Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks has proposed reducing the Region 7 bobcat harvest quota from 600 to 300.

Fellow Region 7 trapper Lewis Tafelmeyer and I recently completed an independent technical review of the proposal. We examined the available harvest history, trapper participation, published research, and the supporting information presented by FWP.

Our concern is not with quota reductions in principle. Our concern is whether the available evidence clearly supports a 50% reduction. In particular, raw harvest totals can be difficult to interpret without also considering changes in trapper participation and effort.

We have prepared a three-page executive summary and a full technical review for anyone interested in looking at the information for themselves.

Documents can be viewed here:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1WBxibxjqOGuAlho7EYKQc-V9QkIx5-cS

I will also attach the informational poster below.

The Montana Fish & Wildlife Commission is scheduled to consider the proposal on August 19. Anyone submitting comments should keep them respectful and focused on the biological evidence, management objectives, and the information supporting the proposed change.

I welcome thoughtful questions or technical feedback on the review.

Although biologists will say they look at all the data you proposed in the study, the truth is only harvest data and a "gut feeling" is what they rely on. Having been involved in science and having reviewed studies such as this for many years, furbearer biology usually has the weakest data d/t the elusive nature of the subject being studied. Decreased trapper participation, experience of said trappers and releasing of females/juveniles will certainly result in bias that would invalidate purely havest # only data. Well done.

Great work gentleman! Every Montana trapper needs to write a public comment, and contact the Commisioners.

Did bc harvest in region 7 hit or exceed the quota? What data was used to set the 600 quota? What has been the annual harvest in region 7 over the last 10 years.
Looked at the data. I'd say harvest data does not indicate a need to lower the quota. College edicated bios with no real experience shouldn't be making decisions!

I've called and spoke with the FWP Commissioner and voiced my concerns about this as I've seen it over the years and how the bobcats quota was once 1.500 bobcats and would still close before the season ended and that a quota on bobcats is in some ways not giving a actual count on potential bobcats in the region .

Which gives me the feeling that the FWP is managing consumptive harvesters and not the resource

That last sentence of Allans tells the true tale!!!

Appreciate the comments, guys. A lot of the points you’re raising are exactly why Lewis and I put the review together.

We’re not arguing that harvest data has no value. The concern is treating harvest as if it directly reflects population size without fully accounting for trapper participation, fur prices, effort, voluntary release of females and juveniles, weather, prey cycles, and other factors that can affect annual harvest.

The questions about whether the quota was actually being reached, what the 600 quota was originally based on, and what the last 10 years of Region 7 harvest look like are also important. Our review goes into those trends and asks whether the available Region 7 data clearly support cutting the quota in half.

And I agree with the point about public involvement. Whatever someone’s position is on the final quota, a 50% management change deserves a clear biological explanation and a transparent stakeholder process.

Thanks to everyone who has contacted commissioners and submitted comments. The Commission meeting is August 19

That is a very well written and logical, unfortunately I feel that Allan's statement is correct. "Which gives me the feeling that the FWP is managing consumptive harvesters and not the resource"

One thing I didn't see was any mention of other methods of take. Even if all other methods of take are inconsequential, a table showing that, and stating since these other methods of take are inconsequential, you will hereafter only be discussing trapping, would be helpful. If there is enough data to be significant on other methods of take, it would be interesting to see how their harvest percentages compared. In some areas it is also very common for hound hunters to release females and juveniles, but to my knowledge that is not a common practice among predator callers, etc. Probably because trapping and hound hunting are the two methods where you can examine the cat and judge their age and sex before deciding whether to harvest or not.

Something I have seen about too low of quotas in other species is, when quotas fill fast, voluntary selectiveness by harvesters declines sharply or disappears. When they have all season, they are much more likely to be selective in what animals they harvest, while when they know the quota is likely to close in days (regardless of their choices) and their opportunity to harvest is likely limited to the animal in front of them, they become much less selective. If the purpose of the quota is keep stable or expand the population of the target animal, a low quota can actually be detrimental, by causing a much higher percentage of females and juveniles to be harvested.

Good points. The other-methods-of-take question is worth looking at, especially if hound harvest or other take makes up enough of the total to affect how the harvest trend is interpreted. Our review focused mainly on the trapping data because that appears to be where much of the Region 7 discussion has centered, but separating harvest by method could add useful context.

I also agree with your point about selectivity. A quota doesn’t just affect total harvest. If people believe a quota may close quickly, behavior can change. Trappers and hunters may become less selective about what they take because they don’t know how much opportunity they’ll have later in the season. That could matter when discussing females and juveniles.

That’s really the broader concern we’ve been trying to raise: annual harvest totals can be influenced by a lot more than the number of bobcats on the landscape. Participation, effort, economics, quota structure, selectivity, method of take, weather, prey conditions, and voluntary releases can all affect what ultimately shows up in the harvest data.

If FWP has Region 7 harvest broken down by method of take and sex/age over time, I think that would be useful information for the Commission to see before making a 50% change.

Exactly!!! Way too many unknowns and not of home work done in their law making decisions. IMO also

Allan, as several furbearer specialist here in MI have told me it is easier and cheaper to manage fur harvesters than furbearers. They have been doing it for decades. Fight the good fight.

I agree Gabby and Bearcat2 , the phone call i,made to the dist 7 Commissioner was rather lengthy and I brought up many points that I will not post on a open public forum as this isn't my first quota discussion with FWP and sadly it won't be the last .

As there are some other variables that you may not of taken into consideration , I'll admit I've not read you're 3 page statement because my new glasses haven't arrived yet ha ha !
And if anyone is wondering I was the Dist 7 director for over 20 years .

Appreciate that, Allan. With your history as the District 7 director, I’m definitely interested in any other variables you think we may have overlooked. One of the reasons Lewis and I put the review together was to get more people looking critically at the assumptions behind the proposal, not to pretend we had every possible factor covered.

And I actually remember you from trappers camp when I was a kid. Funny how things come full circle. I didn’t realize until you said that you’d been the District 7 director for over 20 years.

If there are things you’d rather not put on an open forum, I’d be glad to visit with you privately sometime. I appreciate you taking the time to call the commissioner and weigh in on this

The YTC is a fantastic learning tool to shape young people who want to learn proper ethical and humain methods to harvest our various animals .
Teaching snare building and setting them for the different target animals is still very enjoyable for me I even taught knife sharpening which also is very important to know how for every day life . I was one of the instructors for the MTA for 12 years at YTC and over 20 years in schools and county fairs .

Yes I'm a little gun shy about posting on a public forum as it's not just trappers who can look at what's on here with different things quoted line and verse that they tried to use against trappers and other consumptive harvesters of our wildlife , just some more food for thought folks .