A little concern for wildlife out here
FWP is proposing some pretty drastic changes to the 2024 changes primarily in Region 6 of Northeast Montana. Certain topics from much higher ups in the state of Montana have come up before and they include, opening new access, what is best for the local communities, not taking away hunting permits for the vast majority of those interested in hunting and expanding Block Management. Now the newest topic, which I will not expand much on and save for a separate article, is CWD. I hate even discussing CWD and will say this and think I speak for many in saying, the reaction to CWD scares me more than CWD itself. Again, we are going to save the discussion for CWD for another day, but when discussing management practices for Mule Deer and other wildlife, the first and main question should be, what is best for the wildlife?
Often, stricter management strategies can get a lot of push back and be labeled as trophy hunting or managing for trophies. When in fact, there should be a target goal of what can we do to produce the healthiest mule deer herd possible. What is the target population? What is the target buck/doe ratio? What have the previous drought conditions and/or winter done to our fawn recruitment? Instead, it seems like we are seeing what is best for putting more tags in pockets. How many folks are dining out in these local communities? How can we expand Block Management? In my opinion (and it is my opinion), wildlife management and various wildlife foundations were put in place to do what is best for wildlife. Are we doing what we can to take care of these natural resources? Is this sustainable for the next 5-10 years? I have seen and read several reasons why our Mule Deer numbers have declined in Eastern Montana. The answer should simply be we had two years of the worst drought most can remember followed by a drastic winter in 2022/2023, all while not decreasing any permit allocation (possibly more pressure in certain areas as hunters became more concentrated) while counts were down. It really is that simple to understand.
Five to ten years and prior to that, much of Eastern Montana was an outdoor paradise for many different species like Elk, Mule Deer, Pheasants and the fishing on Fort Peck. Today, besides the fishing on Fort Peck, many wildlife species are hurting and some severely. I might repeat myself hear but increase permits with increased access with longer seasons are not sustainable for healthy wildlife. I would rather see the money spent on habitat or predation control. Maybe we do not all have a permit every year, but I would rather see healthy animals and not be able to hunt them than have a permit and not see them. Part of this plan should be the experience and seeing healthy critters in the wild. Montana is often thought of as a fallback state for hunting or a state you can always get a tag and go when unsuccessful in other state applications. We have the most liberal seasons and permit allocation than anything in the western United States. Couple that with ease of access on public lands (especially Eastern Montana BLM) and the block management expansion, the increased pressure on much of our wildlife is getting to be too much. Yes, Idaho also has very high quotas in much of the state, but last time I hiked in much of Idaho, my legs were burning from the hike and did not have a BLM two track on every ridge line on public ground.
One argument I hear from many organizations, including the State, is these local communities would be crushed if the access and high permits were not implemented. There is also a flip side to that. If the pheasant, elk and deer numbers continue to drop across the area and are not given the chance to replenish, people are going to look to spend their money elsewhere. We are already seeing some of that in the fall of 2023. Some folks are leaving earlier than usual, and I have heard more than once, they are not sure if they are coming back next year.
Yes, all of wildlife go through cycles, but are we doing anything to make these cycles less severe or lightening the human factor? It seems the current practices and regulations that are in place are unsustainable for the long term. You cannot continue to open larger tracts of ground, with vehicle access especially, and destroy vital pheasant habitat, like they did on Bowdoin National Wildlife Refuge, and expect to have the same outcome we were having only five years ago.
CWD will be used as the main contributing factor for some future decisions. I again will save that discussion for another time. What were we doing before CWD and are we using CWD as an excuse in these management decisions? These “conservative measures” should not be linked to conservation, and I question what we are calling true conservation.
Brandon Guhy