Similar to the results from the 1993 Montana Farm and Ranch Survey, northwest Montana, 

 an area with little private land, had the highest percentage of private land closed to hunting 

 (Most districts 50% or more closed) (Appendix I) (Figure 18). Region Two in southwestern 

 Montana west of the divide also had several districts with private land closures of greater 

 than 50%. The lowest percentages of closed private land were recorded in eastern Montana 

 (Regions 6 & 7 - 20% or less in all districts). 



Districts with high percentages of outfitted/leased private land were most frequent in 

 southeastern Montana (Region 7). Hunting districts 704 and 705, primarily Custer, Powder 

 River, Fallon and Carter Counties, were 54% and 79% outfitted/leased respectively. Low 

 percentages of outfitted/leased were recorded in western Montana (Regions 1 & 2). 



Comparing the results of the 1992 Farm and Ranch Survey with the estimate of land access 

 status indicates that although there appears to be a trend toward more restricted access, most 

 landowners continue to permit hunting. Also, there is a direct relationship between the 

 magnitude of game damage perceived by the landowner and the amount of public access 

 allowed. 



Another indicator of access restrictions should be deer harvest. If access becomes overly 

 restrictive, there should be a decline in harvest, especially antlerless harvest. Current harvest 

 records do not show a decline. 



The hunting districts with severe closures and restrictions seem to cluster together in certain 

 areas of the state. This may be indicative of a snowballing effect of closures caused by 

 increased numbers of hunters looking for access adjacent to areas that they have traditionally 

 hunted. Landowners may be forced to other restrictive means of controlling hunters because 

 of the shifting that occurs. If this is so, solutions to the access problem will need to include a 

 means of preventing this shift of hunters and/or provide for a wider distribution of lands 

 open to hunting in order to disperse hunters. 



RESULTS OF SPECIAL HUNTING SEASON TYPES & MANAGEMENT 

 STRATEGIES 



In recent years, various hunting season types have been implemented to resolve management 

 problems and/ or in response to demands by hunters for certain types of hunting experiences. 

 Many of these season types have now been in place long enough to determine what resulted 

 and how that might compare to what was perceived when the action was first taken. 



Season Types: 



I. Antlered Buck Mule Deer - 2 point or less for last two weeks of season 



Purpose: This season type was initiated in the Bridger Mtns. (HD 312) in 1989 



as an attempt to restore the opportunity to kill large mule deer bucks. 



28 



