Is the rut hunt really MT's problem?

  • Thread starter old_man_of_the_hills
  • Start date
O

old_man_of_the_hills

Guest
Reading the Montana Questionaire post got me thinking. I have always had the idea that if MT would just shut down the mule deer season in early November, things would be all good.

After really thinking about it, I'm not so sure.

If you look at the records, even in the mule deer haydays of the 60's, MT did not keep pace with other western states. It has never produced a mule deer over 300". It's state record typical is "only" 207". Other western states had rut hunts then.

But that does not explain things totally. I think the nature of MT has something to do with it. In the western side, where most of the bigger bucks come from, most of the hills are less than 7,000. Because of the rain fall and low elevation, most of western MT has MILES and MILES of dark timber, which makes things tough for hunting.

So after reading this maybe you are starting to agree?

The problem is that in the LE units now becoming popular, big bucks are being killed more often.

So what do you think?

Rut hunt is the problem

or

Just not a trophy-producing state regardless

---------------------------------------
This is my post

I've just pissed in my pants.......and nobody can do anything about it.
 
My apologies to anyone that already read this on the other post, but heres my opinion:

Im born and raised here in western montana as well. I think the november hunt is great and it would be a tragedy if they shut it down early. I think generally speaking, especially in my neck of the woods, you need to exert just as much energy and time in the early season as the late season.

Also where i hunt, the end of the season has by far the lowest hunting pressure (except for thanksgiving through sunday). I really dont think the reason you dont see more big bucks come out of MT is because theyre all getting killed early, but more genetics and the the vastness of the country along with low hunting pressure.

My hunting partner killed a buck this year that grossed 192 and f&g aged at 10+ yrs old. the canyon we shot him out of is only 500 yards from a main plum creek road on public property, not to mention in a general tag area only an hour from Missoula. we hunted this canyon 9 out of the last 12 days of the season, saw at least ten bucks a day, and never saw another hunter. with my experiences, its hard to say theyre all getting killed too young.

Look at areas in the state like the national bison range; completely closed to hunting. you see good numbers of deer and quite a few mature deer, but i dont think ive ever seen anything over 170 there.

I have one particular mountain that i spend alot of time on. This mountain is gated off during hunting season but open in the summer due to a lookout tower. this area holds ALOT of mule deer and gets almost no hunting pressure due to the access. Ive watched alot of nice bucks up there in July and August, but never anything bigger than bucks i see during hunting season in more accessible areas.
 
I have hunted in Montana for the last 4 years and it seems like the real hard rut starts the week after the season closes. We hunt the week right before Thanksgiving and the young bucks are acting tough and with the females. The older bucks seam to be starting to rut but My friend always tells us we should see the all the big bucks that seem to come out the week after the season closes.

I'm sure some of the younger bucks get shot during the end of the season but not much more then would get shot anyplace else.
 
I have to agree with some of what has been said, but I think you have to look at a combination of things. I was raised in Montana and have hunted there for nearly 20 years. In my experiences (mostly in the eastern half of the state), hardly anybody hunts the last couple weeks of the season. Most out-of-state hunters book earlier as the weather can be so incredibly unpredictable, and only gets moreso as the season progresses. Most Montanans, not all of course, but most, are not trophy hunters--they hunt for recreaton and/or the meat.

What about the length of the season? Don't you think that has a profound impact? I know when I was younger, I passed on many a buck knowing that I had so much more opportunity to hunt. That being said, I have not gotten any nicer bucks late in the season vs. early. The hunting style is different, but in my experience in the areas we hunt is that the same quality of bucks are available both early and late---granted there are fewer in late November.

I think the real tragedy would be to shorten the season without taking away the late november portion. I do believe if you pushed the same # of hunters into a later hunt, it could be devastating.

Of course, I am not a biologist and only know the areas that we hunt. There is some "trophy" quality, but compared to what I have seen in other areas and states, it seems limited. Where we hunt, the food is limited and the winters are harsh. I think that keeps the deer from aging more than the hunters do.............
 
I stole this quote from the other thread...

"I spoke with them again and they said that since FWP required drawing (choosing) an area to hunt mule deer in SE Montana, the number of big muley bucks they get in every year has greatly increased."

Do you mean SW Montana? I don't think there was ever a 'pick your unit in SE MT was there???

If you're talking SW MT then, I would agree with you 100% especially in the late 90's but IMO its not the case anymore. I think it was probably the best thing they ever did to help out the deer, unfortunately the dropped it for the most part. There are a few unlimited LE units which is basically what they had before.

I'm all for anything to help the deer make it to maturity. If closing areas early will help then so be it, but I don't think that's the main culprit. There are many areas that close early and have for years. IMO it doesn't help any because it seems like more people want to hunt there, thinking that since it closes early there MUST be big deer in there. I'll bet if we knew the real numbers for the CMR, you'd see that there are probably just as many hunters killing just as many deer in the 3 week season vs the 5 weeks before, or maybe even more hunters! It would be interesting to see the stats if they have any.

I think a lot of you guys are missing the big picture here. Some of you say that you have the best deer hunting you've had since the 70's? Do you guys hunt the 'Root or what? I'm sure it is great there, since its basically all on a draw of some sort. The vast majority of he big deer we see in the glossy pictures are from the LE units or from private ground IMO. The OTC units on public land are not producing up to their potential, I think its getting better but I think one of the main factors for it is due to limited hunting on private ground.

I grew up in MT as well. There are no where near as many mature deer on the hill as there was 30-40 years ago from what I've been told. I do think there are more now than there was in the 90's after the big die off, but seeing those big bucks in the high country is a pretty rare thing anymore. I'm not old enough to have seen it first hand, but my old man and grandpa spent many many days in the mountains and will contest to it, not to mention lots of friends that hunted the same time frame. They all say that they would see half a dozen wall hangers/or big mature deer every season, not B&C bucks, but big boxy heavy beamed mature bucks. In the last 15 years of hunting the same area, I can only think of two bucks that we've seen in the exact same area that I would have considered 'wall hangers'.

The area I hunt in the SW part of the state gets hammered by elk hunters, most of which will shoot any 20-24" 4pt they run across as well. This goes for the majority of hunters both NR and Res... To each their own, and I don't think that killing a few immature deer will crush the population, but IMO its nearly impossible to manage deer heard when anyone with an OTC tag can shoot any deer in any unit they choose. Personally I think the best thing they could do is go back to the 'pick your unit' program. It was amazing to see how fast the buck populations rebounded in those short 4-5 years when they had the program. As a mater of fact two of the more 'premier' units in the state as far as LE units go started off in the 'pick your unit' program.

Another problem with the current OTC program is you can hunt virtually any unit in the state sans, the LE units of course. The problem I see with that is that it's very easy to 'high grade' units so to speak and also very easy to hammer selective areas in those units. As a result the winter range areas get pounded because the vast majority of them are easily accessible! A lot of the deer come off the mountain to the face hills about the middle of the season to rut, sometimes earlier some times later depending on weather, etc. Think about all the other states around. Most make you pick a unit or at least a region.

I will agree that MT doesn't really have the genes to grow big deer, but they have the cover and vast area to grow far more mature deer than we have right now.

Maybe I'm just jaded, and 'my area' just hasn't come full circle yet. I don't know... I got a glimpse of what it could be at the end of the pick your unit program... All I know is I spent the week of Thanksgiving behind a spotting scope last season looked at probably 250 mule deer in 4 different areas and didn't see a mature buck. I ended up shooting the biggest whitetail of my career so far and came home happy, but disappointed at the same time.

The last few years I've been hunting deer in CO. The areas I hunt are what I would consider comparable to MT as far as pressure and draws go. Its a left over draw area, and plenty of good access. All I know is in the 7-10 days that I spend in CO chasing deer, I'll easily see 2-3 times as many 3.5+ yo bucks. Colorado's season is dang near as long as MT's when you add it all together, they have basically the same amount of deer, and probably 2-3 times as many hunters as well. The one thing that they now have is a LE draw for all deer! From what I understand the deer hunting in CO wasn't all that great when they had the OTC any unit tags. Maybe MT could take a look at what CO has done?
 
Yes, learn from CO.
If Co can have hunts in november and still maintain good bucks then they may be doing something right.
It's really just limiting tags in certain areas and not being 'general' in tag numbers.
Jeff
 
Can you imagine the uproar if Montana tried LE in all units, or even a pick a unit system? We are spoiled here, and used to the current system. I love to chase big mule deer, so an increase in LE areas wouldn't hurt my feelings. But, having the option to hunt elsewhere if I don't draw my preffered area is nice. I can't speculate as to why Montana doesn't produce truckloads of "trophy" bucks, but a 207" typical isn't too bad in my book. It may take some effort and a whole lot of study, but I think tagging a B&C buck is possible in some of Montana's non LE units. There are several places on my list as soon as time and funds permit. mtmuley
 
I think that Montana has the potential to produce big deer in both sides of the state. But as we all know, 9 times out of 10, a big deer is a mature deer. Mature meaning 5 to 6 years on up. When they are getting hammered during the rut every year they have no chance of getting mature. I see it every year, hunters killing nice, symetrical 4 points that are anywhere from 24 to 27 inches wide that are only 3.5 to 4.5 years old. What do you think these deer would look like in another 2 years? Another argument that people have up here is putting in a 4 point or better regulation. This is all fine and dandy, but what happens when there is an immature 4 point that is 24 inches wide standing next to a 28 inch, heavy 3x3. They tip the 4 point over and let the 3x3 spread its genetics another year, causing more 3x3, and the cycle continues.

If we would just move our season up 2 weeks earlier, into October, shut it down earlier in November, in a matter of 2 years we would see an outstanding improvement in trophy quality. One of the problems that we have is numbers, high numbers of deer in some areas, extremely low in others. Montana doesn't micro-manage like some other states do, therefore everything is managed together. This really hurts both areas. There is so much competition for quality forage in the over-populated areas, causing the quality to suffer. One of the areas that I hunt, I could show my hunters 40 to 50 bucks a day, ranging from little squeakers to mature deer. Last April an unexpected winter storm rolled in and took its toll. The land owners would find piles of deer that had just curled up and passed on. When the biologists posted some of them, there stomachs were totally empty or were full of non-nutrient rich forage because that was all that was left for them to fill up on before the spring grasses came along. My point being is, get rid of some of the does that are competing for that quality forage, and manage the bucks in the herd like you would a heard of cows. This should be the responsibility of the G&F as well as land owners, outfitters, and sportsman.
 
Montana would produce top end deer, if our Fish and Game Dept. would pull their heads out of their _ _ _ ends. Ending the rut hunt would be a great start.
All you have to do is take a look around, mainly to Sask, and Alberta. Sask was the number 4 B&C producer for the last 5 years.....and last I checked, they are just north of Montana. (which I have been told that Mt is just to far north to produce big deer, by an F&G biologist!!!) What does Sask do that Montana does not? Manage...limited permits.

In short Montana's Game Dept is unwilling to manage for anything but dollars. At the expense of the resource....our mule deer.
 
mthunter, What the Hell do you want? An end to the rut hunt, or limited permits? This discussion went the way I thought it would. I like the permit system. And we aint in Canada. mtmuley
 
"imagine the uproar"

Talk to just about any hunter from CO and ask about when they changed the deer tags from OTC to draw for the entire state. There was a quite a bunch of PO'ed hunters, but I'll bet if you asked the same whiners about how the deer hunting in CO is now, I'll bet 90% of them say its better.

MT has everything needed except for managment.
 
I wouldn't mind more LE areas in Montana, but I think the majority of deer hunters in the state just want to kill a deer. Any deer. My neighbor and his son killed two little forkies and were tickled to death. To each his own I guess. mtmuley
 
I don't dissagree with you on that at all. There are thousands of happy hunters in CO that go home with forkies.

The problem that I see with MT is they manage for a post season buck/doe ratio... no problem with that if they would manage for a post season ratio of MATURE bucks to does.
 
mthunter, I too was told by a f&g biologist that Montana is to far north to produce any big heads, this was his response after I asked him if f&g ever considered selecting a few districts to be managed for trophy mule deer like some areas in the bitteroot (270) This biologist never even knew about dist. 270 and the quality bucks that come out of there. Pretty sad...
Then he started talking about some areas with permit only dist. with unlimited buck tags. I guess thats there way of managing for quality mule deer.
 
I think the bigest problem with the late season is that many of the deer that live on public land will have moved off of public ground during the last two to three weeks of the season. In Eastern Mt during the rut the bucks leave there hiding places in search of does. Often this will take them to agr. land that has a high number of does. Last year on our ranch 5 quality bucks showed up for the rut. This more than doubled the number of quality mule deer bucks on the place. I had not seen four of them before the rut. Some of them stayed for a day others for three weeks. I belive that most of the five spent Oct on the Forest or BLM some ware withing five miles of my property. I could have taken any of them by steping out of the pickup and shooting them. The rut increases the hunting value of my property. Our place is far from unhunted( the last three years we have taken more that 50 deer a year from the place each year)but when a deer steps onto our place from the public ground the public no longer has as much control on how that deer is managed. In eastern Mt more and more land is now managed by outfitters and not the Game and Fish. My place is still a family and friends place but the pressure lease is great. After all who wouldn't want an extra 5 to 10 thousand dollars a year. Again the season during the rut increase the hunting value of my place because those buck that are living on public land in Oct but ruting with the does in my alfala in Nov are now bucks that I could sell. A few year ago a neigbor of mine got in a bind and needed some money. He leased to an outfitter. His place borders a sevral thousand acres of BLM. That summer I was talking with the BLM manager in charge of hunting outfitters. The BLM manager told me that the outfitter had stoped in and inquired about hunting the BLM. The BLM man proudly told me that they had turned him down and that the BLM felt that the public was better surved if that BLM ground remained hunted exclusively by the public. There was several nice bucks on that BLM and The outfitter was able to take most of them when they left the relitive safety of the thick juniper hills of the BLM for the does in the hay fields on my neigbors land. With the rut the outfitter didn't need to hunt the BLM he just needed to wate for the deer to come to him.
The rut may be a good thing for me as a landowner. I have more bucks to hunt on my property and if I ever choose to take lease my property I will get more money because of the rut hunting. My gain comes at the publics expence. I feel this is bad for the sport of hunting in general and that the late season is not in Montana's best intrest for the future.

Antlerradar
 
I love the long season as much as any body but Mule Deer in the rut are just vulnerable. As Antlerrada stated they could be shot at just about any time.

Another issue that will have to be addressed is the continued rise in Montana's population. We will soon have to do something with OTC tags just due to how many people we resident hunters we have to deal with.

I would like the FWP to do a trial basis and pick an area like the 622, 631, 630 or a similar area and make it draw only. I understand alot of Montana residents are happy to shoot just meat bucks but if they only want meat then let them shoot does. They are better eating anyway.

There are alot of things that could improve the quality of hunting but they generally have to do with decreasing some part of the hunting season: Length, access, limited draws etc.

Unfortunately, I don't think the majority of residents of Montana are ready to bite the bullet yet.

Nemont
 
mthunter, Apology accepted, but NO, the rut hunt does not need to end. Draw only areas would, in my thinking, be a better solution. But, I have problems with that also. Read on. bittersweet, I agree about managing for mature deer, but that has not been a total success either. In one certain area, in the South Bitteroot, I obtain at least 2 doe tags per year. I hunt private land only. This last year I observed more mature bucks (at least 4 points) on the property I hunt than does on more than one occasion. This area is open through the rut. The buck to doe ratio is amazing in this area. There is not an easy solution to Montana's mule deer management. The state is too large and diverse to say "If the rut hunt was ended, everything would be alright." mtmuley
 
I'll weigh in and probably piss people off too. Colorado's plan eliminated elk hunters shooting forked horns so people could "go home with something." This led to more/bigger deer. Colorado isn't a good comparision in my opinion. Colorado is in a series of mild winters, most with average or above average percipitation. This has led to ideal conditions: no winter kill, does dropping twins, great antler growth.

I archery hunted Montana 7 times from "85" through "97" This doesn't make me an expert by any means but my theory about 250-300 lb deer with thin, 24" antlers is that Montana deer enter the spring putting on body weight from the winter rather than growing bone. They have adapted to the climate by growing their body rather than horns. Maybe this is called genetics but I think the same deer, under ideal conditions, will reach trophy quality.

I base this on the following. Some years i'd see dozens of HUGE bodied bucks with wimpy antlers. (usually 22"-24") In two of those years, I saw several bucks that were exceptional by any standards. These were the same years all of the does had twins or the rare set of triplets. Does are known to abort fawns during extreme living conditions. The years i saw does without fawns, the buck's horn growth suffered too.

My first year there i saw 10 deer in 8 days. 3 years later I would see 40+ plus a day and if I was hunting them instead of elk and specifically deer habitat, I'd see upwards of 100 a day. A small part of this can be attributed to me learning the country better but the difference was drastic. A few mild winters and the herd rebounded unbelievibly. For what it's worth.
 
I don't hunt anywhere in this state anymore other than the NW part. As a resident, I KNOW I don't want a shortened season, and I know I like the season to end when it does. With that said, I would like to see MT FWP do some LE "experimentation" on some units. Especially 109. Lincoln County has the potential and genetics(coming out of Canada) to produce some record bucks. But there are two things that hold it back, very few trophy hunters, and a combination of predators and lack of logging, both have taken an equal toll. Mule deer have adapted well to the mountains, but they are IMHO, too relaxed, and too stupid when it comes to predators. They need openings for protection and browse, both of which have dwindled dramatically since the hey-days of the mulies in the 60s and 70s. I believe the state P&Y record was taken in Lincoln County and its a mere 3/4 of an inch off the WR. For that Biologist to say we are too far north in ludacris, has he heard of British Columbia?
But lets face it, most hunter just want a buck, if you want trophy mulies you have to designate places that you want to grow them. Young mulies are just so friggin stupid, they just get pounded to the point of me feeling sorry for them. If you want more to reach maturity, you have anyone with a tag cleaning them off the hillsides. There are a lot of good units, take a couple and "test" them out, you can always go back to a free-for-all.
 
Why is it so hard for Montana to look around at other states such as Colorado, Wyoming, and learn from their success. If we would "micro manage" our mule deer instead of putting everything together, it would be a start. Moving the season up two weeks earlier in Ocotober and ending it two weeks earlier in November would be the best place to start. Someone mentioned that the state is not ready to take these steps............very correct statement. When you talk to the ordinary, everyday hunter, they want to be able to go out and take "Junior" hunting for the first time and shoot anything, fine and dandy, take "Junior" to an OTC district and have at them, but stay out of our trophy areas. Who ever this biologist is that made that statement about being too far north should be kicked in the bag, what kind of deer are they taking out of Canada every year, not just BC. But like I stated about 2 weeks ago, it's all about the dollar to Montana, including the G&F, local business, corporate business, taverns......whatever, they just don't care to look past that and see that even if they did change the season dates the hunters will still come, and will continue to come because the quality will improve.

BlueLeader
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom