Would you give up RIFLE hunting for 5 years to help Elk and Deer populations???

[brewer427]

Just as the title says, would you be willing to do it out west. I understand there would be an impact financially on a lot of States and companies, there would also be those young and old who would suffer do to the fact that either that would be the last years they could physically be able to hunt or those would be years where young ones could use there cow tags. I just think overall it would be a great benefit to allow elk/deer populations to recoup and get some decent size bucks and bulls back statewide. I know here in MT, it's hard to find a decent mule deer buck in the mountains and it's hard to find any bulls that get a chance to get bigger then a raghorn before being killed.

I also understand that there is areas where this would not be needed, but with the overall growth of hunting and a thriving population of predators in a lot of these areas, I just wonder what the hunting would be like if there were not hunters out there rifle hunting for 5 years. For those areas where there is to many Deer/Elk I'd say have a permit drawing for those areas, to insure that everyone in the state doesn't head to those areas and decimate the population. Keep rifle open for wolf, bear and lions. Also maybe antelope. I'm not posting this to come off selfish and take opportunities away from others to insure good hunting for me in the future, just wondering what everyone thinks what a system like this might do for hunting as a whole after those 5 years. I also wonder what would happen to the wolf population if guys couldn't rifle hunt elk/deer maybe there would be more out in the woods hunting wolves on a regular basis. On the other hand I know there is a chance for predators to grow in numbers do to the fact that there would be more game in the woods with no rifle hunters.

I know overall success % usually isn't over 20% but It would be worth it IMO to see what the outcome would be. Maybe it wouldn't even take 5 years, who knows...

EDIT-If you read shrek's post, that is not what I am getting at, at all. I'm am simply saying are Elk/deer populations are hurting bad in a lot of areas, and if we allowed some animals to mature maybe there would be some better and stronger genes to help promote stronger animals. There are also way more bulls harvested during rifle then archery so that argument is void as far as I'm concerned. I was not stating this for "TROPHY" purposes I was stating it for overall health of populations.

 

[Shrek]

Wow ! Deer and elk are not being managed to provide huge trophy animals for you so we need to divide and villianize a portion of the hunting community. Maybe we should ban archery hunting in the rut and make only one season with the same standards so big bulls and deer wouldn't be hunted when they're most vulnerable and more big bulls would be available for Rifle hunters because they are obviously more deserving than archery hunters and morally superior. Or how about this idea. We let the game managers manage deer and elk for the benefit of all hunters and not divide the community. I could care less about big antlers and hunt for food and the experience and big antlers are a lucky bonus for me and I would guess the majority of hunters.

 

[AXEL]

Here in BC, a legendary hunting region of North America, our game pops. are down and declining. The often foreign-owned GOs here are actively advocating a far smaller share of what is left for we citizens and have recently succeeded in obtaining more, ie. a split of 60/40 for Bighorn Sheep in the Kootenays.

This, plus much larger Grizzly, Wolf, Cougar, Black Bear and Coyote pops. has really damaged the hunting for fun and meat of we residents and any programme such as the one proposed here, would probably end our hunting.

So, NO, not here and what we MUST do is ban all foreign hunting, eliminate the entire GO industry and control predators as well as do habitat enhancement and control the slaughter by Indians here, a major issue.

THEN, when we have restored our fabulous game heritage, I advocate ONLY a "hunter host" programme to allow BC people to bring friends and ANY relatives from the US and certain Euro./Commonwealth nations to hunt. That, IMO, would be FAR better for our game and would bring back the sport element into BC hunting, which has become a business and a threat to OUR rights.

I could actually invite folks I have met on the few sites I have remained on to hunt with me, "docdb", "Luke Moffat" and several others; I only wish I were 35 years younger and could legally do this as I know some damned good hunting places.

It is, however, a very provocative concept and well worth discussion, IMHO.

 

[LJ Buck]

If you want the Populations to come back in the west spend more time WOLF Hunting.

 

[Shrek]

What Brewer427 and AXEL are crying about are game level and allocation management policies but What Brewer427 is proposing is proposing has nothing to do with changing the culture of the management and everything to do with discrimination along the lines of his personal discriminatory bias. A regular Al Sharpton type plan.

 

[Jason Snyder]

I don't know where you hunt in Montana, but we find plenty of bulls bigger than raghorns and on public land.

If you want to help the mule deer, move the rifle season out of the rut.

 

[mt100gr.]

The percentage of animals killed by hunters of wild game populations is pretty small when compared to all other mortality. The artificial selection of "trophy hunting" has been studied in a few select populations and can have detrimental effects on small populations or sensitive species like sheep but for deer and elk on a larger scale with greater numbers, I believe taking even one or two years off would result in the opposite. Predator populations would likely boom in some areas as their reproductive rates will outrun prey rates and if a deer or elk herd did grow as a result, it may or may not be due to the removal of rifle hunting. I think it would be hurtful to the hunting.g community and everything we have worked for to take ourselves out of the game. Not to mention the huge amounts of money that would be lost that currently pay for management. There are still plenty of big bucks and bulls, especially in the mountains of MT. They don't grow big by being easy to find.

 

[AXEL]

...crying about...????

I spent decades in BC and Alberta and Canadian federal resource management agencies, all in field work and last season, 2014, was my 50th.

No offence, but, I think that many do not really grasp just how severe our current decline in game pops. is and my understanding is that the US western states are even worse off in respect of hunting allocations and success rates?

Whatever, perhaps this thread is about US situations and I should just refrain from any contribution.

 

[Shrek]

Axel , the populations are being managed down by the introduction of or promotion large carnivores to destroy hunting. Your and my beef is with "rewilding" agenda 21 based policies. Brewer427 is crying about his personal boogiemen and his lack of ability to adapt to elk and deer that have shut up and stick to thick cover 24/7/365 to avoid wolves , lions , and bears. Axel , you have a legitimate issue while Brewer427 is pushing we all hang separately.

 

[dotman]

Interesting, I was just reading an article that before the browtines rule was implemented that there were many more big Bulls and the spikes were being hammered, success rates were much higher as well. Now the research shows that because spikes aren't legal that Bulls do not usually grow to old age because more people are forced to hunt them for meat.

If you give up hunting for 5 years good luck seeing it come back to it former glory. First it wouldn't only hurt a ton of small businesses and drive them into the ground but it would bankrupt many F&G agencies. Once your 5 years is up and the populations haven't changed much as it will take much more time for change to happen in the population, you'll see all areas a draw and the antis with fight big time to keep it closed.

Most herds are close to their objective, the Yellowstone ecosystem was way over population but has been hammered in recent history. Take into consideration hard winters and dry years and you may even see a further decline in the deer and elk populations in the next 5 years even without hunting as more animals will be fighting for resources.

So just because a big bull isn't behind every tree and success rates aren't 80% doesn't mean the herds are hurting just means you have to hunt harder, pass on that small 6pt and eat tag soup for many years possibly.

The wolves have hammered the elk but there are still plenty of elk and if you don't carry a wolf tag while you hunt you aren't helping the bigger problem and I don't recommend just shooting the wolves just because, follow the law and don't lose your right to hunt.

 

[AXEL]

I just find the term ...crying about... questionable, but, am not about to comment further on it, just take it as "it is what it is", no problem.

You are substantially correct here in that BC tends to follow "The North American Model" of wildlife management, but, our agencies are SO underfunded/staffed and our government is giving away our hunting/angling to foreign interests and aboriginal....well, maybe I better not go there!

I DO agree that ALL hunters MUST stick together, or, we WILL as we ARE NOW, "hang separately". The battle over wolf culling in my home region of BC, which involves persons from all over the globe actually threatening horrible deaths to we who support this shows just how difficult our mutual situation really has become......

Bl**dy sad, eh?

 

[Jason Snyder]

I can assure you that game populations in Montana are NOT on the precipice of disaster.

 

[5MilesBack]

I've already given up big game rifle for the most part. Sure I love popping a nice fat cow in the late season, but I wouldn't trade archery hunting for anything.

 

[GFY]

"Jason Snyder


I don't know where you hunt in Montana, but we find plenty of bulls bigger than raghorns and on public land.

If you want to help the mule deer, move the rifle season out of the rut."


^^^^^^^^ THIS^^^^^^^^^^

 

[Whisky]

As somebody who lives in a state where in 2008 we had 149k rifle deer tags, and last year we had 48k, I can tell you that reducing rifle hunting, in conjunction with milder winters, does have a positive affect on critter herds. Both my observations and aerial surveys prove this. Furthermore, closing mule deer doe hunting in 8 units (both bow and rifle) has an even much greater affect. I hunted a spot last year I hadn't been in to since 2010 and the difference in deer numbers was astronomical. More bucks, and many many more does with fawns. Lots of twins.

Also, 2014 marked the first year we've had an antelope season since they closed it in 2010. They shut it down completely, both bow and rifle. The numbers are coming back.

I have not rifle hunted in my own state for 3 years, and I'm sure 2015 will mark the 4th. I accept that in these times of low critter numbers. I also accept the fact that my rifle hunting has a far greater affect on herd management then does my archery hunting. Personal and statewide success rates prove this. Tough concept for some to grasp however.

For the record I live in ND. Our badlands/mule deer/antelope are Western ND. Same dynamics at play as Eastern MT. They were hit hard when we were hit hard.

Also, can you imagine the money our NDGF has lost in tags since 2008 at $20 a pop for residents? Over $2M difference yearly between 2008 and 2014. They're still doing just fine. One thing that is out of control is the loss of habitat. And that is a HUGE factor in the scheme of things, and sadly why we will never have the kind of hunting we did just a few years back.

Just thought I'd chime in with some real life examples here. I'm not an anti rifle hunting "houlier then thou" archery hunter. I enjoy all forms of hunting.

 

[realunlucky]

More to good conversation than harvest rates. Big factors are habitats and carring capacity. Private interests ( grazing permits) private land interests ( winter range) historical migration routes all have an impact.

 

[brettb]

Imo, if you could devastate the predator population, make animal/auto collisions non existant, make game friendly fences with mild winters and wet summers, you would see a big big gain in populations and quality. Then don't allow developers to build in wintering areas/habitat. And then hopefully the managing by the local and state biologists and game dept. you could grow and manage for quality and quantity. Hunters only take a small marginal % of the over all population throught the west, in all hindsite, there is a lot more bigger year round problems other than hunters. That's just my personal outlook.

 

[WyoBowhunter21]

I don't agree with stopping hunting for 5 years but I do agree with change. In Wyoming I have completely stopped hunting areas due to the low population. Now that is just me as other members of my family still hunt those places. They don't harvest trophies anymore nor do they see them. There is more to the story. Like all equations there are variables that have to be accounted for before we solve the problem. Predation is one variable that can be worked on. Humans are managed by regulations, some mammal predators are not which causes an imbalance in the equation. Bad winter is something that can't be taken out as a variable so you have to work with it. I could go on and on. I think some things do need changed but stopping hunting just gives those who don't agree in hunting ammo to eliminate it. I would say Mother Nature would jump in if we stopped hunting. She would do her part to hunt and manage the hearts. She has let us benefit with meat from these animals and allowed us to live and that is why we hunt, or at least why I do.

In conclusion, it is my belief that if you change how licenses are given or what can be taken can help a population. It is up to the wildlife biologists to look into all parts of the equation to get the solution.

 

[30338]

Fire 4 desk jockeys from your state's Fish and Game departments and hire 8 guys with dog packs. Turn them loose with a vengeance on mountain lions and coyotes. Maybe add a bounty program on coyotes as well. Stop issuing mule deer doe tags and stop rut hunts for mule deer bucks. Try that for 5 years and get back to me on results.

 

[Jon Boy]

I can assure you that game populations in Montana are NOT on the precipice of disaster.

Ding ding ding. A lot of our elk herds in montana are above objective and most anyone whose hunted other states will tell you montana has the greatest trophy potential in general units than any other states.
As far as the mule deer situation, Jason touched on that too. I'd like to see the last two weeks of general season shut down for mule deer and make it archery only those 2 weeks.
We are moving in the right direction though considering we've cut all doe tags for the se part of the state.