quote:

Originally posted by yellowstone:
IMHO Montana is experiencing growing pains. The limited entry, drawing process, staggered seasons, preference point system, etc. etc. that have been installed in other western states is finally coming to critical mass here in Montana. I don't know about the other Montana entries on this thread but someone can verify that about 15 to 20 years ago every sumbich with a horse trailer in Montana became an outfitter. Leases were taken, clients were cultivated, and in ever increasing instances access to the "RANCH" as well as the public land beyond it was controlled or denied. Montanans are not used to paying for hunting as in Texas. However, Montana has the largest population of resident hunters in the nation with, as already noted, the longest big game seasons you're marriage will tolerate.

So what happened? First, national forest lands were hit pretty hard by the "horse trailer" crowd as well as the plebes on foot or the ubiquitous 4-wheeler. If somebody is trying to kill you, where you gonna go? How about private land with a lot less people. Yep. Or maybe the wildlife will go further into the back country, but that didn't work. Again, Montanans on this thread know exactly what a rodeo elk season is in the fabled Bob Marshall, the Beartooth adjacent to Yellowstone, or wilderness south of Big Sky.

With warmer weather over the past 10 years the hunters bemoan the fact that elk hunting hasn't been any good and harvest percentages are way down. Not really, the elk and deer are there 24-7 and 365 days. We're just not good enough to root them out of the home and kill them. So, elk in particular, crowding onto private land and lack of harvest has boosted populations of elk in the state to about 150,000 head, second behind Colorado.

This first attempt at reapportioning tags doesn't have much to do with game control, but hunter control and distribution. Archery hunting in the Missouri Breaks is much worse than a rodeo. I can't say it, but it's kind of like a cluster ---k. There is a decided loss of quality, and overall bull scores are lower if that matters to most of us. Something has to be done. This year was again warm, but the elk are smart enough to have moved, in some instances 50 miles, onto private land where the pressure is quite a bit less. I didn't say locked up or posted. Some of those ranchers will allow hunting. Some charge a fee and some don't. Many will gladly let you kill every damn cow on the haystack, but here's the real rub. They don't let the plebes kill the bulls unless they're willing to pay for it. A ha ! Privatization of public resources. So many many residents want an even playing field for the bulls, never mind that there are freakin elk in places up here that haven't been here since Lewis and Clark. You start screwing with the license quotas and outfitters, who've had pretty good on private land for quite awhile start getting hit in the pocket book. BTW, the number of outfitters have declined in Montana over the past few years, mostly quitting the national forests where the crowding ruined the experience and the kill bragging rights. At one time, there were more outfitters working the Beaverhead, Gallatin, Deerlodge, and Helena N.F. than the whole state of Alaska.

So, what's the solution? I don't know, but it's going to be a painful process. As for myself, I believe a landowner has the right to manage and control his property as he sees fit. Coveted bull elk trophies are seen as a gauntlet to independent Montana hunters. I think that everyone involved in big game hunting up here needs to give all wildlife a reason to STAY ON PUBLIC LAND. How is that done? Provide good habitat and security. That means to me a change in grazing practices, rotation, planting, water sources, etc. etc. As for security? That sounds like closing roads and enforcing those closures, limiting the number of hunters either through limting tags, shortening seasons, or forcing a choose your weapon alternative.

This is part of the face of the new West. I don't like it, but then again, nobody asked me what I liked. And we're all going to have to learn to live with it.

Thanks for explaining the situation in a way I could understand (Not being a smartass) OB

quote:

Originally posted by Mark Dobrenski:
Ann-in resonse to your question about the people moving in that are not hunters. If they're city folk, which the vast majority are they cause no issues.

Now if they come in with big money and buy ranches and turn them into "gentlemans ranches" now that is another issue.

There are parts of this state has big time issues and challenges with the elk population. IMO the three biggest challenges with this are as follows.

*the people who buy the gentlemans ranches and like to see the animals around and won't allow any hunt pressure. It creates some true preserves and as much as anyone I feel for the true rancher next door that is trying to make a living off the land.

*outfitting has done incredible things to the elk herds in parts of the state as well. In that they lease up big ranches and take a few bulls yearly and the cow herd just gets way out of control.

*some of the areas of the state the elk herd will either migrate into areas we can access them either too soon and fast and or too late. Take the Madison herd parts of it come thru very fast and early and make it to a big ranch and winter up there. And parts of the winter herd out of the Gravelies come to the same ranch but most often after the regular season is closed.

This year they extended the season for a couple of weeks in an effort to try and kill more elk. They did that a couple of years ago as well.

Traditional thinking for managing game and the elk herds just isn't working that well for our state anymore and it is time for some true out of the box thinking.

Just my 12 cents worth.

Mark D

Maybe they need to free up some Cow tags on a seperate draw.I would love to take a Cow Elk for the Freezer!!!!

Most of the state is now either sex for most all of the season.

If they had some early cow hunts with a rifle that could in some areas help to do some herd reduction. By early I am saying August thru Oct 1st or so, in other words during typical bow season.

This year there was an area that started some hunts on Sept 1st with a rifle in an attempt to do some herd control. They shot quite a few elk on them and we'll see if they choose to continue it on later. The issue here is that the land owners next to the mtns won't allow access (gentlemans ranches) and the herd has gone plain out of control. And now the herd has moved down into the flats where real ranchers are still trying to make a living off the land.

And part of the challenge here is that the state has taken the stance of if you don't allow hunting during the regular season then we're not gonna have late season hunts on your place later on.

Lots of things go into this problem and lots of out of the box thinking is required by all to fix it.

Mark D

And on this hunt they did allow us to buy a second tag that was good for a cow on this hunt and then we didn't have to burn our bull tag for later on. A smart move by the F&G.

Mark D

Yellowstone and Mark,
Thank you for clarifying and putting into words better than I can.

Throughout the west, the issues are the same, the location changes.

I was very involved in archery hunting politics for about 10 years. So I feel I am pretty well versed in the issues.

I live in western SD and it is very much like WY, MT etc. Open areas, ranching and public land (National forests, BLM, grasslands).

It usually comes down to same thing, people are the problem and how do you manage them. On the flip side, it is also people who are the solution.

Thank you gentlemen and lady. Everything that Mark has said since my post last night is right on the money. If we think about it a little more, this could be seen as a good problem, too many elk. I well remember not too long ago in the mid-70's when gettng a cow tag in the Gravelly Range was a wonderful blessing. Drawing odds then were about 1 in 3. Now, as Mark says, seasons are extended and addtional second cow tags are sold in some districts. The New Age rancher/landowners are now a permanent fixture to Montana and other western states. As opposed to Idaho, as an example, elk winter range in the mountain valleys of Montana is not publicly held. There is some, but the percentage is small in comparison to the trophy ranch and subdivision interests. Mark has alluded to the Sun Ranch in the Madison valley. It is not only the prime winter range now, but a significant number of those elk don't migrate back to summer range in the national forest. If they do, it's not very damn far. Why? Because they're have learned that it is not a safe place to live. On the other hand, literally, the Wall Creek Game Range across the Madison River will be devoid of elk most of the year, and even in winter they will trot right over to the Sun Ranch and be safe from gun shots when a late season is put into effect. I'm not picking on the Sun Ranch. They are just one example. Some urban transplants truly appreciate what they have and they don't necessarily like hunting. If there's a bovine on the place it's likely to be a cute little herd of longhorns or Scottish highlanders. It is their ranch, period. Trying to legislate access, whatever the hell kind of form that takes, will cause more problems than cures IMO. The outfitters on ranches that do lease out hunting rights have a vested and monetary interest in bull to cow ratios. Merging those special interests with John Q Public hunters is likely to be a formibable challenge to wildlife managers as well. Other than workig with these two interest groups, landowners and outfitters, not beating them over the head with regulatory solutions, the privatization of wildlife will continue by default even if not by design. They have to get something in return. I don't have a clue what that might be.

I suspect Mark was at the FWP sponsored 2007 Elk Forum held in Bozeman early in December. With probably 350+ people in attendance the current state of game populations in the state of Montana was presented. It was pretty much a non-event IMO. It was not contentious but it also wasn't forward thinking. Representatives from agriculture, wildlife, general hunting, outfitting,biology, and state legislators were on the panel pontificating various aspects to wildlife management and populations to this point in time. FWP folks were incognito and out of uniform canvassing the audience and gaining opinions. Part of the outcome was to gauge how this cutback in archery tags was going to set with everyone. I bring up the subject because I want to use a ranch as an example. Hold on to your hat folks, the best managment practices that I heard about came from the ranch manager of the Flying-D near Bozeman and north of Big Sky (sort of). The owner? Ted Turner. Holy shit ! ! When Ted bought the place there were about (my numbers will likely be wrong from memory, but close enough) 2000 head of cattle and 2800 head of elk. It was determined that this was way in excess of carrying capacity. Ted being Ted, the ranch now has 3000 head of buffalo, no cows and a resident / semi migratory herd of 1700 elk. Cow hunting was allowed and records of kills were kept for each season. NO, the bulls were kept for the paying clients. BUT, the bull cow ratio right at the moment is 71 to 100. Holy Shit ! ! ! The best FWP can do up in the Elkhorns is about 44 to 100 and the much discussed Missouri Breaks is about 2 to 5 and headed down. FWP loves the Flying D because they are a freaking bull factory. The summer range is on national forest land and elk hunting can be very good for bulls in archery season or early gun season before migration back onto Turner's ranch. It isn't a perfect setup but I thing we can all see the potential here as applied to other ranches and landowners.

I stll come back around to how public land and hunting pressure can be addressed. Who wasn't at strong attendance at the forum is critical the solution...........the forest service, BLM, stae department of lands. Public land managers.
The RMEF does good work, but buying conservation easements to prevent subdivision and supply critical wildlife habitat does nothing to gain or gaurantee access and hunting. I hope that the RMEF is working on this, and I know they are, but maybe try and work the angle a little harder.

Then there's block management, but that is a whole nuther subject and I've ramble too long now. Thanks for listening

Yellostone- I think you centered it regarding the "state of the state" here in Montana. We are definetly having growing pains. It is so simple to blame the outfitting industry, but not honest.

Al- I don't know where the $$$ should or could come from. Thinking about the access fee sugestion, the sportsman organizations will squeal like stuck pigs. Any time we talk about giving landowner tags, the same squealing is heard.I do know that FWP has painted themselves into a really tight spot.

What I fail to understand is why any state, Montana, New Mexico, or Arizona, or whatever has any effective say over Federal Land that all taxpayers are paying for. Clearly an overreaching infringement upon our rights to enjoy our land.
It is afterall, OUR land, not that state's land! One could say at best they are merely custodians or trustees of that land which belongs to us all...not simply state residents...maybe one day soon, there will be a federal lawsuit to limit the egregious actions of such states...let that day be soon...

More questions...(there is no right or wrong answer).

Residents of elk rich states: Do you expect to kill an elk every year? Should you be able to kill an elk (or more) per year? If not, how often would you expect to kill one (male or female)?

Personally, I expect to kill a whitetail every year, hopefully three of them. At least one buck and two does or three does if no buck. But alomst any legal deer will do.

Venison is my primary meat source followed by home raised poultry and waterfowl. Sometimes I kill a bear too (if I am lucky).

I think you will find the urbanite with money turned rancher is going to be the more difficult hurdle to jump. Only because the midwest and east has already faced it. BTW- I like Highland cattle, they look prehistoric!

Ann-
To an extent I do expect to kill a elk every year. I do not care if it is a bull or a cow. If a nice bull offers me a shot and there are cows around I will take the bull. I am like you in the fact that my family eats 90% wild game. It is not about saving money it is that we prefer it much more than beef. Hell if I were thinking about money I would sell my guns, bows, four wheeler, 4 wheel drive truck, wall tents and all my other gear and I could eat Prime Rib every night for the rest of my life. It is about the love of the outdoors, the hunt and the game meat. I also expect to fill my 1 to 3 Antelope tags and also up to 5 deer tags. You must keep in mind I take hunting serious and hunt hard for my critters. If you expect to kill a elk on a fair game hunt every year you best plan on working your tail off. I would hate to say how many miles I walked this year to take a cow elk. It was a hot dry year and hunting was tough. If it were not for the extended elk season I would not have taken a elk this year. Myself and 2 friends all filled our tags with cows on the last day. I have lived in Montana now for 15 years and have taken 14 elk. Before that I lived in North Idaho and had went 12 straight years taking a elk before moving to Montana. It has been a way of life in my family for at least 4 generations.

Just back from a marathon shoppping trip with the little lady. Good Gawd........but I love her anyway. Let's back up just a tad and look at Ann's original comments and questions. The proposed cut back on archery tags has a twofold purpose. We've already addressed the overcrowded nature of some of the archery areas, and as Mark points out, the unlimited number of archery tags available in the Missouri Breaks. There is about 1 million arcres of CMR game range that belong to all of us, including you Gila River boys. Immediately adjacent to that is another 1 million acres of BLM, likewise all ours. So what's the problem? Two million acres is not all prime wildlife habitat so elk, deer and their intrepid hunters,out of state, resident, guided and unguided all flock to the same spot at roughly the same time. The rodeo begins and the wildlife head away from the impact area. Duh ! The other thing looming on the horizon with this tag cutback is, pure and simple, good old American opportunistic capitalism at its inventive finest. For the past three years or so, archers may purchase an archery only antelope tag, including the dreaded non-residents. If you get one of these tags, that is when and how you hunt antelope ONLY. No rifle hunting for you in the general season bub. However that archery only tag is good for anywhere in the state of Montana where antelope can be legally harvested. Enterprising outfitters have advised their client base of this wonderful opportunity and here they come. Bingo. So, what's the problem? As the result of this, thousands of acres that were enrolled in the block management program have been withdrawn by participating landowners because they will make considerably more income from outfitted leases than getting paid by the state of Montana $10 per hunter per visit on their block management land. Quite a bit of this land is heavily patchworked ownership, most BLM and State interspersed with private. As originally conceived, landowners were paid for trespass without the headache of policing the fence lines. Now, with the new round of locked up land via the outfitter/rancher coalition residents, some non-residents, and FWP is pissed off, and rightly so. Kind of a back door approach to privatization of public resources. This then is the second reason for the tag cutbacks.
I don't think it's in the wind for the state of Montana to deny hunting priviledges or access to out of staters in any fashion either through tag limtis or regulations. The focus is people management in high impact areas regardless of where they're from. There are high impact areas because access and hunting is being squeezed by the rancher/outfitter business arrangement. That folks is just plain American capitalism. And as an aside, money spent by ALL and I mean ALL hunters during the long season is much appreciated by the small communities and local governments stretched across 800 miles of the 4th largest state in the union. Montana is a wonderful place to live but unless you've brought your wealth with you, it can be a damned hard place to make a living in this scratch gravel country.

FWP is finally moving into action, but don't confuse tag restriction with solving over population of wildlife, specifically elk. Weather and disease will probably end up making this whole wringing of hands and gnashing of teeth a mute point in the end. Up until about 1962 or so, give or take a few years, what is now the headquarters of the Yellowstone Institute at Buffalo Ranch was the Lamar Ranger station. It is in the middle of the Lamar valley in the NE portion of YNP. In thoe preceeding years, park rangers herded elk in the winter time, across the road, in corrals, and shot the shit out of the excess. The meat was donated to needy institutions and people and thus benefited the common folks. I remember going into that old ranger station and looking at a whole wall or racked pre-64 Winchester Model 70's with their bolts removed. My how times have changed. My point? Unless you have a HUGE family nobody can really expect to eat two elk a year. If hunting doesn't control the elk boom, FWP may come in and slay the mighty beast when and where they are legally allowed on, no matter the time of year. It will take eveyone involved to get things back in balance. Nice picture of the wooly heffers. Mount Washington perhaps? or Anaconda Pintlers in Montana?

Ann, Yes I do expect to kill an elk every year and I have had an elk tag for 44 years and kill 22 or 23 elk. Remenber in the 60's, 70's and early 80's there were only 40 to 50 thousand elk in the state and when I was in college in Missoula 70 to 74 we would go days without seeing elk. Do I kill an elk every year? No. Why, because I hold out for a larger bull and I do not put in the necessary energy every year to kill an elk. Why I did not kill an elk this year is that I was tying to get into horse back hunting and by the time I purchase a suitable horse and was comfortable in the mountains on him hunting season was about over. No fear I went to the Snowcrest Mountains and had an opportunity to shot 3 different cows and did not. My "elk" was gaining con finance in my horse and horsemanship.

Well, they extended the season for 2 weeks and on the last day I decided to shoot a cow. Due to icy roads and that "Coulter" was in winter pasture, I went on foot. I went above Wall Creek State Game Range and within a few minutes after shooting hours at 400 yards there were over a hundred elk coming through the trees. I took aim and the elk were very small in the scope. I look again 400 yards and shot twice. On the second shot I heard the sound of a bullet hit and cease firing. My range finder indicated 385 yards. Several days early I was sitting in a chair at home and had turn down the scope to 2.5. I got to the place where the elk were and no dead elk but millions and billions of elk tracks and no blood. I search for an hour, no elk, no blood -- I missed, the bullet must have hit some soft dirt or I heard wrong.

Went back to the truck and had lunch and waited several hours for the evening hunt. About 3:30, I spot 7 or 8 cows high on the mountain and start after them. By 4:30 I am still a long ways from them but could have gotten to them before 5:17, end of shooting hours. Shortly thereafter I did the math. Shoot an elk at the end of shooting hours, gut it and leave. The next day I would have had to return with my horse and make two trips packing out the animal. The cost: $70 gas, $150 processing fee and pulling a trailer on ice which is not cup of tea plus a day of work. I am self employed. I quit. I can buy meat for that price. The cost of the hunt priceless.

For those of you who want equality on federal land: In 1682 in between burning Witches, Mass. Bay colony instituted the first hunting season around Boston. Traditionally states have owned and managed there fish and game and done a very good job for the most part and there are federal court cases reaffirming this right. There is a western elk tag with the current demand for everyone every year. Residents are going pay resident prices and non residents are going to pay around $500 to $600. Washington and Oregon sell Roosevelt tags over the counter, Idaho and Colorado has over the counter elk tags, Montana is a 50% chance of drawing. Wyoming has $350 cow tags and one can draw a New Mexico tag. Not everyone is going to get to hunt where they want every year but those that want can hunt.

If you want the federal government to control hunting on federal lands look at the mess that has been created in Alaska with the Native land claims, subsistence hunting and tier 2 hunting. Recent Russian immigrants have a subsistence hunting right around Delta and residents of the Copper River Valley can hunt 40 inch plus Dall Sheep in the Wangalls for meat. Lets kept the federals out of hunting.

quote:

Originally posted by Gila Jorge:
What I fail to understand is why any state, Montana, New Mexico, or Arizona, or whatever has any effective say over Federal Land that all taxpayers are paying for. Clearly an overreaching infringement upon our rights to enjoy our land.
It is afterall, OUR land, not that state's land! One could say at best they are merely custodians or trustees of that land which belongs to us all...not simply state residents...maybe one day soon, there will be a federal lawsuit to limit the egregious actions of such states...let that day be soon...

The reason the states have effective say over the hunting on federal land is that the state pays for the management of game on federal land. The feds pay for all other fees on federal land (other than most weed control, most road management, some fencing, etc.) and control all other uses of same.

Everyone across the country gets to use the land just like state residents except for this one "use". In most federal-land-dominated states everyone who's a citizen of the US gets to hunt, reasonably, for every critter on federal land except big game. In Montana you can buy doe tags and draw for bucks and bulls and the odds aren't horrible. When I hunt in Eastern MT the hotels are filled with out of state hunters who drew tags. They really appreciate the system.

The feds decided long ago to allow states to manage game. Thank God. If you want the feds managing game on federal land you just might get what you're asking for. Can you even imagine how awful it would be to have the elected officials of California, Florida and New York having input into managing game on federal land in the West? What would Nancy Polosi, Chuck Schumer, Fienstien, etc. do when they vote on federal game management laws? You can kiss your chances of drawing an out of state tag good by.

I fully admit that I'm writing this from the standpoint of a resident hunter who enjoys hunting on federal land.

Tomorrow night at 7 pm in Boze there is a public meeting on a these new proposals.

I'll be there.

Mark D

I was involved in the outfitting "industry" for over a decade, MOGA is a pack of liers, thieves and assholes by in large. Think I'm bull-shitting? If you had seen the volume of citations, complaints and arrests (Yep arrests and charges filed with county attorney for FWP regulation violations, criminal tresspassing, poaching, etc.) that MOGA members were/are involved in you'd puke.(One year, as I recall it was close to 15% of ALL OUTFITTERS!) Due to to quirk in the law it's virtually impossible to get any information on this if you're not directly involved with the Board of Outfitters in some capasity. Last time I checked it was illegal to disclose any of that information, the exception being "illegal outfitting" ie. guiding without paying the state its' due. (Oh, there are some "great" guys, as far as their out-of-state clients are concerned. Personally, I won't piss on most MT hunting outfitters if they were on fire.)

The biggest problem FWP has in MT is the outfitting "industry" Thank God outfitters are not allowed preference tags for antelope or we'd have virtually no public hunting for antelope AT ALL. Plus we'd have a "crisis" with giant herds of doe antelope playing hell with farmers during the winter similar to the one we're now experiencing with elk.

I've heard all the crap from non-residents and the outfitters about economic benifits and "well, it's federal land and I should be able to (fill in your favorite whinny ass complaint here)" Save it for someone who gives a shit. Funny thing, as many of my ex-clients move here to retire they suddenly begin to share my opinions on this matter...

Reading through this again, you have to be impressed by the fact that so many attended the "Summit" and regardless of their affiliations came away with the same ideas. I was expecting FWP to lay out more of a hard-line approach and a plan. It seems they don't have the political will( or capital) to do that.

Yellowstone- You mention the Elkhorn stats. I think in this last count they are way less than 20 bulls/100 cows( I was told 16. You could not get to 44 even including spikes). And that is just dandy with them! Point being is that the bar is set very low. Some folks who have commented here are OK with that. Is it too much to ask for a couple of quality areas in each district?

Yellow-bellied Sapsucker
Genus Outfitter Bird
(Redirected from Yellow bellied sapsucker)
Jump to: navigation, search
Yellow-bellied Sapsucker


Male
Conservation status

Least Concern
Scientific classification
Kingdom: Animalia

Phylum: Chordata

Class: Aves

Order: Piciformes

Family: Picidae

Genus: Sphyrapicus

Species: S. varius


Binomial name
Sphyrapicus varius
(Linnaeus, 1766)
The Yellow-bellied Sapsucker, Sphyrapicus varius, is a medium-sized woodpecker.

Contents [hide]
1 Habitat
2 Description
3 Photo Gallery
4 References
5 External links



[edit] Habitat
Their breeding habitat is forested areas across Canada, eastern Alaska and the northeastern United States. They prefer young, mainly deciduous forests. There is also a disjunct population found in high elevations of the Appalachian Mountains in Virginia, Tennessee, and North Carolina. They nest in a large cavity excavated in a deciduous tree, often choosing one weakened by disease; the same site may be used for several years. Usually, these birds will mate with the same partner from year to year, as long as both birds survive. They sometimes hybridize with Red-naped Sapsuckers or Red-breasted Sapsuckers where their breeding ranges overlap.


[edit] Description
Adults are black on the back and wings with white bars; they have a black head with white lines down the side and a red forehead and crown, a yellow breast and upper belly, a white lower belly and rump and a black tail with a white central bar. Adult males have a red throat; females have a white throat.

These birds migrate to the southeastern United States, West Indies and Central America, leaving their summer range. This species has occurred as a very rare vagrant to Ireland and Great Britain.

Like other sapsuckers, these birds drill holes in trees and eat the sap and insects drawn to it. They may also pick insects from tree trunks or catch them in flight. They also eat fruit and berries.

They drum and give a cat-like call in spring to declare ownership on territory.

Apparently because the name sounds amusing, yellow-bellied sapsucker is sometimes used as a comic, generic term for an unusual animal. For instance on The Honeymooners Ed Norton sees one in New York City's Central Park but claims that it's unusual because they are not supposed to live within three thousand miles of it.


[edit] Photo Gallery

Female Yellow-bellied Sapsucker - molting juvenile.


Sphyrapicus varius




[edit] References
BirdLife International (2004). Sphyrapicus varius. 2006 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. IUCN 2006. Retrieved on 11 May 2006. Database entry includes justification for why this species is of least concern

[edit] External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to:
Yellow-bellied SapsuckerYellow-bellied Sapsucker Species Account - Cornell Lab of Ornithology
Yellow-bellied Sapsucker Information and Photos - South Dakota Birds and Birding
Yellow-bellied Sapsucker - Melanerpes carolinus - USGS Patuxent Bird Identification InfoCenter
Stamps (for Antigua and Barbuda, Barbuda, Dominica, El Salvador, Nevis-(Saint Kitts and Nevis), Turks and Caicos Islands)
Yellow-bellied Sapsucker videos on the Internet Bird Collection
Yellow-bellied Sapsucker photo gallery VIREO
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow-bellied_Sapsucker"
Categories: Least Concern species | Sapsuckers | Birds of North America | Birds of Canada | Birds of the United States | Birds of Mexico | Birds of Central America | Birds of El Salvador | Birds of the Caribbean | Birds of the Greater Antilles | Birds of the Turks and Caicos Islands | Land Birds of the Lesser Antilles | Land birds of Antigua and Barbuda | Land birds of Dominica | Land Birds of Saint Kitts and Nevis

quote:

Originally posted by Gila Jorge:
What I fail to understand is why any state, Montana, New Mexico, or Arizona, or whatever has any effective say over Federal Land that all taxpayers are paying for. Clearly an overreaching infringement upon our rights to enjoy our land.
It is afterall, OUR land, not that state's land! One could say at best they are merely custodians or trustees of that land which belongs to us all...not simply state residents...maybe one day soon, there will be a federal lawsuit to limit the egregious actions of such states...let that day be soon...

In the West wildlife is owned by the state, regardless of where it is trespassing!

As for federal lawsuits?

Go ahead and read the bill of rights and when you get to the one about states rights make sure to read it fully.

When you read it and understand it you will understand why these laws are in effect.

Speaking of states rights Texans are the worst.

We could not buy alcohol while we were in Texas picking up a new airplane from a military contractor or go into a bar (other than the hotel we were staying at) because your state passed a law that bartenders and liquor stores could require if they chose to only allow Texas ID card holders to purchase booze.

What kind of BS is that? States rights in effect.

Crane,
I stand corrected on the bull cow ratio in the Elkhorns. I didn't realize it was as low as it apparently is. If I recall that "summit" Idaho has a few areas in the 40+ range on the ratios. I sat there embarrassed by that number. I have wanted to be fair in comments about the outfitters in this state, but I see since my last post that the ire of Montana residents is starting to rise to a boil. It's damn hard not to blow up, but I think in the end they are going to have to be "negotiated". As powerful and influencial as the MO&GA might be in Helena and with the FWP desk riding policy makers, their influence will pale in comparison to the wealth that can and will come to bare in lobbying efforts from the unbelievable rich New Age landowners. What money wants, money is gonna git. In the meantime, the 40 or so public meetings regarding these tag changes has started around the state. Go tell the FWP what you think or forever hold your peace or don't fuss and cuss when it all comes to naught

Actually, I can't resist just one (of many) war stories concerning outfitters. A few years ago I drove to the end of the road up the East Boulder, south of Big Timber, to go deer hunting. Set up at the bridge crossing over the stream was a big wall tent and cook tent. Obviously, it was set in such a fashion as to discourage anyone from proceeding further. Parked next to it was a big F-250 Ford with Missouri license plates and a magnetic sign slapped on the side proclaiming the outfitters name. Was I pissed? You better believe it. I had and have been up that drainage many times. But to rub salt into the wound, my partner and I met this Joe Blow coming down the old jeep trail way passed the blocked and locked gate with his client and a nice mule deer buck in the back of the truck. Seems like the sumbich was given the key to the forst service gate from the district ranger office in Big Timber. How in the hell can that happen when Montana hunters can only walk in?

Reminds me of the phrase, "Let them eat cake." As I recall, she lost her head over that snobbish comment.

Montana outfitters are one thing, but out of state outfitters are an entirely different piece of cake. There are certainly some fine people in the group who provide a real service for urbanites to take them hunting. If I were one of them, I'd form a different club from the MO&GA umbrella and divorce myself from these money grabbing assholes who are privatizing public resources. There, I finally said it, sort of..............Fuck 'em Danno

Yellowstone- Thinking back to the Elk Summit you remember when they gave examples of the 5 states? By omission, New Mexico, Arizona and Nevada were left out. Is it coincidence that those three states have pretty good controll of their herds? What they are doing, and was not mentioned for reasons we can only guess at, is agressivly marketing cow tags to specific areas in COOPERATION with the landowners or land managers in the case of public lands. These tags are highly sought after and yeild a high success rate as, at least on the private lands involved, are pretty huch a managed(guided) hunt. This system has given the biologists a chance to close up those sex ratios. There are plenty of elk herds in this state on private property where the landowner and/or outfitter has chosen to limit their bull harvest. I know of several with 25+/100 without spikes.

I was reading through the printed material from the Summit last night and recall that 96% of the outfitters are Montana residents.

Specifically to the Elkhorns- It should be obvious to FWP that if closing the sex ratio is desired we cannot shoot literally all the spikes in a given unit. That is what is happening in the Elkhorns today.

Crane,
I'm not familiar with Arizona or Nevada other than to know that Arizona has some hunge bulls. However, I have hunted in New Mexico and you are right on about how they manage herds and apportion tags. I thought it was a little strange that those states were not mentioned at the summit. I let my anger get the best of me last night with these outfitters, but it was also very obvious that the MOGA lobbyist at that summit was new the job. His statement about 'what you people should do in your state" was a slip of the tongue IMO that he hasn't been around too long and I didn't get the impression that he is an elk hunter either. I could be wrong, but he was either unprepared or unknowledgeable, or both. You may have noted in this morning's Billings Gazette the front page story of the Mars (candy baron) ranch and their fight against CBM. It's a whole other issue, but it does serve to point out the New Age landowners in the West.
We have been several years killing spikes in the Elkhorns. It sure looks like the wrong idea now, and something needs to be changed.

I'm hopeful that Montana will adjust their management strategy in pretty short order. with 150,000 head, it is not too much to ask for some areas managed for trophy quality, and a big shift in thinning out the cows. I myself, haven't ever found cow elk to be an easy hunt, and any elk on the ground is a good one. Plumb tasty.

I was in the cop business in MT from 1979 to Spring of 2007 when I finally retired. From 1985 to 2007 I was with the State working as a Highway Patrolman. Troopers were also Ex Officio Game Wardens. Able to enforce FWP laws , commit to minor FWP investigations, etc. I worked with my area Wardens as much as possible during the season, so I am aware of how the Agency works.

The FWP Wardens were a VERY dedicated and overwhelmingly fair group of Officers. They truly care about the resources they are protecting, as well as how those animals relate to the landowners who are impacted by them. They have a tough balancing act to keep the landowners happy, game numbers where the Biologists want them, hunters happy , etc. And all this working horrific hours during the seasons, and all for a paycheck that MANY of You out there would consider laughable. THE biggest problem; not enough of them. The poaching, trespassing, and game related violations committed around the State are staggering.

The Outfitters. Unless the area I worked is unique..... the Outfitters are one of the biggest problems in this equation. They could care less about anyone else but themselves and their PROFITS. They would take EVERY elk available as long as they had a hunter that was paying for it. They are given far too much weight when it comes to making decisions regarding the game in Montana. I'm sure there are those operating honestly as well as within the law....I haven't met them.

Then You have the Biologists from the FWP. Their job is input on managment of the herds, overall numbers, health of the herds, etc. I've only met a handful of them regarding elk herd managment in the area I worked. I was unimpressed. They tended to be young and inexperienced. Then again the FWP doesn't pay anyone other than the top Officals very well, so You get what You pay for.

Then the hunters. Many of the out of Staters have the opinion that paying the high tag fee entitles them to HARVEST a deer or elk no matter what. The concept of HUNTING has been replaced by BUYING. "I paid. So now I should get one". Team a guy like that up with an Outfitter who just wants to fill his tag and get the next paying guy IN and You have a problem.

Many of the hunters who come here are true Sportsman. They come out with no expectations other than a nice experience and the possibility of harvesting an animal. Unfortunately they are somewhat the minority.

The Resident hunters.

The average Montana hunter isn't a guy like Mark Dobrenski who hunts ethically, is active in matters concerning hunting, etc. I would hazard that 50% or MORE could care less HOW they harvest that deer or elk. I refer to them as the "Any method....Any means" crowd. These are your opportunistic road hunters who shoot any deer or elk they see, no matter where it happens to be. Trespassing as well as shooting from a vehicle is their form of hunting. If my 50% figure for slob hunters seems high. Well maybe the area I worked was overpopulated with them. So my apologies to those of You who do it within the law and ethically.

Then You have the rest of Montana; A resident who hunts to fill his freezer as well as enjoying his or her hunt. They are probably earning a wage FAR BELOW the national average for whatever their job. They see that over the counter $17 elk tag as a small payoff for the sacrifices we make to live here. Do they EXPECT to get an elk? Probably not. But they surely work for one and deserve one.

Landowners......

Heres a big problem with no apparent solution. I know landowners out here from both sides of the spectrum. From fifth generation Ranchers working VERY hard to make a living on the Family Ranch. To a couple of Billionaires who own thousand of acres on multiple Ranches. Using it as a recreation destination with the ranching or hunting of that property a secondary consideration.

Ranches change hands or are Outfitted. The locals as well as out of Staters who hunted there for years or generations now have to go someplace else. An out of stater buys a huge ranch and closes it off for the use of his family and friends. The locals are now looking for someplace to hunt. A local Rancher Outfits his land to make ends meet,the fees from hunters pay his bills. But locals are now excluded. Those landowners are within their rights to use their land as they wish. But they are made to look like the bad guys by many.

The State tries to accomodate these landless hunters by the Block Managment system. The few times I've tried the BM lands for antelope in eastern MT it was far too few antelope and far too many roadhunters. Though I do know huntes who do well on BM in certain areas.

The FWP has a problem managing our elk herds and hunters. It's tough to make everyone from hunters to landowners to Outfitters all happy. I fear that hunting out here has turned into a MONEY sport for the few who can afford it. Attitudes regarding hunting have changed as well. Many feel that possession of a tag entitles them to a kill. "Hunting" has changed to "buying" for many.

The times they are a changing. I'm very happy I had the access I enjoyed for so many years and was able to take my share of elk and deer. I had so many memorable days elk and deer hunting, I feel very fortunate for those experiences.

I feel real concern for the next generation of hunters. Sportsmanship and ethics are taking a backseat to "gross inches" , record books and profit. Look at SCI or the other niche wildlife organizations...is it TRULY about the game or the habitat they say they are protecting? Or is it ultimately about the almighty DOLLAR? I tend to think the latter.

Wish I had a simple solution to our problems. But the elk situation out here is a very COMPLEX one with no clear solution.

FN in MT

FN,

28 years as a trooper and exofficio game warden: thanks for sharing your experiences.

Fortunately a person who still wants to fill their freezer with a cow or doe can still do it, even on some of the billionaire ranches around Boz-angeles. A few phone calls to old friends, letting them know its a doe and I've never been turned down. Lots of public land to do it on, too.

Walk in only Block Management is the only way to go in my opinion. Much of the rest stinks for big game, most is excellent for birds and upland game, though. Also, BM along the HighLine seems much better than in the South East, IMHO.

As backup to your outfitting issues:
I was with my wife and daughter in Glasgow about 12 years ago during bow season staying at a B&B/house. Three outfitted bow hunters, hoping for a Milk River Monster were staying at the same place. 5 days later, no deer. Day 6, last day, no deer at dinner time and late into the evening. Day 7 (early AM), everyone has a decent buck in his truck for the drive home, they're all sheepishly looking around, can't wait to leave town. Hmmmm. It was clear to me that this was pretty normal practice and that evidence against them was circumstancial, didn't see it = didn't happen.

I've had two outfitters try to kick me off of public land and another who was, shall we say, upset that I walked onto his public land honey hole.

Still a great state to hunt in, lots of opportunities if you can walk in. Sure, it could be better and someone's always going to hate the F&G, but we've got it very good.

I think FN's comments paint probably as accurate a picture of the situation as you're going to get.

This thread has drifted off the archery/one area original post and has broadened into a much bigger subject so here's my dilemna:

Here I sit down here is Texas, missing the mountains and the elk. I love my home state, but I also love seeing Montana now and again. I've hunted all my life, but I'm new to elk hunting and I don't have the gear, the knowledge or a large group of experienced friends to help me haul everything back in where the good/hard hunting is. And I'm not going to own or even rent horses and mules. I've been on one outfitted hunt in the Madison range; we rode quite a ways back in, and I killed a respectable bull. The outfit seemed to be an ethical, decent bunch. I'm not the kind of guy that is going to take any bull or muley buck by any means any where anytime, but you read through this thread and it feels like as soon as I buy that Outfitted license I'm an instant arsehole that has crapped on every resident hunter in Montana.

What's the solution besides "stay the hell in your state and we'll stay in ours"?

You're right the thread has drifed some, but it all started because of the backlash associated with the outfitters feeling the pressure of tag adjustments. Look back and you'll see that several of us acknowledge that there are some very fine ranchers and ourfitters who provide a service, hunter access, and a quality experience. I have found that in every bar or restaurant in Montana that I have been in during the hunting season that hunters no matter where they are from sooner or later get to sharing stories and information. Generally, they do it willingly. However, if they're sitting there with their guide it is a different story. Tensions build. Don't sweat the rhetoric. I hope you come to Montana and have a great trip and meet some good sportsmen and women. It is a great place to hunt and those of us who are priviledged to call her home intend to keep it a great place. I have had tons of fun hunting pigs in Texas and never had cross words with anyone.

I still haven't figured out how you guys get two syllables out of b u c k.

Well surprise,surprise.Sunday Night as I was here at the Computer I got a phone call.Caller ID showed the call from Helena Montana.So I picked up the Phone and a young man Id himself from Fish and Game .He asked me about my Hunt this fall.He wanted to know where I hunted .If I got an animal.If a Buck ,number of points and if it was a satisfying experience.Thats a first for me and I hope they do take a large enough survey to be meaningful.I have got to say other than a few altercations with Outfitters,my time spent in Montana is always quality time.I dont have to take the biggest Buck or Elk to be happy.I dont have to shoot anything to enjoy the experience.I do like Muley meat and usually take something home.There is still good hunting to be had if you get out of the Truck and walk.Anyplace where it is walk in only,we very seldom see another hunter.We came for the Rut this year ,and yes we caught it just right.Way too many others did the same,so we had to go far away to avoid the crowds.If I am lucky enough to draw again I will go in the middle part of the season ,when the Huntin aint so good.Although I injoy The Deer hunt in Wi.It is way to intense and I enjoy hunting more layed back.I am glad for the Friends I have made in Montana and am made to feel at home when there.Hunting there for almost 40 years has given me a brain full of memories that will never leave till I am dead.Sorry for the Ramble. OB

yellowstone -

Two syllables? You must be talkin' 'bout them East Texas boys. That's a whole 'nuther country over thar.

Yellowstone-you sure the plate with the out of state tags was for the outfitter? Or could it of been for one of his guides that was from out of state and just had the outfitters sign on it?

Just a thunk.

Mark D

Frank, Thank You for telling it like it is!

Mark,
I suppose it could have been a Missouri resident working for a Montanan outfitter, but could have just as easily been a Montana guide driving the bosses pickup truck. My partner did call the F.S. district office in Big Timber wanting to know why they had a key to the gate when nobody else was allowed to drive in. Walking in that drainage is preferable to clawing your way in via a 4WD pickup. It is a very rough road and deteriorated about 1 1/2 miles in. If you're familiar with the area, it is the Dry Fork of the East Boulder River and it terminates at Mocassin Lake below the saddle at Squaw Pass. The F.S. response was that they had a permit. If there was further explanation I don't recall what it was. Also, I don't recall the licensec plate of the dark red pickup we met on the jeep road hauling out the deer. The wall tent camp didn't have any horses staked out so I'm assuming no back packs and no game cart to get the animals out.

It is a mute point now. All that happened before the new adit was drilled at the platinum mine. I haven't been back in there for a few years now. I realize that lion hunters from different states, for instance, work several western states with their hounds and clients, but exclusive use of the key to the green gate still riles me up.