Table Of Content1999
Elk Response Data Summary
Preliminary Expanded Elk
Hunting and Harvest
Statistics
Elk
Response Data Summary
License Year 1999
Harvest Surveys
Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks
July 28, 2000
INTRODUCTION..1
LY99 ELK RESPONSE DATA SUMMARY. GENERAL RESPONDENT DATA.3
LY99 ELK RESPONSE DATA SUMMARY, EFFORT AND SUCCESS TABLES.4
Hunter Effort and Harvest Success.5
Time Period of Kill Statistics.19
Bull Antler Statistics.33
LY99 ELK RESPONSE DATA SUMMARY. ARCHERY KILL COMPARISON TABLES.46
Interpreting the Elk Archery Kill Comparison Tables.46
Elk Archery Comparison. Reported Harvest.47
Elk Archery Comparison. Time Period of Kill Statistics.75
Elk Archery Comparison. Bull Antler Statistics.103
Introduction
This report contains summaries of license year 1999 (LY99) elk hunting and harvest
survey response data, based on responses returned from random samples of mutually
exclusive populations of holders of the elk general license and each individual elk special
license. Montana residents were surveyed primarily by phone, while non-residents were
surveyed by mail. Contact labels were generated for approximately 65% of resident elk
license holders (76% of special holders), and 70% of non-resident holders (98% of special
holders). The overall resident rate for returning usable responses was 69%, while the non¬
resident rate was 49%. The resulting effective overall response rates for elk license
holders were 45% for residents and 35% for non-residents.
Elk response data is summarized by location (Statewide, Regional, and hunting District),
and by residency (Montana residents, non-residents, both combined). An additional
analysis is presented which compares kill data summaries for archery kills, versus elk
taken by other means.
Elk response data cannot be summarized down to individual elk License/Permit
level. The response data set alone does not contain this information. Also, these
summaries do not present expanded statistical estimates of hunting effort or
harvest success. Complete Elk response data analysis requires information from
Montana Fish Wildlife and Paries - Wildlife Research - Harvest Surveys ElRspSumRpt99.Doc 7/28/2000 Page 1
additional data sets (Sportsperson/License Database, Quota and Regulations Database)
and further data manipulations. These steps are in progress. This report summarizes
only the information contained in the LY99 response data set.
Given these limitations, summaries of response data can provide useful information.
Relevant hunting and harvest ratios such as percent hunting and percent success are
unaffected by statistical expansion, as are percent harvest by sex-age class, time period of
kill, antler point class, and bow and arrow. The tables comparing archery versus other elk
kills reveal differences in the distribution of harvest among sex-age classes, time period of
kill, and bull antler point counts due to bow hunting down to the Districts level. These
distributions will remain the same when the numbers are expanded to statistical estimates.
Though summaries to License/Permit Type are not possible from response data alone, by
viewing district level response information, in the light of knowledge of the management
use of the License/Permit Types valid within the district, it is sometimes possible to deduce
hunting and harvest to License/Permit level.
Note: Throughout this report, missing or undefined data is indicated by -9.
Montana Fish Wildlife and Paries - Wildlife Research - Harvest Surveys ElRspSumRpt99.Doc 7/28/2000 Page 2
-3
LY99 Elk Response Data Summary, General Respondent Data
This Statewide summary is derived from the two most basic questions asked during the elk survey:
• Did you actively hunt for elk?
• If so, did you harvest an elk?
The following information is presented:
Res = Residency class. N=non-residents, R=residents, AII=both residency classes.
Cons Pfx = Conservation Prefix. These are the 2 digit codes the Licensing Section assigns to various types
of conservation licenses sold. All elk license holders must also hold a conservation license. All = all
prefixes combined.
Responding Sports = Number of sportspersons holding an elk license returning responses.
Respond Hunter = Number of responding sportspersons reporting active hunting.
Report Harvest = Number of elk reported harvested, and number of successful elk survey respondents.
Percent Hunting = Ratio of active hunters to responding sportspersons * 100. Percent of elk license holders
that actually went hunting for elk.
Percent Success = Ratio of successful hunters to active hunters * 100. Percent of active hunters
succeeding in taking an elk.
Holders To Kill = Ratio of responding sportspersons to reported harvest. An estimate of number of elk
license/permit holders required to harvest a elk.
This table is presented at the Statewide location level only.
Fri Jul 28 page 1
LY99 Elk Response Data Summary, General Respondent Data
Statewide, by Residency and Conservation Prefix
Cons Responding Respond Reported Percent Percent Holders
Res Pfx Sports Hunter Harvest Hunting Success To Kill
ALL ALL 55,930 43,356 8,484 77.5 19.6 6.59
R ALL 50,075 38,208 7,354 76.3 19.2 6.81
09 4,947 3,670 791 74.2 21.6 6.25
11 5,413 4,517 1,119 83.4 24.8 4.84
12 17,071 12,521 2,168 73.3 17.3 0
• 0
19 21,071 16,297 3,108 77.3 19.1 6.78
34 849 622 92 73.3 14.8 9.23
74 710 568 76 80.0 13.4 9.34
81 14 13 0 92.9 0.0 -9.00
N ALL 5,855 5,148 1,130 87.9 22.0 5.18
83 3,986 3,503 691 87.9 19.7 5.77
84 1,398 1,205 317 86.2 26.3 4.41
88 296 278 63 93.9 22.7 4.70
89 175 162 59 92.6 36.4 2.97
Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks - Wildlife Research - Harvest Surveys ElRspSumRpt99.Doc 7/28/2000 Page 3
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2019 with funding from
Montana State Library
https://archive.org/details/elkresponsedatas1999mont
i
C
o (A
(A
c
CO
•O C3
c
CO
co' o
(A Cl
co L-
"c3 ©
CD c
O) CO
CO
I >%
X -Q
a)
<A
>*
■o C
(U a>
c
o c ^
© a>
J3D tao> Q_
i— "O
•-Kc Q- c 4
O TO e
TD jo —- ag
CO = P
2 (A _
0
■o' ■o j3O 00
© o 2
•nc •©c *(-A> ©> 28/
oTO Cl C © 7/
© |©
in ■o a c
0) •C o
TO D
a> >» Q. bTO 99.
-aQs .Q T(AO pt
■o CO O) R
© ■* O _c m
u
c c S
<<//>> W3 -O• E<©u oCL X3 ElRsp
0 L_ ©
§ 2 o.
© s
o to © ~d ■*c-> ey
TO v
o CO r
3 * 8-g >s C Su
jQ ©
(/) st
TO to o gj c ve
"D ©CL ■oi_ CT3 .cE ’-ot—' © Har
CCO ©>% ♦©; /£cno -—>O •-3QC ©> ch -
r
o 3 ■jo a
TO = .0 o T3 se
o a> gl - s Re
tt © ■£C cao n•IccH = dlife
UJ §To^‘ J3D TO Wil
C=
JC (C0D _=0 ■O o -
£r ■oaN> © ® 2 c© O©) arks
•c OH P
■O
(E0 CEO =6 ° TO © and
E E3 coQ . ■OCCOD ■o©’ •oTcO T©O dlife
TTOO C<DO jTQO jcQ T©J I■g Wil
C(3O0 ((£COOAAD £TVTO) TC©OO •oT©TOOO =TO Vc©zi ana Fish
+a-s» c3o © ©C L* .Q3 J©Z Mont
■«—<
■O 3 ^ I TTOO
Q c (0 TO TO Oi TO
CO O ■o
0 C
■e TO g ~ o ©
0 © .2 TO C
c !fc t -TO ©
o © TO OH 2 ' TO
O) (0 M ©
c JO _ oO CL
Q. ■o
c c TO ■© TO
0 3 TO 5 3 TO
0 -C tr TO C _©
o o *-•
£ © foc TO ■oo W*- W© nTO
co uoi> £3 -C© ® o. ©TO
LLi c c © Q. C O ©
'■4o—* '■C3 |> |© _< -CgO
oo>> CO 3 3 £
.O h- m to
O O
vt— TO
C
LU
