The 2009 big hunting season in Northwest Montana was the slowest since 1997, a strong indication that the region’s whitetail deer population still is decreasing.
The season closed on Sunday with 22,932 hunters stopping at the six Region One check stations, a decline from last year’s 24,995 hunters.
The whitetail count dropped from 1,532 last year to 1,138 this year, while the mule deer count dropped from 219 last year to 193 this year.
The elk harvest was up: 153 compared to 147 last year.
The percentage of hunters with game dropped from 7.6 percent last year to 6.5 percent this year.
“Based on our check station results, it appears as though the whitetail deer population is still declining,” said Jim Williams, regional wildlife manager for Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks.
The best indicator of the whitetail decline is the buck harvest because regulations applying to bucks have been consistent over the years. This year’s buck count at the check stations was 797, the lowest since 612 were checked during the 1997 hunting season.
The overall drop in the whitetail harvest largely can be attributed to a sharp reduction in the availability of antlerless deer tags this year, a change that was driven by evidence of a declining population through most of the region.
Williams said the whitetail population has been declining for the last two or three years, mainly because of back-to-back long, cold winters with deep snow at lower elevations. Predation by mountain lions and wolves also has had an impact, along with a generous availability of antlerless deer permits.
“We need a strong fawn crop to survive the winter before we will see significant recovery of the whitetail population,” Williams said.
John Vore, a regional wildlife biologist and whitetail specialist, said that based on field surveys earlier this year and observations during the hunting season, fawn numbers are up in most parts of the region from the low levels of 2007 and 2008. He noted, however, that the overall population is significantly down, particularly west of Kalispell.
Wildlife biologist and mule deer specialist Tim Thier said the mule deer harvest varied across the region.
“At the Olney and Swan Valley check stations, the take of mule deer was actually up,” he said. “In the rest of the region, particularly west of Kalispell, mule deer harvest was way down.”
Regulations for mule deer have been restricted to buck-only in most hunting districts for years.
The elk harvest was the bright spot this year, even though there were relatively mild weather conditions.
“Snow is the driving force for elk harvest,” said Libby area biologist and regional elk specialist Bruce Sterling. “When you have such a mild hunting season it makes it more difficult for hunters to take elk.”
Of the 153 elk that were checked, 72 percent were bulls. The Swan Valley check station reported 27 elk compared to 19 last year. The Thompson Falls check station was, as usual, the busiest for elk, with a count of 48 that matched last year’s number.
Check-station statistics, collected only on weekends, represent only a sampling of the total harvest. A follow-up telephone survey of licensed hunters will provide a far more detailed picture of the season’s results.
Reporter Jim Mann may be reached at 758-4407 or by e-mail at jmann@dailyinterlake.com
Kokanee
Thanks in the shed, That was very good do you think we could have a 100 or so people do the same thing. Problem is as soon as you do something like that your a redneck beer drinking atv riding trailer park trash poaching piece of low life. We wouldn't want to offend anyone they might get mad at us. I honestly think that when FWP tries to placate these anti"s everyone loses. Especially in the Food for Wolves Program.
ndshedmt
Kokanee, check out what's happening down in Bozeman... here's the link...
http://bozemandailychronicle.com/articles/2009/12/04/news/200elk.txt
Kokanee
Did anybody see the missoulian front page online. They are drastically cutting back cow tags in the bitterroots you might want to check it out.
Flovilla
MfgMan you are not looking close enough. I have personally seen a wolf on the north west side of Ashely lake. It was on the road after the private property with the long wooden 3 rail post fence.
They are there and they are also elusive. Look for sign as seeing them is hard to do as they are fast and pretty skittish.
MfgMan
ndshedmt, I also appreciate your willingness to entertain someone else’s opinion. To answer your question, I based my opinion on a combination of what I’ve seen personally and what I’ve read out of the FWP. In short, whether the FWP data is correct or not, I accepted their estimate of a minimum of 500 wolves in the state. Then, I took their data on how many deer and elk a typical adult wolf kills, and came up with 5000 – 6000 deer a year. This backed up what I saw, or didn’t see…I still have not seen a wolf in the wild. I’ve not even seen much sign. I don’t travel around much to hunt, so I admit to a small sampling size. I can harvest a deer to the north of my place on Ashley Lake with minimal effort, so I’ve not seen any reason to go elsewhere.
In the end, I look at the size of the state and the amount of wolves, and combined that with what I did see in terms of the weather over the last couple years, and came to the conclusion that wolves aren’t as big of a factor as weather. Hey, I could be wrong. Lots of people are very distrusting in the FWP, and perhaps they are right. But I also can’t ignore the almost 4 to 5 feet of snow that fell on my place over 11 days last X-Mass either.
ndshedmt
MfgMan, I appreciate your viewpoints and positions and am no way bashing them. But I do have to ask, how you think that the weather has been a much bigger factor than wolves?
I have been a local to Montana all my life and hunt the Swan religiously. In doing so, I also shed hunt the Swan from time to time during the winter months and wittness a lot on what the wolves do to the deer. The last two winters have been hard on the deer I give you that, but I'd say that the wolves have been just as hard! For one, they push the deer into areas that they (deer) don't normally winter, thus making it even harder for the deer to survive and usually results in slaughter. And two, once deer get in their wintering areas the wolves come in and pick them off! I've seen this happen year after year, and am sicked every time I see it!! FWP keeps telling me that I'm just reporting natural die off, but seeing wolf tracks scattered every where and 20 - 30 stripped and scattered carcases, I think other!! Pointing to just the winter as the problem is such a cover up!
MfgMan
DNight, someone else has indeed beaten you to that punch. And I don't disagree that deer will congregate where there is food and relative safety. I also have never disputed that the population is down. I have really seemed to touch a nerve with my fundamental point being that I think the weather has been a much bigger factor than wolves on the deer and elk population. Time will certainly tell.
DNight
Maybe I missed something in one of the posts here so forgive me if someone already stated this,.....MfgMan, have you ever wondered why the only "large numbers of deer" are where you are seeing them on your way home or in your yard tearing things up?
I would consider myself a decent hunter with over 30 years experience from MT, ID, TX, Canada, and Alaska. I've hunted almost every species in North America and was born and raised in Kalispell. I've seen deer and elk numbers grow and shrink through the years and seen many different "management practices" by the MT FWP. some worked, some were disasterous.
The one thing I have noticed over the last 5 years is that the deer and elk that are still here are smarter than we think, they know where they are safe. And being safe means 1. where and when people cannot shoot them and 2. where other predators are afraid to go....ie roads where people are, homes and private properties where people are but do not bother them. What numbers we have left are congregting in areas where we cannot hunt them. I am not saying that a decent hunter who actually get's out of his truck to hunt cannot find a deer or elk. I'm just saying the numbers that were here before the "RE-Introduction" are drastically down. Combine that with properties in MT being bought up by people who do not allow hunting and you can see this happeneing more and more, just look at the FWP hunting regs. In many areas of the state you will see a disclaimer in the Elk regs " Elk will be hard to find and on private property with hard to get access"....or something like that. If you think that these are Healthy numbers for substaining the population...you're nuts. If something isn't done immediatley to change the harvest of Cows and Does while managing the predators better and developing a relationship with large landowners who do not allow hunting, our hunting in MT is going...going.......well you see the picture?
MfgMan
I guess at the end of the day I tend to believe what the biologist’s at the FWP have to say. I don't know any of the researchers, but I've never really had an issue with any FWP employees I've met. I recognize that there are other biologists out there with different opinions, so like most things it boils down to who one chooses to believe.
The exaggeration and hyperbole that I was referring to was one post claiming 60,000 deer a year are killed by wolves, and then one of the earliest posts forewarned of the impeding day when the wolves would start teeing off on humans. In other publications I’ve even seen people claiming that 230 pound wolves have been shot.
I am a native, and grew up in Libby. I certainly remember some pretty nasty winters, particularly in the mid 70’s when the snow was piled up in the center of the highway. But mostly what I remember is that the winters used to be a lot colder, which usually meant a bit less snow. Last winter over Christmas we saw almost 5 feet of snow fall out at Ashley Lake in 11 days.
Flovilla
I would encourage all of the naysayers to spend as much time in the woods as hunters. When i visit an area time and time again, year after year and see less and less game, I know there is an impact.
F&W blames snowfall, etc.. on declining numbers yet everybody is running around citing drought and global warming as well.
Most people in denial of wolf activity do not go out and hike a ridge or closed road for several miles. If they did they would see the wolf sign that is everywhere, just like the hunters.
Kokanee
I suppose I was a bit harsh MfgMan but like montana ,balanced and campo say something stinks in FWP's kitchen and I for one am not eating it.
montanaeasy56
mfgman..you seem to be mirroring the same rhetoric that is coming from the FWP. They, too, have been trying place the blame on the declining elk and deer numbers to the snowfall we have had the last two years.
If you are a native of this area you must realize that 20 to 30 years ago, northwest Montana was notorious for heavy snow fall. The elk and deer seemed to flourish very welll under those conditions. I can remember driving from Libby to the Flathead and observe over two hundred deer along hiway 2. Now you can just about put your vehicle on cruise and not worry too much.
The FWP also argue that we don't seem to be getting the "green up" in March and April like we used to, which, they claim has a devastating impact on fawn and claf survival. What they don't seem to remmeber is in the good ol days, I have snow-catted on Mothers' day, which is the end of May several years ago. So their "green-up" argument doesn't hold water with me.
The other side of the argument is that we used to get a heck of a lot more snow during the month of November than we do now. Which means that the deer and elk have a whole other month to build fat reserves they didn't have the luxury of 20-30 years ago. Yes, it is hunting season, but fawns and calves have nothing else to do during that month other than build reserves and run like the wind from wolves. Study after study has indicated that wolves are putting pressure on the elk to the point that they are not getting the right nutrition to make it through the winter regardless of an early "green- up or not. Being pushed by the wolves at the critical time also causes the does and cows to abort their young causing less and less recruitment of their population.
Kokanee
Well stop accusing us of exaggerating and outright lying and I will not have to cut and paste.
Cougars require way less food than wolves some estimates are as low 2lbs per day they are a whole lot less active than wolves and usually do not chase game very far,were a wolf will run down its prey.
If i use my formulas to extrapolate deer figures it is around 16000 deer at an avg wt. of 90lbs usable kibble big difference between 4000 or 5000 deer.
My point is this you say that we have too many deer and wish that we had a few less and others are concerned that we have too few i fall in the latter category . I feel that our herds will reach a crashing point before this is said and done with. With all factors weather, predators,hunters and cars there is too much already. Nobody wants that, take it into consideration and read what other biologists are saying from Canada and our own state. Again read what was written by biologists and ecologists from MSU in the website I referred to in another post then lets talk some more
montanaeasy56
Campo... I wrote an op-ed a few months back that appeared in the Lincoln county papers but i don't know if it appeared in the Interlake or Missoulian or not. What I said in the op-ed piece was exactly what you are talking about. If hunters all across Montana told the FWP we are not purchasing one more hunting license, not applying for one more special hunt permit, not going to support your decimating efforts of managing elk/deer herds, they would get a picture. It would take one year for them to come crawling back to us for our input. These "input" meetings that have had the past decade or so are nothing more than a facade. They say they are listening but continue to create policies that are going to eliminate hunting opportunities as we know them. I predict within 10 years all Montanans will be applying for a permit to hunt any deer, any elk...state-wide.
MFGman...did it ever occur to you that the reason you are dodging deer on the way to work or complaining about deer eating all your shrubs and flowers is because the deer have figured out the safest place to be safe from the FWP "management" is in town or close to town.
MfgMan
Kokanee, I'm 42, and certainly don't need you to cut and paste from and on-line dictionary for my benefit. I actually knew what I meant without having to pull out a thesaurus or dictionary. If you spent as much time reading as you do typing, you would have noted that I’ve not personally attacked anyone. Until perhaps now…You’re probably one of those people who listen with their mouth.
First, the number of deer and elk consumed by wolves is a number I got from the FWP (as I stated) and your figures are pretty consistent with what I listed. You came up with 4100 elk, and the number I listed was 5000 to 6000 deer. So what’s your point?
Second, just where have I ever said or even hinted that wolves don’t have an impact on the deer population? As I’ve reiterated about 3 times now, I was making the point that the last couple of winters have had a much larger effect on the deer population than wolves. These things are not mutually exclusive.
Finally, are you trying to tell me that 500 wolves eat more than 1800 cougars? Really?
An “un whelped pup”, huh? That’s actually pretty funny. I guess it preferable to coming across as a senile, cranky old fart.
Kokanee
Wow Mfg.Man where to begin let's start with your use of: Misrepresentation is a contract law concept. It means a false statement of fact made by one party to another party, which has the effect of inducing that party into the contract. For example, under certain circumstances, false statements or promises made by a seller of goods regarding the quality or nature of the product that the seller has may constitute misrepresentation. A finding of misrepresentation allows for a remedy of rescission and sometimes damages depending on the type of misrepresentation.
Now let's try:Hyperbole is a figure of speech in which statements are exaggerated. It may be used to evoke strong feelings or to create a strong impression, but is not meant to be taken literally.
Well it certainly sounds to me that I am dealing with a un whelped pup that has no respect for his peers or elders opinions. 1800 cougars estimated at present but no where near the consumptive rate on ungulates a cat does not have a pack to feed it might whack several deer in several drainage's then either feed alternately on these or kill more where a pack might take multiple animals at one time.
Prior to wolves we had no where near the numbers of predators we have now. How in blue blazes can you say that by adding another predator that it has not been detrimental to our herds. If at your house you are feeding 1 dog and you get another do they not eat more, when we raised butcher pigs and steers one animal by it self would not eat very much put another in the pen the competition was on the first would almost double his food intake.
Now here is your math lesson 500wolves X 8lbs food per day= 4500 lbs.per day
There are 365 days X 4500lbs per day = 1,642,500 lbs per year
Now lets just use an elk as an example on avg. there are 300lbs of usable meat on a avg. elk plus some viscera and other things that carnivores will eat so for sake of argument if the wolf ate all parts edible we will use 400lbs as avg. So 1,642,500 divided by 400 =4106.25 elk per year. Now with that said that is minimum count of wolves and that is what a wolf has to eat on a daily avg just to survive not including play kills or fawns still in the womb. You are way wrong and you just cannot face fact that you have been misled. You remind me of a biologist that said this is his job and he intends to keep it.
what is misrepresented above,what hyperbole was given, when the wolves were not here we did not have to feed them what part of that do you not get!!!!!
MfgMan
Balanced, I said earlier I'm not a wolf advocate. I know they kill livestock, and need to be managed. The estimate on the number of kills per year is from the FWP website, and while I can easily understand wolves killing sheep for sport, in nature predators don't typically expend the energy or risk injury to kill for fun. Sheep are not risk...they give up the second an animal gets a hold of them. Sure it happens, but I seriously doubt that they kill as much for fun as for food as you state.
Why does everyone want to turn this into either a "for" or "against" wolves argument? I'm just saying that the hard winters in NW Montana have been way harder on deer than wolves, that's all.
Balanced
Mfg man, My info cones from the latest federal studies. Please verify if you wish. Either the web site the other gentleman suggested or this one www.saveelk.com. Also here is another figure for you to ponder. 3 wolves 1 night Dillion MT. 120 sheep all killed. That is 40 sheep per wolf in 1 eight hour shift. your estimate doesn't include the animals they kill for sport & leave to rot. Winters in Eastern MT have been just as hard as the ones here but the deer population there is growing. How is that ? Oh, NO WOLVES.
MfgMan
Mr. Mark, don't be so presumptuous. I don’t kill deer because I think they are a problem. I enjoy hunting, and I like venison. And deer are all but impossible to keep out of your yard, deer whistles don’t work and my head lights are just fine. In fact, I just ignore the damage they do in my yard and let them be, but that doesn’t mean I have to like it and wish they were fewer of them. Anyone who lives in Montana long enough will hit a deer at some point.
And Balanced, while I’ll agree that no one really knows how many wolves there are, according the FWP there are a minimum of 500 wolves in the state, and they kill 15 to 19 total deer & elk per year as adults. I have no idea what percentage of the wolves in Montana are pups, but even if one assumes 2/3rds are adults, then you have about 5000 or 6000 being killed; nothing near your 60,000 number. I don’t know where you got your information, but my bet is on the biologists.
And lastly Kokanee, I don’t have a clue how many mountain lions are in the state of Montana, but I’d be shocked if it not well over 500; I’ve certainly seen more lions than wolves…which is easy given that I’ve never even seen a wolf. And biologists agree that mountain lions kill more deer and elk than wolves and that their population has been growing steadily.
My entire point was that weather has been a much larger factor than wolves in the decline of the deer population, and this has been borne out by places around the state that don’t even have wolves, and secondly, my own personal opinion is that having fewer deer around isn’t such a bad thing. Of course people can disagree all they want about that, but I do feel compelled to comment when I see so much hyperbole and misrepresentation of the facts pertaining to the impact of wolves on said population.
Balanced
Mfg Man, I think we should plant wolves in Helena and see how fast this wolf situation changes...lol...Maybe even a couple in your yard. just an FYI Wolves kill more animals than hunters, lions, & bears combined. each wolf kills two to three animals per month for food two or three more for sport. lets assume 1000 wolves at 5 deer/elk per month that is 5,000 x 12 is 60,000 next year add 20% to the wolf # as they are very prolific at reproduction. pretty scary math even if your only a wildlife photographer much less a hunter.
Balanced
Mfg Man, Lets put these wolves in Helena and watch how fast they change their tune..lol. Maybe even a couple in your yard. FYI, Wolves are killing more ungulands than hunters, lions & bears combined. If they triple the quota next year it will show me that they are trying and I'll be less abusive. I want to give you a fact or two, each wolf kills two to three elk/deer per month for food & just as many for sport. So I'll use 1000 wolves as the estimate of total population in the state according to the top wolf expert in the country. 1000 x 5 per wolf = 5,000 x 12= 60,000 according to the FWP hunter take for 08 was around 27,000 elk for the entire state. Next year when caculating this equasion add 20% to the wolf number as projected they will expand by at least that.
Kokanee
First every ones opinion is important there is good thought in every post .
Second we are not biologists (even though I play one on T.V. lol)
Third we are discussing this the way we should, openly so no need to point fingers at each other.
Fourth all hunters are a brotherhood you should not look down on others that do not hunt as you do. We all have different experiences and hunting standards.
Now, there is a website that I mentioned earlier that has many good articles on it please read look for yourself it is not a I hate wolf website but a differing opinion from mainstream biologists
http://westinstenv.org/wildpeop/2008/11/17/montana-fwpd-wolf-management-fiasco/ . MfgMan as far as predators go in the state of Montana the cougar count does not even come close to the population of wolves in sheer numbers the wolf is way ahead. There are many hunters that have hunted this state longer than I, who in their prime could out hunt me any day. Perhaps you should locate one and ask about hunting opportunities in the past in just my life I have seen dramatic shifts of deer and elk populations.
Some have said this shift of more deer to towns is caused by the relative safety from predators and of course food. There could be a point there!
Muscaria: Not every one here is an atv activist and the only reason for myself having so much time to devote to this subject is unemployment. The Tuesday after the close of hunting season I did a little hike up above my home which has no roads what so ever in the 5 hours of my little walk I counted 1doeand fawn and one small buck. Now I cut one adult cougar track one set of bobcat tracks two coyotes and at least two wolf tracks now it could have been one but they paralleled each other for some distance at about 50 yards apart. From years past I know that this count of deer is low. My neighbor who has lived here all his life does not hunt anymore said that he would have as many as 100 deer yarded up at his place in winter now maybe 8 does and fawns. Private road private drive no roads in the forest above explain that to me.
I am not here to tout my abilities as a hunter nor brag about it. When they allowed reintroduction of wolves allowed them to breed without control we added another mouth to feed. An adult wolf needs an avg. 6-8 pounds of food a day just to survive now do your own math but that is a lot of wolf kibble.
MrMark
MfgMan, sounds to me like you kill deer just because they are a problem. That's just as bad as someone who hunts for sport. You know, there are ways to keep deer out of your yard and from eating your precious plants. And if they're jumping out in front of your vehicle all the time then maybe you need to pay better attention or get some better headlights. Deer whistles have always worked for me. Why don't you try that. And Balanced, really? Deer are trying to get away from wolves 24/7/365? I really doubt it.
deerhunter
Wolves aren't the onl'y problem but I must say they are problably the largest problem. I too saw more wolf sign in areas I never saw wolves before. The wolf population is way larger than anyone will "admit" too and hunting is just going to get a bit harder untill the quotas for wolves is at least trippled. There are simply becoming too many predators. There are no natural predators for wolves, mountain lions, bears or even coyotes. The number of predators will make the faster and healthier deer and elk more skidish and alert, but will deminish the young. We as hunters, need to protect our lands and groom the areas we hunt. If you don't hunt bear, mountain lion or wolf you should start. During the winter season do your part in coyote control, (not tag needed and no limit....). not many people mention coyotes as a problem but they too will feed on newly spawned fawns and calfs come spring time. This season was clearly a sign that something has to be done. It's unfortunate that this kind of ignorance is making it's way into Montana FWP, it is the job of FWP to see to it that we "humans" have successfull hunts not the predators
Balanced
If you really believe your great skill has allowed you some sucess I'm happy for you. I have hunted west of town for 32 years and each year it is not difficult for me to fill the freezer but what we are saying is that the wolves have and will continue to deplete these herds. I see about 10% of the deer I used to & yes I'm getting older & the deer are getting wiser because of the constant threat from the wolves. Imagine being chased ( with your life in the balance) 24/7/365. These deer are dying from stress and expending vital energy reserves that were supposed to carry them thru the winter months. If these last two winters have created the massive reduction in numbers can you imagine what a bad winter will do ? As with everything its a combination of factors but are wolves going to impact these factors. Absolutely !!
MfgMan
I'm just an average hunter, which is my point. Its easy to harvest a deer. Geez, just get in your truck and drive around in the mountains. Furthermore, mountain lions kill exponentially more deer than wolves. And do you really think that wolves are hurting the relative health of the population? Get real...predators are the BEST means of improving the health of deer and elk population. If your worried about bull: cow and buck:doe ratios, look to hunting regulations. Wolves don't discriminate.
I'm not a wolf activist; I'm just pointing out that after two hard winters it ridiculous to try and pin the lower population of deer on wolves, and that in my opinion, we can do with fewer animals running out in front of cars and moving into towns (like Helena, where last year before culling them out they had about 700) and trashing peoples yards and gardens.
campo
Well good for you oh great hunter. I killed a bull and buck and had little trouble doing so myself, but that doesn't inhibit me from seeing what is happening. I know many very good hunters who were not as fortunate.
You just keep thinking that these deer and elk need over-whelming numbers of predators to be smarter or cagier. As if that is going to matter when they are run into the turf, seems to me they don't needs brains as much as steroids. And that the population is somehow healthy because there are fewer? What is the age structure becoming with years of losses of fawns? What is the buck:doe ratio becoming? Bull:cow ratios? Not just that simple and cut and dried is it Mr. ecologist great white hunter.
MfgMan
I can't believe some of the posts I'm reading here...So much hyperbole and nonsense that it’s comical. The bottom line is that if you can’t harvest a deer, you’re a cruddy hunter. The weather has been a far larger factor on the deer population than wolves. And frankly, we have too many deer in the first place, and I’m tired of dodging them every night on my drive home, and I’m sick of them eating my landscape and garden.
muscaria
I sure here a lot of complaining and I'm not seeing anybody acting. It seems to me people have reached the epitome of laziness just as the game have once again been given a reason to wisen up. It's no mystery. You add a smart, aggressive predator that poses a constant threat, and you wind up with a smarter, healthier, albeit cagier deer/elk population. Hunters are more and more relectant to venture too far from their ATVs and pursue prey that now must be pursued. I for one had an excellent hunting season, both my wife and I filling our tags with nice 4Xs. But I'm sure the more you sit around on your computers complaining, the better your luck will be next year.
campo
One more thing, if FWP is acting only for "monies" sake. How many hunters would be willing to hit them where it hurts, and take year off from buying licenses, permits, etc? That is all it would take is one year too. Non-resies would have to do it as well, because they are the lions share of MT FWP budget. If they are all about money, that is how you get them to listen.
I would.
campo
Kok, I agree that there was a ton of talk about wolves, long before the deer pop tumbled, but I disagree that it was all just ignored. I mean, what do you think they should have done? Before the wolf was delisted, their hands were basically tied. I supposed they could have just gunned them out of helos at such. Not arguing, just curious as to how you would have played this out.
My concerns are the present and future, what is in the past is just that, in the past. My fear is they are going to drag their feet on these does, still be shooting does first and second weeks and still lump 132 in with 170 for as many as 5 B tags. Its got to stop and stop now.
I also agree that when they talk about hard winters killing the deer, they always just throw in wolves and lions as as afterthought. Vore keeps doing that in his interviews. Its stupid and annoying. These winters we've had, that they are blaming this on, have not been that bad, very survivable. But these deer have nowhere, I mean nowhere to yard up and survive. How many fawns are just aborted by the does under stress? They don't mention that, but I know its playing a part, cause I am not seeing "the little spotted ones" that past two years, and I live in fawn dropping Mecca in the east valley. I don't believe they are able to even put the fat on in the first place because they are chased around so much by these over-populated predators. So yeah, duh, many die as "winter-kill" but that isn't the real story. IMO.
Rebel Rouser
As for FWP being culpable, I have an experience that left me with (much) less respect for their motives, (in another state) the wildlife management bureaucrats sold 22,240 deer tags in a zone that only had 2,000 deer. They told the hunters this was good management for this area but they were exposed by a separate deer population study being conducted by a proposal to put in a new highway through this zone. The price for a deer tag was $34.00 = $756,160. Now i'm not saying FWP is doing the same thing here, but who is watching? If all MT state hunters banned together, WE have control, not them. If continued to go unchecked, hunters (the ones paying for it all) will lose.
montanaeasy56
Kokanee...I totally agree that wolves have had a big impact on deer/elk herds. I was seeing wolves out in HD103 three years before it was fashionable enough for the FWP to even agree there were wolves out there. My point was in the post was that the FWP has almost as much culpability in the declining whitetail herds as the wolves do. They are wolves in sheeps clothing....and all for money.
Kokanee
Not going to argue with that easy but doesn't this time line also coincide with the growth of the wolf packs. 96 -97 was bad we suffered huge losses in 121 begged them to not have 97 or 98 doe tags pretty much the only year then they did just what you said. 97 was also the first year we had wolves in any number in the cabinets I know cause I turned my hounds out on several tracks that in the deep snow could not tell what they were, dogs wouldn't run them I was mad at them dogs till an older houndsman set me straight.
montanaeasy56
I guess I need to throw my two cents in on this discussion. We all remember the winter of 96-97. We had a record amount of snow in NW Montana. You will also remember that during that season the FWP had antlerless whitetail open for the last 4 days of the general rifle season. Following that winter the FWP came out with the news that whitetail numbers had taken a big hit as a result of starvation and it would take 4-5 years to replenish their numbers. Time went by and the whitetail numbers did start to increase. So, what did the FWP do? They initially gave out 100 antlerless deer permits for the first few years. Later they increased the number of antlerless permits to 300 in most hunting districts in Region 1, at least in the Lincoln county area. After that, they decided to, in their "expert" wisdom, not only allowed antlerless harvest of whitetail for the first two weeks and the last two weeks of general rifle season, in addition to the 300 extra permits, they also allowed people to buy additional over-the-counter antlerless whitetail. Many people were able to purchase 4-6 of these extra permits on line. Do you see a trend here? While I certainly agree that the introduction of wolves has had a dramatic impact on hunting opportunities for deer and elk, lets not forget the culpability that belongs to the FWP themselves. They found a way to generate tons of money to run their agencies. Naive hunters bought into this money making scheme of the FWP and purchased the extra permits. Now, we are all wondering what the heck happened? We need to look no further than the wolves in sheeps clothing that run the Montana Fish Wildlife & Parks to find out the answer. In their rush to make tons of money that forgot the very thing they are supposed to be doing. manage deer and elk. They set the whitetail up for slaughter and that is exactly what happened. It just took about 5 years to accomplish.
Kokanee
I agree with most of what you said there are certain points that I do not disagree,but would like to look into. Wolves are not static they will move out of and into areas that have game similar to prey migrating for food plots at different times of the year. They have been known to wipe out moose in areas e.g.Alaska,Canada as well as decimating deer populations to the point of not having a viable population in Minnesota.When this occurs they do move out of an area to better hunting grounds. As individuals disperse where will they go they go to start their own pack it is this saturation point that concerns me at what point will it balance?
Being neutral on wolves has had some disagreeable consequences IMO it says that we agree to what is being spoon fed to us that this is a good thing. I think that in order to be heard we must set a precedence as the pro-wolf advocates have in being the squeakiest wheel gets greased first I find that most sportsman's words are good on the handshake it is the pro -wolf people that forced this issue on not letting the state manage after the 30 breeding pairs(10 per state) was established as according to the initial plan. Had they stuck to the plan things may have proceeded well by all involved.
David Mech foremost wolf biologist in the united states said that in order to make a wolf population static you will have to take 45% of the wolf population and in order to decrease it you would have to take 75% yet we only took 15% of a minimum count of 500 just to appease the pro -wolf population. He also said that in order to have harmony with every one that more wolves should be taken out of the three state area which he believed to be closer to 3000 wolves
Elk do get along just fine with humans just look up Estes Park Colorado on you tube or Banff in Canada They hunt around those areas fairly heavy. You are right animals are cyclical and maybe we are in a down time for our big game so do they need the added pressure of more predators will they crash I for one do not want that gamble.
photoguy
Unchecked, wolves can indeed destroy a population for a few years, but wolves will not wipe out a population completely, I look at the wolves in NW Montana completely different than I do the wolves in SW Montana, we are dealing with two separate types of populations, one is a naturally occurring population(NW) and one is a re-introduced population(SW).
Wolves are very effective at what they do, But they will also decrease in population as prey decreases in population, which is being shown in certain areas in and around Yellowstone.
I am very neutral on wolves, if they are not doing anything, leave them alone, if they are causing problems, then take care of the problem. Would I actively hunt wolves, no, would I shoot one, Yes, I have no problem with practicing prudent wildlife management, and I think we have a problem in the tri-state area, because the agencies have had to bow to National pressure as well as Judges that are not well versed in wildlife management. FWP is in a catch 22 situation, they are damned if they do and damned if they don't, if someone sees a wolf kill a deer, they cry, if some one sees someone spit at a wolf, they cry!
I think we are going to have to get used to a bit less hunting opportunity, due to the fact there are wolves in the woods again, I would also agree, the seasons as well as the types of tags issued need to be restructured and we have to also accept, they we are part of the problem as well, because the massive amount of people that are moving into prime habitat, which has changed where the big game animals are living. Whitetails are far less worried about humans than elk, elk become very elusive with human expansion, I have seen it happen in many states, including Washington and Oregon, which has a token population of wolves, but elk have changed quite a bit over the years with human expansion..
Currently the biggest change in ungulate populations have happen since wolves became more abundant, but they are not the only cause of a decrease, there have been many factors over the last 10 years that have contributed to the decrease, and if we don't look at ALL the reasons for decease, then we can't develop an effective management solution to ensure continued populations to satisfy all parties..
I can guarantee, with the hate the is rampant in certain sectors over wolves, that will do nothing but ensure they are returned to the endangered species list, which I know for a fact, none of us what to see happen.
Love them or hate them, they are here and we are going to have to work to find a way to live with them...
As far as hunters causing the decrease, I seriously doubt it, because we are still working on the same management strategy that has worked for many years and ensured continue populations, but we need to continue to evolve as the game changes to ensure all parties are satisfied...being bull headed and showing that there is some much hate, will not accomplish anything..
Balanced
I 100% agree that the wolves are generating revenue. I also believe the FWP is acting more like a corporation than an agency designed to protect the resource. example: dropping the quota's on does to 25 from 600 when they know our deer are in trouble ??? answer: a 2 dollar drawing fee ie: revenue. The FWP is funded by tax payers & sportsman. They need to start listing to us and manage the resource or get a FEIN get listed on the stock exchange and assume the consequences for the epic failure they are creating. For the record. I think your going to see us drawing for tags in the near future. What we are seeing now has already been proven in Canada.These wolves destroy the natural balance of the undulands.
Kokanee
Well it looks like the internet space has consumed my last comment!!
Campo Kent Laudon is the wolf biologist for region 1 he will gladly e-mail you a map or tell you where they were killed. Here is a website that will help with some of our concerns http://westinstenv.org/wildpeop/2008/11/17/montana-fwpd-wolf-management-fiasco/ they are several well written articles on that website most of them written by biologists or professors at MSU. I do not know how to make a link from this page so just copy and paste. If we want to be heard we will have to go a different route the federal monies coming into our state for wolf management exceeds what the state has for elk management I do not see them changing this willingly. I do not know what to call it I think it is called a referendum ?? where we as hunters get a petition to be heard at the state level, I have never seen the amount of complaints at meetings from hunters as I have from the meetings that pertain to wolves we are simply not being heard.
Kokanee
Campo: Kent Laudon is the wolf biologist for region 1. He will gladly tell you or even e-mail you a map of the kills. IMHO this will have to go to state referendum (i think that's what I want to say) in order to be heard we have griped and complained at every meeting and they still have not heard us. Federal monies coming into the state right now for wolf programs exceed the budget for elk management so why would they cut their nose off to spite their face. This website will shed some light on the amount of damage done already I wished I knew how to make it a link from this page but I do not, it is very well written by a retired FWP biologist there are other articles in there as well some written by professors at MSU http://westinstenv.org/wildpeop/2008/11/17/montana-fwpd-wolf-management-fiasco/ .
campo
DNight, I would encourage you to participate in the upcoming public comment meetings. I believe they usually take place in February. Maybe you do every two years, but just in case. I encourage all to come and speak your peace. Too many hunters complain but never participate. I am in complete agreement with your comments about the does in NW MT. I want no more doe season or B tags until we get the numbers back. Another comment I would like to see if others would agree with me is, we need more specific wolf hunting districts. Having one district run from ID to ND and from Canada south past Missoula is a joke. We need to be a little more specific than that about where we thin these numbers. I haven't seen the map of wolf kills, and I know Jim Williams said it was distributed wonderfully, so I will reserve judgement until I see the map, but I don't know how 72 wolves were killed and the distribution was great when only 3, yes 3, were killed in all of Lincoln County. That is ridiculous!! How did this wolf hunt help things up there? 3 wolves didn't even cover pups born into one pack!! Anyway, just wanted to tell everyone to get in there and participate.
Kokanee
Mr.Mark I like the new you, one thing that I see is we are predators as well. We have many species that prey on our ungulate population.
*wolves
*bears
*cougars
Are the three big ones then they are documented cases of bobcat/lynx killing winter weakened ungulates as well as wolverines and coyotes. Then on top of that you have feral dogs it is a big mess. According to the rocky mountain gray wolf recovery plan they wanted the hunters to accept the wolves so in order to do such there is a provision in above mentioned document that if wolves start a decline of ungulates in an area that was frequented by human hunters called overlapping that the wolves would be relocated or other lethal means used. So already in some areas there are rumors of dropping quotas in some hunting districts by FWP which is in conflict with the RMGWR that was signed off on in good faith back in the mid 80s. This gray wolf recovery exploded in growth never before seen in the wild, in Montana the first documented case of multiple births to a pack (two females,two litters) that just goes to show you how good the wolves were at obtaining food and how abundant it was. I personally would follow cougar tracks in the winter (after the quota was filled) to find there kills mostly looking for horns some would have kills spread out over two drainage's point is I have never had a problem with predators till the introduction of wolves they are just too good at what they do and I fear that without some severe actions it will be like what is mentioned below with restrictions aplenty or even worse hunting by draw only for residents. We are very concerned.
MrMark
Actually, DNight, I'm not anti-hunter, though my past attitude, as photoguy would attest to, was quite different. There are a lot of good hunters out there. I'm just against the killing of animals for sport. And I know that photoguy had a hunch I was being my OLD self and being sarcastic and antagonistic to and about hunters. Really, photoguy, I was just thinking out loud. I might not have worded it too good, but I meant no disrespect to you hunters that hunt to feed the family. I'm just sick of the wolf bashing and trying to be as open minded about this mess as I can. Maybe you can better express why you think that the hunting of animals over time might not have some kind of detrimental outcome, especially in some areas. I'm trying to learn more about this and your thoughts and ideas are usually very well worded. Thanks DNight for your thoughts. Interesting.
DNight
As bad as it sounds Citizens need to take wolves into their own hands and quit allowing FWP to manage them. They obviously don't know how to manage them properly and their hands are tied anyhow. Most wardens I know would rather see them gone too. They can see it coming as well. The less deer and elk populations we have the less hunters we will have= less money will be spent on tags and conservation= the less money FWP will have to pay their salaries=less wardens, less biologists, less everything. I also think FWP needs to take a hard stance over the next three years and COMPLETELY shut off ALL Doe and Cow tags. Make all Bucks 3 point or better and Bulls Still Brow tine only. It will hurt numbers for about two to three years but after that we will all be happy. Every state that has gone to that policy has been happy and the hunters are as well. So in summary give unlimited predator tags, forget the quota...what a joke that was! Stop Doe and Cow tags for three years, let the numbers get back up as well as let the small bucks and bulls get a little bigger. While MrMark sounds like an Anti-Hunter part of what he is saying is right, we should stop shooting does and cows for a while to get the numbers up. I can remember 5 -6 years ago going anywhere in the NW you could not go around a corner without seeing a deer and going down to the SW you could not go anywhere without seeing an elk, now it is hard to find any of them. And I am not a road hunter, I have horses and hunt on horseback a lot.
photoguy
MrMark...
Simple answer......
NO!
MrMark
Is there any possibility that hunters have killed off so many of the bucks that there isn't enough of them around any longer, along with predators and cars, to make new babies? Are hunters actually part of the problem? Hmmmm?
Balanced
I being very fortunate filled my tags & had a super season but I was very disheartened by the devestation being caused by the all to numerous preadators ie: Wolves I saw sign every where I went from Idaho border, North to Eureka, South to Yellowstone. If there are only 500 wolves in the entire state I want to know how come they are every where, every ridge, valley,old logging sites I'm thinking someone doesn't know how to count. I also know the hog heaven pack had 7 remaining members after they killed 27 of them but If you recall the DIL article of only days prior the FWP claimed 9-11 members in the pack ??? 27 + 7 huh I'll bet there are more than 1500 here now. Good luck hunting next year as we are going to need it.
Kokanee
IMHO the wolves and other predators have moved the elk out of the timber and hidey holes that they would stay in all season. Making them A. more countable B. easier to see and therefore shoot. I do not think that the elk population is up just more countable.
RiverSmith
It seems obvious to everyone but FWP that the wolves have decimated the deer, elk and moose population in the state. A cursory pass at placating the public by stating "Predation by mountain lions and wolves also has had an impact, along with a generous availability of antlerless deer permits.", really doesn't cut it. The largest contributor to the low harvest is that wolves are killing the deer. (Wolves have even run off the lions in many areas.)
FWP management philosophy is now to manage and protect predators. Unless of course you are a human predator, AKA hunter, then you are a threat. Someone should re-interview that Troy hunter who was charged by three bears and shot the sow grizzly that was going to kill him. Ask him how FWP treated him. I happen to know that the biologists wanted to throw the book at him, but to their dismay, the evidence they found supported his story.
Funny, had those bears killed him, public outcry would have forced finding all three bears and exterminating them.
My2cents
It's not that the fawns have to survive the winter...they need to survive spring, summer and fall too--meaning they need to survive the predators. Plus, we saw more does and yearlings this year than anything. All but 2 bucks we saw were on private property (front yards, posted fields) or at night crossing the road.
I don't mean to be a 'whiny hunter' but the wolves have taken quite a toll on the deer population. In Plains, the wolves are in the valley and people are starting to lose their pets. We're not seeing the deer in the open fields at dawn/dusk as we did a few years ago---unless you're in residential. Things are way out of balance right now. Introducing wolves that are twice the size of those that were here before was just stupid. But, once their food supply is down, we'll see them go after more cattle (though they're already doing that!), household pets (happening in Plains already) and eventually people (again). We'll see more hungry mountain lions as well--won't that be fun considering we're already dealing with that.
Strider
The Hog Heaven pack was just eliminated last year. It takes a while for the herds to return to their original size. We used t have four or five deer eating our hay. Now there is a doe & fawn. No, it was not bad weather.
naturalresources
From Billings Gazette;
A total of 15,600 wolf licenses were sold, including 89 to nonresidents. Resident licenses cost $19. Nonresident wolf licenses cost $350.
As much as I wanted a wolf license to hang in my office, I refused to succumb to the ever growing cost and never ending control, regulation and manipulation of a once great sport and pastime called hunting.
"FWP" Wolf license sales generated $325,859 for the state license fund.......
This should put FWP's budget in line to hire more biologist's and managers etc and create even more regulation for the residents of Montana to endure in future huniting seasons.. When you factor in the lawsuits which are surely headed our way thanks to environmental groups across the region and will be paid for at taxpayers expense....well you get the picture.
Flovilla
F&W needs to add another lane/question when going through the check station for those that did not even see any game.
While elk numbers may be up a small amount, I never saw an elk off of private property, this includes cows and calves which I could not shoot.