Bull/cow or calf?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

Probably not, this topic has been beaten for a while.

Remember all those claims about hunters being such great conservationists? They are, until you tell them they cannot hunt something because the population is crashing.

---

I would suggest to take it easy. The moose population indeed crashed but for now it seems to be stable. It is just not as good as we want and/or not as good as we think it was.
And if we do not know the reason for that and are not sure if hunting elimination would bring the desired result, then, why to stop hunting?
Again you seem to be very emotional on the issue (I’m trying to avoid “hysterical” here).
The moose population is still quite manageable. And I’m pretty sure if - for any reason - we would come to the very bad situation everyone would agree to stop hunting.

Actually, I'm wrong. If it will be really bad, MNR closes the seasons regardless of hunters opinion. But I meant I think everybody would support such a decision.

In many documents that I have read predation by wolves is the elephant in the room. But why in western Ontario are wolves such a huge factor in moose mortality while in Algonquin park wolf numbers are higher but predation on moose is substantially less? The only answer I can come up with is alternative food sources. I do think however that predation by wolves is much more of a factor than once believed.
And I'll suggest this: as long as all the factors that affect moose populations remain the same, the population should stay the same. But those factors are constantly changing, ie, logging continues, access improves, wolves are more protected, maybe even climate change (if you believe in that).

Would seem to me like Saw Bill said close it for 5 years. Then maybe there need to be additional regs around it. With modern equipment like ATV, big trucks, Argo's, 2 way radios, etc and logging roads every where it is no longer difficult to get into places that 50 years ago were next to impossible for the average person.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sawbill

In many documents that I have read predation by wolves is the elephant in the room. But why in western Ontario are wolves such a huge factor in moose mortality while in Algonquin park wolf numbers are higher but predation on moose is substantially less? The only answer I can come up with is alternative food sources. I do think however that predation by wolves is much more of a factor than once believed.
And I'll suggest this: as long as all the factors that affect moose populations remain the same, the population should stay the same. But those factors are constantly changing, ie, logging continues, access improves, wolves are more protected, maybe even climate change (if you believe in that).

---

So should hunters who want to hunt moose in the future not buy some bear and wolf tags and have an impact on predator control? Hmm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarkD

I would suggest to take it easy. The moose population indeed crashed but for now it seems to be stable. It is just not as good as we want and/or not as good as we think it was.
And if we do not know the reason for that and are not sure if hunting elimination would bring the desired result, then, why to stop hunting?
Again you seem to be very emotional on the issue (I’m trying to avoid “hysterical” here).
The moose population is still quite manageable. And I’m pretty sure if - for any reason - we would come to the very bad situation everyone would agree to stop hunting.

---

So are you suggesting that the same thing continue because that would allow you to hunt? They are not sure if hunting elimination would bring the desired result but not having all of those animals killed in the fall would mean that those animals would have a better chance to make it through the winter and grow up, allowing them to breed. That is a simple fact that anyone can understand.

Sorry, my mom grew up in Northern Ontario and a place where you would see moose regularly is now a dead zone, it is a big deal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

So should hunters who want to hunt moose in the future not buy some bear and wolf tags and have an impact on predator control? Hmm

---

If the problem is wolf and bears, then the MNRF has a duty to get them reduced and if they can't get that to happen, then they must reduce the available moose tags.... You can't be able to have it both ways if you want to sustain a population...
The burden shouldn't be on the hunters, the burden is on the MNRF which are the game managers, we are just a helpful tool.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fratri

If the problem is wolf and bears, then the MNRF has a duty to get them reduced and if they can't get that to happen, then they must reduce the available moose tags.... You can't be able to have it both ways if you want to sustain a population...
The burden shouldn't be on the hunters, the burden is on the MNRF which are the game managers, we are just a helpful tool.

---

Sawbill and Fox both have it right and the NFLD experiment tells the tale. They introduced six pair of Moose onto the Rock in the late 1890 BECAUSE hunters had wiped out most of the caribou, which goes to Fox's theory. The wolf on the Rock were already wiped out so the Moose had no problem multiplying. But also of interest is the fact that they have Black bears there
and they take Moose calf's in particular, but off setting that is a Spring and Fall season with two bears on a license.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarkD

Again and again and again...
MANY factors affect the moose population. Hunting is only part of them. See the posts above.
As such it is very possible that with any tag allocation system the result would be exactly the same. Even worse, it is possible that even eliminating moose hunting for years entirely would not give the desirable result.
You could see and try to understand that there are many differences between Europe and America's moose situation. Environmental, traditional and social altogether. Not everything that is easily possible to achieve in Sweden has any possibility here.

---

Hey MarkD-I know the factors You are referring to ( Your commented-see the posts above)
I think You are referring to the comprehensive descriptions of moose problems-started with post #27.........:ashamed:

I do not claim any of the facts listed in that post to be my discoveries;)but there is really no need for this kind of brushing off ppl.
Advice me? to read my own post? to understand what impacts moose population,which happen to be me posting in this thread in most details first???Not that matters at all, who was first.



I do not claim that i invented any of those observations,and i am the only one knowing or posting about-but if You refer people to items in the thread-maybe helps to know the posts ........just saying.

Peace.

The post from AlaskaDFandG was great.Comparing and analysing Alaska VS Scandinavia.


They actually say in the text what many here want to deny-that killing calves (and)cows brings the population DOWN.
Just read these sentences from the Study(2nd page)-just read them in REVERSE .

Hunters can be effective in maintaining
numbers of moose at levels the habitat can support. In areas with
high moose densities, harvesting more antlerless moose (cows,
yearlings and calves) helps keep an abundant population within
the bounds of its forage base.



As far as Harvesting goes-we shall add into Ontario Harvesting loses the: regulated hunt-non regulated hunt-bear and wolf predation. Performed by any "usual means"(ATV-4x4-fly in etc)
Some posters relying purely on experience and observation already said all this.

For the ones believing only in science and statistics, here is the much desired scientific proof.