How accurate are Montana's harvest/hunter numbers

[timekiller13]

Just out of general curiosity, how accurate are Montana's harvest numbers and hunter numbers for general tag HD's? I know Colorado's are pure BS, just wondering if Montana has a better, more realistic grasp of actual harvest and hunter numbers. Or are they just SWAGing it as well?

 

[bigsky2]

I can't see how they would be very accurate. Montana needs to go to mandatory harvest reporting.

 

[sharpshooter269]

MT calls at the conclusion of the season to see if you harvested and what unit you hunted, how many days. Not sure what they do if you don’t pick up the phone. Has to be some guesstimating.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Selway]

They're pretty accurate for rifle pronghorn, moose, sheep, goat and limited entry deer/elk.

For general units, they're really only helpful for trends (bull harvest per year).

The way they work the hunter days is completely bogus, and I would put no faith in those or success rates.

 

[jmez]

Our group of 3 hunted MT for 6 years in a row. I was never called, each of my hunting buddies were called one time for elk. One was called one time for deer. He answered the deer question and then asked if they wanted info for elk hunting, lady told him no, he wasn't on the list for that.

They are completely inaccurate.

 

[timekiller13]

They're pretty accurate for rifle pronghorn, moose, sheep, goat and limited entry deer/elk.

For general units, they're really only helpful for trends (bull harvest per year).

The way they work the hunter days is completely bogus, and I would put no faith in those or success rates.

Kind of what I was thinking. Thanks for the replies. Gives me some things to chew on. I have always wanted to hunt in Montana. I got overruled on our first couple trips and we went to Colorado instead, but since it looks like I am going solo this year, I will do what I want to do. If I draw a tag.

 

[BuzzH]

Lets put it this way, before I got disgusted with Montana not managing elk and quit hunting them there...the numbers in the unit I hunted (and still deer hunt the same unit) were a joke.

They claimed they were killing more bull elk than their population estimates said even existed in the area.

The harvest on bulls was supposedly around 85 bulls with a bull elk population of about 80.

I called and talked to the biologist for the area and asked him how you kill 85 out of 80 available bulls...he didn't have much of an answer other than both were "estimates".

For the record, from hunting that unit for 39 straight years, there is no way that anything close to 85 bulls are being killed out of there...no way.

 

[prm]

With the ease of setting up data collection for each tag sold there is no excuse for not having rock solid harvest data. No idea why the results of every tag aren’t collected, unless they don’t want solid data. Not making an accusation, I just can’t explain the absence.

I’ve received calls about my CO license. I’ve tried to respond to a message by filling out the online survey and it won’t allow me saying something to the effect of me not being on some list (even though they called me and left a msg.).

 

[Forest]

As a resident I can tell you I occasionally (maybe every other year) get a call about my deer hunting days in the field, which units, success if any, # of points on the buck, and lastly if I encountered any wolves.
I couldn't tell you the last time I got called about elk.
They never call my wife who has the same tags in her pocket more often then not.
Long story short their numbers are educated guesses at best. FWP's wildlife management is far from the best in the west, that is for sure.

Sent from my SM-G973U1 using Tapatalk

 

[mt100gr.]

Agree with posts above. Of the last 20 or so animals I have tagged, I'd guess FWP has known about 1 or 2. There isn't a check station on the way to where I usually hunt and the phone surveys usually just leave 1 message - rarely get a follow up.

 

[Riplip]

For what its worth, I have hunted elk in Montana 4 times as a NR and can tell you that I have been contacted each time after the season via telephone for a harvest survey. I have missed or ignored calls that were from 406 and they will continue to call until they reach me. Not sure if that translates to accuracy of harvest statistics but at least in my limited experience they seem to be making a strong attempt at collecting the data.

 

[slick]

I did the hunter harvest surveys for 5 years as a side job while going to school at MSU. While I agree there are better ways to collect harvest data, this is how it works.

FWP has two crews one in Bozeman, and one in Helena. They are tasked to called 65% of Pronghorn, 63% of elk, and 62% of deer tag holders. Those percentages may be made up of 100% of certain permits, 75% of other permits, X percentage of Gen tags.

Every year it switched in asking specific district effort between deer and elk.

Did you hunt deer (or elk) in MT this year?
In what 3 districts did you hunt the most and for how many days?
Did you archery hunt?
If so, what 3 districts did you hunt the most and for how many days?
Were you successful at filling (a permit, or your general) your tag?
In what district did you fill your tag?
Was it archery or rifle?
What week of the season?
Was this mule deer/whitetail?
Buck or doe?
If a buck how many points?
Did you see any moose or wolves while hunting?
Date, district, how many, closest geographic point, how many days did you hunt there before seeing them, etc.

Very similar for elk, deer, pronghorn.

DEA are called 3 times. MSG are called 7.
Message is left on the first call, but no subsequent calls to speed up the process.
Those percentages have been determined by the biometricians in Helena as data that is statistically defensible.

Again, I’m not saying it’s the right way, nor the best way, but that’s how it’s done.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[slick]

Some permits they do know a large majority of the harvest data, sometimes up to 100%. As for general tags in general areas, no, they only know a percentage of the harvest.

The reason for the sporadic calls is that they go through round 1, before round 2, and finally round 3. It may be a month before you’re called again.

There is randomness to the survey also. You may have had 7 tags in your pocket, and you filled all 7, but they only ask you about 2. To me- that’s the biggest flaw with the system they have decided on. They have you on the phone, they might as well get all of it while you’re there. There unfortunately is l no way for the person on the phone to collect any of that info.

They are shifting to electronic tags and maybe they have something else in the works to collect harvest info?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[black dawg]

They call.....sometimes. The checkstation (atleast in one of the areas I hunt in) never seems to be open after dark. Opening day rolled back by the checkstation 1 hour after dark......nobody home. The times we have actually caught the checkstation open (all times in the middle of the day) this year they only asked how many hunters, and youth hunters.

And I have a hard time believing the observed elk counts......in an area that we spend 30+ hunting days in (spring bear,fall bear, archery and rifle seasons for deer) and the rest of the time hiking, backpacking, Berry picking, fishing, cutting firewood and camping in......we don't see elk. .Rarely see sign of elk, did see three sets of tracks this fall though. Elk count for this area for 19 was just over 1000 elk.

They did call this year and ask about deer harvest, and asked about wolf sightings...…..seemed more interested in specifics on wolf sightings. Asked for a pretty specific location of sightings how many and what dates.

 

[Indian Summer]

I’ve hunted Montana for over 30 years and they haven’t called yet. The check stations aren’t there during archery. Yes they factor in unreported kills but the stats are still worthless .

 

[slick]

...…..seemed more interested in specifics on wolf sightings. Asked for a pretty specific location of sightings how many and what dates.

That hasn’t changed in at least 7 years. They’ve always asked about wolf sightings, location, date, district, how many. There is no more or less preference on that now then there has ever been in the recent past.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[black dawg]

That hasn’t changed in at least 7 years. They’ve always asked about wolf sightings, location, date, district, how many. There is no more or less preference on that now then there has ever been in the recent past.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Never been asked before . And they asked for as specific of location as possible......seemed weird

 

[slick]

Again. Hasn’t changed in at least 7 years.

The idea behind having specific locations is a wolf can’t be seen in two places at the same time. They can use hunter field days and wolf sightings, time of sighting and location to help inform them of potential packs travels/where abouts/ expansions, etc. so the more accurate the information, the better info the bios have. Nothing new.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Elk97]

As a NR I've been called every year. Never been asked about wolves. Some years I also get called about upland birds because it's a combo license.

 

[black dawg]

Again. Hasn’t changed in at least 7 years.

The idea behind having specific locations is a wolf can’t be seen in two places at the same time. They can use hunter field days and wolf sightings, time of sighting and location to help inform them of potential packs travels/where abouts/ expansions, etc. so the more accurate the information, the better info the bios have. Nothing new.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thank you.

To be clear, I was just stating that I had never been asked before, and that more time was spent talking about wolves than the deer tags we had/had not used. I know plenty of people that have been asked about wolves and I am sure the folks on the phone get tired of the earful that comes along with those questions.