunt if they want elk killed they need more people hunting


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They still do that in certain areas

 

[S.Clancy]

How about increase the "access enhancement fee" from 2$ to 10$ and put all that money into the block management program to increase funding and make it more competitive with outfitter leases.

 

[mtwarden]

I like the idea of earn a bull. Shoot a cow before you can take a bull.

Also Colorado’s ranching for wildlife program seems to work pretty well even though it’s only open to residents. I got to hunt some pretty cool private land through RFW when I lived there. It gives people a chance to draw tags for specific ranches in the public draw for cows or bulls, the ranches have to do habitat work, and the split for the specific ranch is 20% of bulltags go to the public in the draw while 80% of the cow tags go to the public draw leaving 80% of the bull tags for sale and 20% of the cow tags for sale by the ranch as hunts.

that sounds like a great system









for outfitters/landowners selling tags- no thanks, Colorado can keep their ranching for wildlife

 

[johnsd16]

I got the email from FWP and felt it was more the same ridiculous bullsh!t as always. I don’t see anything in the new changes that help anything. The rich get richer and the public land hunter gets to continue to watch from the sidelines. I regret having any BP in MT now even though I only live an hour away.

 

[tops911]

until over grazing of public lands is addressed the elk issue on private land will never change. I want to puke every time I step on public land grazed down shorter than a putting green on a golf course.

 

[MJB]

Money seams to be talking