https://ero.ontario.ca/notice/019-7813
Hope this link opens
Printable View
https://ero.ontario.ca/notice/019-7813
Hope this link opens
Finally, after several years of waiting,something is going to happen to make things more fair.Quote:
Originally Posted by BPR 30-06
Especially nice touch:These changes are expected to result in more hunters being able to participate in the moose hunt each year and will help limit the minimum points required for moose tags in future years. More hunters claiming tags and hunting each year will help all hunters have the opportunity to moose hunt more frequently.
Pretty decent proposal-even though if they bring back the "First in first served call in system" -that will be a bit of a pain.
Thanx for posting
Well this will stop the complaining about unclaimed tags but just watch as the available tag numbers decrease in the coming years since more will be used and more moose will be taken
Not sure the end result will really be any different but probably the right step anyway as it will be more predictable and people won’t feel like they are missing out due to unclaimed tags
But until they deal with the actual reasons moose populations are declining it’s not going to make much impact in my opinion
Big no to a phone-in allocation!!! I’m pleased that they didn’t consider point transfers… eliminates the chance of phantom applicants.
I think that they could have come up with a modified group application process to cut down on unclaimed tags.
The problem is having to all apply in the second round because you are unsuccessful in the first round, all the folks want is one tag and if more than one person is successful you end up taking one tag.
System sucks, they need to take party hunting into consideration.
Penalizing hunters for not wanting to use up their points is just another flaw in this new system.
For twenty plus years they forced us to party hunt.
When it comes to groups applying in the second draw, make sure that only the guy with the highest point total (or one person only) applies for the tag in the first choice, the rest of the guys apply for zone 999 with their first choice.
The silly thing is for decades the MNR was trying to encourage groups to just take one tag. Now because of the points system, that is happening - and they are not happy.Quote:
Originally Posted by gibb
What has happened is that the point system worked as intended. Because of the limited number of tags, points became very valuable and hunters are trying very hard to preserve them. This is how it should be. Now tags after round 2 remain unclaimed. So what the MNR has done has created "point inflation". The simple solution is to increase the number of tags available such that after round 2, even with the unclaimed tags, the desired number of tags is allocated. This is how the rest of the world runs tag point systems. I do not understand why the MNR cannot figure this out.
X2. It appeared quite quickly that "phantom tags" was a much bigger problem than originally thought. We always like to think that as hunters,we're a very honorable bunch,but,obviously,if there's a way to game the system,there'll always be dishonorable people who will do it in a heartbeat.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Menard
As long as the government stops at that juncture and goes no further,the proposal should work as intended. Allowing it to go back to the old "status quo" will make the "new" system a colossal waste of time and effort.Quote:
Originally Posted by werner.reiche
There should be a clause that would take into consideration things beyond the person control or a least a process that a person could appeal the point taken from them. I believe this would allow for a better system. just my 2 cents
∆∆∆ x2 on THIS ∆∆∆Quote:
Originally Posted by FishHog
I wonder if they thought of second choice application scenario:
1. 99Z
2. My unit - cow/calf
3. My unit - calf
Essentially want only participate in freebie
<quote>The simple solution is to increase the number of tags available such that after round 2, even with the unclaimed tags, the desired number of tags is allocated. This is how the rest of the world runs tag point systems. I do not understand why the MNR cannot figure this out.<\quote>
My guess would be that they don't have enough data to accurately predict the percentage(per WMU) off how much to "inflate" available tags in order to achieve what you are proposing..
3 years with wild swings due to hunters changing their application patterns is not very reliable data
MNRF is working with the individual,if there is a JUST CAUSE.Quote:
Originally Posted by overtheir
It helps if the issue happens before the seasons start date.
Maybe otherwise too-but it will likely take some serious work.
Phone calls and documents will be needed-but one can get the tag voided,and points given back.
There is an appeal process,but,it's quite rigid,as it should be,the death of the applicant,a death of an immediate family member,a serious sudden illness or injury,all of which must be verifiable upon investigation. No more BS excuses.Quote:
Originally Posted by overtheir
Apparently they think they have enough information to start changing the system though. Can't argue it both ways. If there's enough information to fundamentally change how the system works, their should be enough to do tuning to the tag allocation.Quote:
Originally Posted by newbiehunter
My fear is that if the tag allocation reaches 100% then the success rate will increase followed by a tag decrease.
Exactly what will happen. At the end of the day it’s a very limited resource and if harvest goes up the number of tags will have to go down.
That’s why I never understood the complaints about unclaimed tags. As soon as they are all claimed there will be less available in the first place.
I guess the ones wanting to go "reasonable" moose hunting,will go.Quote:
Originally Posted by FishHog
The ones "holding them back by playing games"will eventually lose their "leverage".
Overall-there will be less tags definitely-but the transparency will be there.
So the one with lesser points per say will not be "pushed out "by the ones playing games.
Because:
True points will rule the few tags.
A lot of hunters think that if you apply in the second chance draw first choice you should if awarded the tag lose your points whether you take the tag or not. I don’t think that is fair at all with the new system. Let’s say my group of hunters have two hunters with seven points each the highest point in our group of let’s say six or eight hunters. We were not successful in the primary draw in the wildlife management unit we applied in . Bull tags are awarded down to seven points in the secondary draw first choice. No one knows where the cut off is going to be. there is 10 bull tags left for 50 hunters with seven points. my group has a better chance of getting one of these tags with two chances as one, but then we could get none or we could get two tags when all we really want is one. With hunters not knowing the points required to be awarded a tag you would be a fool not to send two seven pointers in. being able to apply in groups would fix the unclaimed tag problem as long as a group has a member with the required points and pull the remaining group members out of the remaining draws like what Sam says. The way I see it.
My suggestion is that getting Moose tag have to be attached to the Wolf hunt success ...
No predator hunt = no Moose tag no moose hunt ...
In some area day and night the Wolfs are howling ,
I guess they hunting and eating Moose meat ...!
That's the whole crux of issue that new proposal is trying to fix..Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralphy
By throwing 2 applications in, your group displaces/reduces chances of other groups trying to apply as well..
Essentially, it's the old logic applied in new system (large groups have priority because they have "buying power" - many people that apply just for sakes of applying)
Per my understanding, the idea behind this "must take tag" logic is to evenly distribute opportunities between various groups (large or small) by forcing 1 second chance application (with highest points) per 1 group..
Agreed on predator hunt!Quote:
Originally Posted by alfoldivandor
Although, one cannot drop wolf population in long term, but If every hunter takes a wolf in fall, many more moose will make it through the winter.
Wish I could hunt wolves and coyotes in my area 42. But we’re too worried about a wolf/coyote cross so they banned those hunts
Hunters in a large group get to go hunting pretty much every year and enjoy it. A group of two or three stay at home, probably 2 to 3 or four years at a time in a lot of areas and even longer. If you hunt individually or in a small group, you make that choice you cannot complain about larger groups having priority or buy in power. Hunters can apply just for the sake of applying whether they are in a large or small group or as an individual.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralphy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralphy
I am not the one complaining [emoji17][emoji17]
Here is the root of the problem
They hunting Moose without licence or tag…🙄😳
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDOpUarKdSI&t=80s
that is the largest benefit of the new system. We are all now equal. I can hunt alone and have the same chance of getting a tag as everyone else. If you want to bring a lot of others along to hunt on your tag that’s great. But at least it’s fair for everyone.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralphy
I don’t think many are complaining other than the large groups that used to have an unfair advantage and don’t any longer.
I can hunt alone and have the same chance of getting a tag as everyone else. I don’t think so. In a wildlife management unit where it takes five points to get a bull tag and you hunt by yourself you will get a tag every five or six years. Depending where you live. If you hunt in a group of minimum six hunters, you will go hunting every year. How can anyone say you have the same chance of getting a tag. The ministry has always promoted group hunting, more hunters get to go. if you are able to apply in groups, pull all the successful groups out of the remaining draws that had a hunter with the required points. More chances for the so far unsuccessful hunters in the remaining draws. A win-win for everyone.
only one person gets the tag. I as a solo hunter have the same odds as anyone else.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralphy
the fact that groups want to allow a bunch of people hunt under one person’s tag doesn’t change the fact that it’s still only one tag.
sure you can hunt more often but that doesn’t change the statistics that its one tag and it’s fair all around
all the above is obviously not including past accumulated points
Ralphy,Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralphy
There might be some misunderstanding about the scope of argument for the proposed changes.
No one arguing about the fact the large groups will hunt more often due number of group members.. that's ok
However the change "of must take a tag" acts within a scope of single season application. It prevents a situation where large group changes the dynamics of lottery
Eg The example you provide:
10 tags left, 50 hunters with 7 points apply
If your group have 10 hunters with 7 points, if everyone applied, they can effectively block all others from hunting (10 tags awarded you your group, but a single one claimed)
After the change, the 10 various groups will apply for those 10 tags..
Resulting in a single season even distribution; however smaller groups won't be able to apply on year basis, therefore your larger group will have more or less reliable yearly hunts
The problem with the current system is the "game player"hunters,making others getting a tag impossible by them applying-getting it-then throwing it back.Quote:
Originally Posted by FishHog
This must change.
It appears that this will change.Quote:
Originally Posted by gbk
It’s a proposed change, not official. I would prefer to see it left the way it is. 80% of tags are claimed. If that becomes 100% quotas will be reduced to 80% of what they are currently. In effect changing almost nothing. The mnr mandate is to manage harvest not tag #’s.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So,if you apply and receive a tag,you own it regardless of circumstances. Beautiful. Personal responsibility....my goodness,what a novel concept.Quote:
Originally Posted by gbk
I agree that it’s a proposal but knowing how the MNR works it’s a done deal.Quote:
Originally Posted by outdoorlife
I agree that there is a direct correlation between harvest and tag numbers, so it will be interesting to see what happens if they issue all available tags. Some things that hunters can look at is “number of tags not issued” and “recent success rates”. Depending on the unit, issuing all available tags may not increase the harvest by very much. For example, let’s say an additional 100 bull tags are issued and the success rate is 20% which translates to 5 more bulls being harvested. Is this something to panic about?
Lastly, the MNR has a broad mandate that includes ensuring that hunting is sustainable. They also have a mandate to provide hunting opportunities (and sell licences/tags). It’s a balancing act and is a reason why the MNR is reluctant to take drastic action.
With most units needing 10 points and a lot at 20 points I think a lot of you folks are delusional on this point system. If you want to hunt in units with almost zero chance of success or fly in I guess that's your choice. Most of the core units 30,31,29,28 all need 10 plus points for a bull tag. I guess you can live the dream by going to 21A or 19, under the present system it a tag in your lifetime maybe 2 if you want to hunt in the core range.
The moose herd is in trouble and taking points away in the second round is not going to solve diddle squat.
Anybody following the study going on in unit 13 ?
Looks like there will be no change-at least based on the 2025 moose application process steps, described on their website.
The election suspended any major decisions and changes to processes.
Thanx Sam-that could be an explanation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Menard
Not challenging You,yet the election was a foreseeable slam dunk for Doug Ford............... how this "rather small" issue"(moose tag allocation) would hinder Government timing.
Impacts of Improving the Moose System on hunters would be likely a wash at best at polling stations.
During the run up to an election, Ministries and Departments go into what’s called “caretaker mode” and nothing of significance gets done including changing policies… even if the changes are deemed to be minor.
I believe that hunters should be made to take their tags. So I agree with the changes.
The point system removes the need for multiple group members to apply every year. There is no more "randomness" of tag allocation.
For my group, the hunter with the highest points applies for the tag, everyone else applies to Hunt Code 999 (WMU 99Z) to collect the point, with the size of the group, and the minimum points per Bull tag, we get one every year in the first allocation.
The idea that 12 hunters need to put in for an allocation, just to only select 2 of 5 tags they qualified for, is somewhere between a misunderstanding of the point allocation system to simply being greedy and tying up available tags.