Big cuts coming to Moose Tags???

I'm hearing rumours that aerial surveys have shown dismal results in some of Ontario's Moose strongholds and drastic cuts to tags are coming for this season. Some areas could get cut as much as 80%. I wish I had more information but my understanding is final numbers have not been set yet.

I'm not too surprised after Minnesota cancelled its Moose hunt last year then from what I heard Moose hunting was not very good in many places last year in Ontario. Is this the end of Moose hunting in Ontario as we know it? With Deer suffering with one of the worst winters in many years its not looking too good for big game hunting in 2014.

I'd believe it . seems every year we need more guys for a guarantee . its getting ridiculous

how can we have a sustainable population when the natives slaughter the moose out of shear spite?

If only everyone actually needed a tag...

Popcorn is popping...just cracked my beer... please proceed to blame all hunting and fishing problems on FN.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fishy Wishy

Popcorn is popping...just cracked my beer... please proceed to blame all hunting and fishing problems on FN.

---

Not blaming it entirely on them at all...

But if there is truly a problem with the herds, limiting one group, while still allowing a free for all for another, doesn't seem like sound management strategy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TurkeyRookie

Not blaming it entirely on them at all...

But if there is truly a problem with the herds, limiting one group, while still allowing a free for all for another, doesn't seem like sound management strategy.

---

According to Toddc they "slaughter the moose out of shear spite" then you hitched your horse to that wagon.

I have known and grown up with FN as friends and in mentor roles...certainly they never "slaughtered" ANYTHING "out of shear spite"

Will this mean cuts to the number of tags allocated to outfitters too?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fishy Wishy

then you hitched your horse to that wagon.

---

Not sure at what point in my statement I jumped on the killing for spite slaughter wagon, but I think my point of cutting back numbers for one group, while still allowing full unrestricted access for another being a poor way to manage things is a far cry from Todc's statement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TurkeyRookie

Not sure at what point in my statement I jumped on the killing for spite slaughter wagon, but I think my point of cutting back numbers for one group, while still allowing full unrestricted access for another being a poor way to manage things is a far cry from Todc's statement.

---

With treaties as they are...the province has no power to change that as far as I know...so in planning you gotta include the population killed by FN as they would attribute to other predators like wolves and cougars.

Now I do remember reading about how the idea of unrestricted calf harvest was a bad idea but was part of the negotiation when the current lottery and tags were introduced.

The reality is this is a brutal winter and you risk having another just like it next year so yes they do have to react and cut tags. We can't pretend this winter never happened and everything will be normal. Every stakeholder needs to be treated equally here with cut to tags. Will they do that? Doubt it strongly.

It's also interesting to take into perspective where they do the surveys, I have seen just as many moose this winter in my travels (weekly) as any other, saw a beautiful big healthy looking cow today on my way back from Chapleau (a black one not the white) :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fishy Wishy

With treaties as they are...the province has no power to change that as far as I know...so in planning you gotta include the population killed by FN as they would attribute to other predators like wolves and cougars.

Now I do remember reading about how the idea of unrestricted calf harvest was a bad idea but was part of the negotiation when the current lottery and tags were introduced.

---

absolutely I agree, I just didn't appreciate my comment being compared to that of the afformentioned as it was no where near the same thought process / intent.

Also agree that with treaties in place what I and many others would like to see happen is impossible, but it sure is hard to manage a resource when only one group is held accountable for what, when, where, and how many.

At the very least, I would like to see mandatory reporting introduced for FN, will they follow it? I can't say, only speculate, but it sure would help get a clearer picture of what's going on out there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TurkeyRookie

absolutely I agree, I just didn't appreciate my comment being compared to that of the afformentioned as it was no where near the same thought process .

---

Well in that case you have my apologies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by William Cody

I'm hearing rumours that aerial surveys have shown dismal results in some of Ontario's Moose strongholds and drastic cuts to tags are coming for this season. Some areas could get cut as much as 80%. I wish I had more information but my understanding is final numbers have not been set yet.

I'm not too surprised after Minnesota cancelled its Moose hunt last year then from what I heard Moose hunting was not very good in many places last year in Ontario. Is this the end of Moose hunting in Ontario as we know it? With Deer suffering with one of the worst winters in many years its not looking too good for big game hunting in 2014.

---

Interesting first post WC - where your rumours coming from? I've seen more moose on my travels this winter than I have in the past few. Plenty of sign, lots of calf tracks, etc. - even had 4 walk through they yard at the camp while we were gone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TurkeyRookie

Not blaming it entirely on them at all...

But if there is truly a problem with the herds, limiting one group, while still allowing a free for all for another, doesn't seem like sound management strategy.

---

Is there no reporting structure in place currently? I don't know anything about treaties so I don't know what FN have to abide by each year in terms of moose and deer harvests. We are lucky enough to draw our one adult tag per year and even luckier to fill it.

AFAIK, there are no restrictions on FN harvest as long as it is within their treaty area. Ie. treaty 9 FN members ( north of watershed, Timmins, chapeau, moosenee, etc.), cannot come downtown Sudbury, (Robinson-Huron Treaty) and practice their treaty rights. They would need a valid license to follow the same limits and seasons as the rest of us. Some FNs have set internal regulations for their members, but are they enforced? Who knows? I have heard Nipissing FN state publicly that their members are not to set nets in the lake during the walleye spawn, but do all members abide by it. Again, who knows?

My wife's cousin is Métis, and he has a harvest card with restrictions on area, seasons and bag limit. He also has to report to his hunt captain about what he has harvested. That is different than what I understand the FNs.

i quite like the idea of mandatory reporting by FNs of harvest levels to better manage for everyone. We should do the same for moose, deer and bear across the province. Many states in the US do this, why can't we?

i would dearly love to see a single harvest system for ALL users of the resources and none of this "special interest" double/triple standard that we have currently.

I strongly believe in mandatory harvest reports of all big game kills. It is truly the only accurate way of knowing what the stats are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fishy Wishy

According to Toddc they "slaughter the moose out of shear spite" then you hitched your horse to that wagon.

I have known and grown up with FN as friends and in mentor roles...certainly they never "slaughtered" ANYTHING "out of shear spite"

---

Im sure you know all kinds of fn that are tie wearing ,tax paying model citizens. I have a family full of full blooded native and I can tell you that as much as they cannot all be painted with the same brush as far as bad ethics it goes the same in the opposite. I have family members that go in the spring and spear steelhead by the cooler full, while the rst of us are trying to tie our little flies waiting for the opener.. I called the mnr a few years ago about the moose in the area of my camp, why do I need 15 men to get a cow tag? the answer was, well we see last years harvst, do a flyover finances permitting and guess how many the natives have taken out prior to the season.. It just so happened that they took out 11 from my immediate area.. How do I know? there machine to haul the moose out broke down and the called the mnr, who ever so nicely went in and helped them out, So you can be politicly correct, and yielding if you wish, but truth of the matter is there is a definate problem with the managment of this provinces game, and a large factor is our tolerance of those regardless of hertage that take advantage and exploit OUR natural resourse and right to harvest responsibly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mbhunter

Interesting first post WC - where your rumours coming from? I've seen more moose on my travels this winter than I have in the past few. Plenty of sign, lots of calf tracks, etc. - even had 4 walk through they yard at the camp while we were gone.

---

I believe that this has nothing to do with Moose taken by hunters. It looks more like whatever is killing off the Moose in Minnesota has come across and is starting to do the same in NW Ontario. As far as I know studies being done in Minnesota have not come to any conclusions. Their herd was hit so hard they flat out cancelled their Moose hunt last year. Also several FN tribes in Minnesota also canceled their Moose hunt as well. As I said before I have not heard any definite numbers as to how the cuts in tags will be handled as in how big will the cuts be or how widespread they will be. Could just be a few areas in the Northwest, who knows!

Hey guys, I know there is some confusion on first nations people and their rights to the resource. I am in a natural resource law program and we have a course explaining this. Based on treaties, case law states that priority of the resource is as follows related to hunting:

1. Protection of the resource
2. First Nations access based on treaty rights
3. General public use

In fishing, it is as follows:

1. Protection of the resource
2. First Nations access based on treaty rights/aboriginal commercial fishing
3. Commercial Fishing
4. General public use

I hope this clears it up somewhat for people...

*so this means that for the government to change the first nations harvest, they would first have to totally end the hunt by the general public

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by William Cody

I'm hearing rumours that aerial surveys have shown dismal results in some of Ontario's Moose strongholds and drastic cuts to tags are coming for this season. Some areas could get cut as much as 80%. I wish I had more information but my understanding is final numbers have not been set yet.

I'm not too surprised after Minnesota cancelled its Moose hunt last year then from what I heard Moose hunting was not very good in many places last year in Ontario. Is this the end of Moose hunting in Ontario as we know it? With Deer suffering with one of the worst winters in many years its not looking too good for big game hunting in 2014.

---

"Rumors" are just that. Unless they're backed up with solid evidence,they're best ignored. Declining Moose population is happening across Canada. There's plenty of info by simply using Google. The trouble is that nobody knows why,but,that doesn't stop the finger pointing blame game which is about as helpful as "rumors." As long as aerial surveys are done properly and accurately,taking in a very vast area,if tag numbers need to be reduced,then,as ethical and honest hunters/conservationists,we have no choice but to accept the info at face value and agree.

I will bet you if the quotas are cut, the numbers will not change for 21A. The MNR are dead set on wiping the Moose out of that area for a handful of Caribou. I will never understand how they think.

Natives are protecting mother earth don't you know. That's what they say.

from who?

.................

good grief. Ok im sorry my great grandpa beat up your great grandpa. They want there rights then fine, Im ok with that.. No guns,outboards quads trucks electricity etc etc etc. thats all us terrible white mans. make a bow or slingshot or whatever else you want and have at her...Oh and try not to be a big tough Rambo online, Im not racist champ.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by toddc

good grief. Ok im sorry my great grandpa beat up your great grandpa. They want there rights then fine, Im ok with that.. No guns,outboards quads trucks electricity etc etc etc. thats all us terrible white mans. make a bow or slingshot or whatever else you want and have at her...Oh and try not to be a big tough Rambo online, Im not racist champ.

---

It seems, based on this thread, that the less people understand, the more inclined they are to talk out their arse.

Let me pose a question to all the experts on "native relations";

There are 10,000 people living in Kapuskasing. There are <150 adult moose tags available within 50 miles of town. Over a 130 of them go to hunters who don't reside in Kap. That leaves adult 20 moose tags. Now, of the 10000 people living in Kap, how many travel by vehicle in and out of the bush every day. Minimum 1500. Now 1500 people with rifles and calf tags (no adult tag) traveling in and out of the bush every day over a 5 week season, how many get a crack at a calf over 5 weeks and get it loaded in the pickup on the way home from work:

Answer : 100's
Problem : not sustainable.

Wolves: not the problem
Natives: not the problem

Solution: Simple, lottery for calf tags. Problem fixed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TurkeyRookie

It's also interesting to take into perspective where they do the surveys, I have seen just as many moose this winter in my travels (weekly) as any other, saw a beautiful big healthy looking cow today on my way back from Chapleau (a black one not the white) :)

---

TR you will always see Moose along highways due to the salt and the ease of travel due to lack of snow. Moose are not to be or shouldn't be hunted along hwy's. And yes are hit be vehicles but this has always bee a factor along the roadways.

My understanding is the the FN hunters do report accurate harvest back to their band and council the number of animals taken (unlimited) each year.
The band inturn hands this harvest number over to the MNR biologist at the district office in their area.
MNR will use this figure aswell as the (regular) application hunters harvest number to determine tag alocations the following year.
It is in the best interest of the FN to provide accurate numbers so that the number of tags allocated do not harm the moose/deer populations in their treaty hunting area.



Is there no reporting structure in place currently? I don't know anything about treaties so I don't know what FN have to abide by each year in terms of moose and deer harvests. We are lucky enough to draw our one adult tag per year and even luckier to fill it.[/QUOTE]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by toddc

how can we have a sustainable population when the natives slaughter the moose out of shear spite?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by toddc

Im sure you know all kinds of fn that are tie wearing ,tax paying model citizens. I have a family full of full blooded native and I can tell you that as much as they cannot all be painted with the same brush as far as bad ethics it goes the same in the opposite. I have family members that go in the spring and spear steelhead by the cooler full, while the rst of us are trying to tie our little flies waiting for the opener.. I called the mnr a few years ago about the moose in the area of my camp, why do I need 15 men to get a cow tag? the answer was, well we see last years harvst, do a flyover finances permitting and guess how many the natives have taken out prior to the season.. It just so happened that they took out 11 from my immediate area.. How do I know? there machine to haul the moose out broke down and the called the mnr, who ever so nicely went in and helped them out, So you can be politicly correct, and yielding if you wish, but truth of the matter is there is a definate problem with the managment of this provinces game, and a large factor is our tolerance of those regardless of hertage that take advantage and exploit OUR natural resourse and right to harvest responsibly.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fishy Wishy

.................

---

Sawbill that was one terrific and I mean bang-up job of moderating.

Not only did you leave the racist comments you deleted where the racist was called out as a racist. JUST FAN-F'N-TASTIC.

You didn't only remove the line where he is called out but also all of the relevant parts of my post.

People here and moan about the FN all of the time...with no moderation I might add...and they expect the FN to not exercise their treatie rights??? They want FN to negotiate???? Why would they? Like really.

Great job. Just great. But hey the forum rules don't explicitly state racism is a no no...just personal attacks...good greif

Where is the racism in those quotes Fishy? What is racist about referring to natives as natives?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by toddc

good grief. Ok im sorry my great grandpa beat up your great grandpa. They want there rights then fine, Im ok with that.. No guns,outboards quads trucks electricity etc etc etc. thats all us terrible white mans. make a bow or slingshot or whatever else you want and have at her...Oh and try not to be a big tough Rambo online, Im not racpist champ.

---

1...You don't know me...and that is obvious...I'm the whitest person you'll ever meet.
2. No one's great grampa got beat up. My family has been in Canada since there was Canada. From loyalists, to voyageurs, HBC, and geological surveyors...this Doesn't mean I agree with treatment of the FN through our history.

Hey we lied, traded in bad faith all sorts of evils...it would have been more humane to assimilate the natives. It would have been cleaner if our ancestors raped and pillaged as Ghangis Kahn or Attilla and the huns, Charlemange or Alexander the Great, and all ancient great conquerors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by B Wilson

Where is the racism in those quotes Fishy? What is racist about referring to natives as natives?

---

How about the first post where he blames the fall of moose pops on natives slaughtering moose out of spite? Generalizing a whole race based on a few???? Nope thats not racist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fishy Wishy

How about the first post where he blames the fall of moose pops on natives slaughtering moose out of spite? Generalizing a whole race based on a few???? Nope thats not racist.

---

You are saying a few natives have slaughtered moose out of spite?

How do to the band councils deal with these issues? I mean what steps do they take to educate their people and prevent it from happening in the future?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BPR 30-06

My understanding is the the FN hunters do report accurate harvest back to their band and council the number of animals taken (unlimited) each year.
The band inturn hands this harvest number over to the MNR biologist at the district office in their area.
MNR will use this figure aswell as the (regular) application hunters harvest number to determine tag alocations the following year.
It is in the best interest of the FN to provide accurate numbers so that the number of tags allocated do not harm the moose/deer populations in their treaty hunting area.



Is there no reporting structure in place currently? I don't know anything about treaties so I don't know what FN have to abide by each year in terms of moose and deer harvests. We are lucky enough to draw our one adult tag per year and even luckier to fill it.

---

[/QUOTE]

Of course the number harvested will always be the exact quota allowed for FN.
If you allowed white hunters to report to a family member instead of the MNR how accurate would the reporting data be??? We have no idea how many moose the FN harvest in zone 48. Its none of our business but it sure makes it hard to manage moose. We've had a draw for calf tags for 10 years and evidence indicates its ineffective.
dan o.

Of course the number harvested will always be the exact quota allowed for FN.
If you allowed white hunters to report to a family member instead of the MNR how accurate would the reporting data be??? We have no idea how many moose the FN harvest in zone 48. Its none of our business but it sure makes it hard to manage moose. We've had a draw for calf tags for 10 years and evidence indicates its ineffective.
dan o.[/QUOTE]

I guess I shoudln't have put the brackets around UNLIMITED. The FN want to sustain the herd so they will report the numer of moose/deer accurately so the the number of TAGS available will be reduced the following year for the white hunters.

Everybody can help the moose by hunting bears and wolves, coyotes during the season. All the wolf scat has moose hairs in it. Buy a tag and eat bear its fantastic.

Kap example is a joke, outdoor life cant possibly live in northern ontario! No where near 100 calf shot in that unit, and no where near 150 HUNTERS goin to work in the bush in personal vehicles every day! and since when do calfes hang out on main bush arteries in hunting season!

It has little to do with this winter apart from the fact that the deep snow moved them into the coniferous forests by the time the 1st aerial survey in 5 years took place this january, at least for unit 28, monster hit coming here!

Something is wrong with herd for sure, ticks, wolves, bears, my guess is a combo of three but had the aerials been completed annually, this might of been avoided! Its not right when nit 28 brings in nearly 250k in application revenues and the province only spends 250k or less in moose aerial surveys for whole province! Still lots of moose, we saw 9 bulls and one cow in 5 days of light hunting with no adult tag! Everyone is still seeing moose, but probably a little less

As for the Natives, there needs to be change, playing politically correct and tap dancing the issues wont solve the problem! The elders are fine, unfortunately the new generations dont have the same respect or consideration for fish and wildlife!

Lyme disease for a few years has been on a rapid rise in this province along with other provinces, hunting and predation hits population. Any one who thinks hunting is not a part of declining numbers are sadly mistaken. Then there is poaching. Weather is also a contributer. Count the amount of moose shot every year in Ontario, that's a helluva lot to say it makes no difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by canadaman30

Lyme disease for a few years has been on a rapid rise in this province along with other provinces, hunting and predation hits population. Any one who thinks hunting is not a part of declining numbers are sadly mistaken. Then there is poaching. Weather is also a contributer. Count the amount of moose shot every year in Ontario, that's a helluva lot to say it makes no difference.

---

I wasn't aware Lyme disease was a factor in Moose mortality. I absolutely disagree that hunting affects Moose populations. If that was the case,all hunting of some species would have been halted,years ago. It's counter-intuitive to equate hunting with non-sustainability. Even poaching,while definitely a problem,wouldn't account for the rapid decline evident across Canada. Adverse weather would,for sure,from starvation, predation or both,either from Wolves,Coyotes and,especially Bears,after emerging from hibernation during Moose calving season,eating everything in sight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fishy Wishy

Sawbill that was one terrific and I mean bang-up job of moderating.

Not only did you leave the racist comments you deleted where the racist was called out as a racist. JUST FAN-F'N-TASTIC.

You didn't only remove the line where he is called out but also all of the relevant parts of my post.

People here and moan about the FN all of the time...with no moderation I might add...and they expect the FN to not exercise their treatie rights??? They want FN to negotiate???? Why would they? Like really.

Great job. Just great. But hey the forum rules don't explicitly state racism is a no no...just personal attacks...good greif

---

I had a gentleman tell me specifically, that the white man was responsible for wiping out the buffalo. It never dawned on me at the time that he was a racist, but now I get it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by onelessarrow

I had a gentleman tell me specifically, that the white man was responsible for wiping out the buffalo. It never dawned on me at the time that he was a racist, but now I get it.

---

Really??? I mean really? Seriously? Just think about how ludicrous you are being.

Now you want to talk about people killing animals out of spite...you just named a perfect example...and who did it. Next up...Ontario's native elk population....must have been the FN that extirpated them...and our native turkey populations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

I wasn't aware Lyme disease was a factor in Moose mortality. I absolutely disagree that hunting affects Moose populations. If that was the case,all hunting of some species would have been halted,years ago. It's counter-intuitive to equate hunting with non-sustainability. Even poaching,while definitely a problem,wouldn't account for the rapid decline evident across Canada. Adverse weather would,for sure,from starvation, predation or both,either from Wolves,Coyotes and,especially Bears,after emerging from hibernation during Moose calving season,eating everything in sight.

---

Hunting is a factor...but a small one, same as poaching.

If hunting wasn't a factor in game mortality, dwindling populations, we would still have our original elk herd, original turkey flocks etc.

While our conservation efforts are....well...existent now...when the aerial surveys are done with such mediocrity and so intermittently how can we say that we are taking serious conservation efforts?

anybody think bear population might have something to do with it along with calf tags

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jazboxer

anybody think bear population might have something to do with it along with calf tags

---

Bears will go after calf's, but I'm not sure how often that happens, or if it is food source specific, last year the berries were plentiful, and sightings were down, the year before we got a heavy frost that killed all the berries and the bear sightings and nuisance bears were out of this world, I wonder if in that scenario, they go more aggressively after the moose.

Not a biologist but dont think the berry crop would have anything to do with Bears taking calves. Most of the moose calves taken by bears are done well before berry crop is ready. The problem is that there is too many bears.

I personally dont think that hunting is a big part of a declining population, yes it contributes but only marginally. Just look at the population for the province, extrapulate the percentage of cows and try and figure out how many fetuses there are in December each year. Alot more potentially coming into the world than all hunting, poaching or FN harvesting put together. So the real question is where do they all go????

That being said it is the easiest area to point to, easiest area to adjust and least expensive solution.

Donnie

I don't really agree with a lot of what's being considered as the root cause.
Firstly, in this area we've always had bears and bear problems going back to the 60's. There was probably more bears back then than what there is now. We had far more blueberry crops back then because the local forests were decimated from acid rain. But berries and cubs come at different times in the summer as noted above.
We also had more moose but that was before ATV's, vast networks of logging roads, extended holidays, early retirements, all that stuff that gets hunters in the field easier, smarter and for longer times.

Railroad kills are way up with ribbon rail and those number are unreported. Unrestricted native harvest, tick infestations come and go but they've always been an ongoing culprit. Put it all together, throw in questionable population data from aerial surveys and we're bound to have cut-backs in licences.

There is simply gross mismanagement of the moose herd in Ontario. Comparing stats with our neighbor in Quebec who face the same challenges as we do with predators, poaching and FN harvest they appear to be doing something right and without that Pool 1 / Pool 2 lottery draw crap.


In summary and to translate the moose population has increased from 55,000 to 125,000 animals since 1994 and there are close to 175,000 hunters of which 15% of individuals have taken a moose on a yearly basis. Or as they put it a 30% success rate as 2 hunters are required to tag a moose in many zones. Pretty darn good odds if you ask me!

This information was obtained directly from the Quebec ministry website.

TABLEAU DE LA SITUATION ACTUELLE En 2011, on trouve des populations intéressantes d’orignaux dans la majorité des zones de chasse du Québec. Les zones situées principalement dans l’est de la province supportent des populations particulièrement importantes alors que, généralement, dans le nord et l’ouest du Québec, l’orignal fait face à la présence du loup et à un habitat de moins bonne qualité, ce qui l’empêche de prospérer autant qu’ailleurs. En 1994, la population d’orignaux était d’à peine 55 000 alors qu’elle frôle aujourd’hui les 125 000.
En raison de l’abondance d’orignaux, la récolte des chasseurs a augmenté de façon importante, soit de 20 % entre 2004 et 2010. Un sommet historique des captures a été atteint en 2009 avec plus de 27 000 orignaux enregistrés. L’augmentation de la population d’orignaux et du nombre de chasseurs a permis cette récolte record. De 2004 à 2010, le nombre de chasseurs s’est accru de près de 17 %, atteignant plus de 175 000 chasseurs. Leur succès de chasse fut excellent puisque près de 15 % d’entre eux ont capturé un orignal en 2009. Considérant l’obligation d’être deux chasseurs pour pratiquer la chasse de l’orignal, on peut même parler d’un succès de 30 % pour un duo de chasseurs.

No comparing the amount of bears now and even 15 years back! used to be treat to see a bear and unless at the dump, 3-4 bears sightings was a good summer! in recent years ive been day trips where weve seen as many as 14 on a single trip and 50 is not exagerrated for the summer! Simply no comparision!

Bears dont eat adult moose, they eat em in the first 3 weeks of their lives, long before the first berry shows itself! not saying they are the only issue, but the manitoba study should put to rest the theory that bears dont eat calves!

I dont think people realize how many bears can be fed from a baited site in the spring! 4-5 no problem, how many bear baits were setup each spring? its not just that there are more bears, there are more bears with a severely reduced food supply in april and May when humans brought em a food supply! Now they hunt their spring food supply!

That may be the case in some parts of the province but I absolutely guarantee that we had more bears in this area 30 or 40 and 50 years ago. They were here because dumps were still open and we had the best blueberry crops in the entire province. We had mother Inco to thank for that.
We also had a decent moose population that went along with that huge bear population.
I suspect the Wawa area was similar to some extent because they also had a defined area of sulphur kill--just not the scope that we had in Sudbury.
The big question is how do you get a realistic estimate of moose calves taken by bears when there is really no way to do a count or find carcasses. We assume and we make perhaps exaggerated claims because we want to believe they're taking a pile of calves. Where's the proof?

This problem isn't confined to Ontario. Outdoor Canada magazine has had many articles concerning the dwindling Moose population in the western provinces and territories. Even northern US states,in particular,Maine,New Hampshire and Vermont are sitting up and taking notice. These states have mandatory reporting of all big game harvests and rigidly track Moose populations. The strange thing is that with all these departments looking into it,there seems to be no general consensus as to the cause.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by unit28

No comparing the amount of bears now and even 15 years back! used to be treat to see a bear and unless at the dump, 3-4 bears sightings was a good summer! in recent years ive been day trips where weve seen as many as 14 on a single trip and 50 is not exagerrated for the summer! Simply no comparision!

Bears dont eat adult moose, they eat em in the first 3 weeks of their lives, long before the first berry shows itself! not saying they are the only issue, but the manitoba study should put to rest the theory that bears dont eat calves!

I dont think people realize how many bears can be fed from a baited site in the spring! 4-5 no problem, how many bear baits were setup each spring? its not just that there are more bears, there are more bears with a severely reduced food supply in april and May when humans brought em a food supply! Now they hunt their spring food supply!

---

I COULDN'T AGREE MORE!

In the unit in which I spring bear hunted I was not alone. There were outfitters and other hunters. Locals and weekend warriors like me. We found plenty of other baitsites and tried to squeeze in somewhere between them all. I often wonder how close we all were to each other in some places. We tried to keep our spots secret, as did every one else!
We put out barrels and barrels of bait. Almost every bait had multiple bears on them. 17 bait sites - all a minimum of 5 km apart. I bet we were feeding 60+ bears! And that was only us! It stands to reason that if these bears were being fed, out in the woods, they tended to stay close to the food source. As long as we fed them there was no need to wander far and wide. We kept them out of town, out of cottages, etc etc.
These full bellied bears probably never even looked for other stuff to eat and this in turn gave calves and fawns a chance to get some legs under them.

By the time we were done the berries and such were just starting to come on ... another plus for the calves and fawns.

So what's the common denominator here. The spring bear hunt was more then just beneficial in the obvious areas of tourism, cash flow, etc etc...

The only other thing that changed was saving/protecting wolves/coyotes ??? what the hell for!

anyway just venting!

I don't believe bears take the number of calves people are suggesting they take. No lone bear in his right mind is going to try to take a calf moose when the cow is right there. She'll defend that calf and can do some serious damage to a bear. There's easier food around than that for them.
Wolves on the other hand hunt in packs. While a few wolves worry the cow and distract her the others can grab the calf. I think that's where the calves are going. The other thing, wolves teach their young how to hunt and kill often leaving the animal uneaten.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sawbill

I don't believe bears take the number of calves people are suggesting they take. No lone bear in his right mind is going to try to take a calf moose when the cow is right there. She'll defend that calf and can do some serious damage to a bear. There's easier food around than that for them.
Wolves on the other hand hunt in packs. While a few wolves worry the cow and distract her the others can grab the calf. I think that's where the calves are going. The other thing, wolves teach their young how to hunt and kill often leaving the animal uneaten.

---

I fully agree with your comments as Quebec acknowledges the same with their western border shared with Ontario.

dans le nord et l’ouest du Québec, l’orignal fait face à la présence du loup et à un habitat de moins bonne qualité, ce qui l’empêche de prospérer autant qu’ailleurs.

http://youtu.be/-JVkaMqD5mI

This cow didn't seem to want to get involved.Not saying it always play's out like this but it's well known large bears target calves during that short period when they are vulnerable.

http://youtu.be/JIBCcV701no

This one from Alaska

We could stop hunting calves for a couple years and see what happens to the population?

The talk of the predators causing all the problems is an odd one, they have always been there and the population numbers have always worked themselves out.

People speak of the high coyote population in SW Ontario, but I was told that when my dad was growing up they never saw deer, they also never saw coyotes but they never saw deer. With the increase in deer population so did trend the coyote population in SW Ontario, and nobody can tell me that the deer population is in trouble, even with the tons of coyote kills.

Bear populations in Ontario are highest in the area through central Ontario, by far. The carrying capacity of the land in this area is very high, there is lots of food in every aspect for bears, if less bears are being shot then it makes perfect sense for the population to be higher, but only to an extent based on food.

This area of high bear population has always been a fringe zone for moose, it is not ideal habitat for them and they are competing with deer and now elk for food in these zones. It is also the closest moose area to humans, within 3 hours of the largest city in Canada and the highest populated "wilderness" that we have in the country. Would it not make sense that in an area with competing factors like deer, elk, bears, wolves and humans on top of being a natural fringe area would not have an impact on moose populations? Moose do not seem to adapt well to people, they do not seem to benefit like deer to people, so how does it make any sense that "bears are the problem".

There was a really good article asking the question about what we should be hunting when it comes to moose and I completely agree that things have to change. Why not adopt a system like the following for moose tag allocation.

Central Ontario
- 2 tags per moose or 3 tags per moose in some zones, moose hunting in generally a group thing, why not use more than 1 tag
- calves to be a draw animal as for cows
- bulls to be a draw animals in some zones, potentially like antlered deer in others
- mandatory year end hunters survey (should be done for all tag animals in my opinion, just 1 online form for all game)
- draw system similar to SW Ontario Controlled hunt, apply and buy a tag if you or a member of your group is successful in the draw, $5 for applying rather than $46 for potentially no tag

North Eastern and North Western Ontario
- Similar to Central Ontario with changes to the north to allow for more hunting opportunities
- No bull tag draw unless in specific zones where population is low or has a low carrying capacity
- 2 tags per adult moose, 1 tag per calf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sawbill

I don't believe bears take the number of calves people are suggesting they take. No lone bear in his right mind is going to try to take a calf moose when the cow is right there. She'll defend that calf and can do some serious damage to a bear. There's easier food around than that for them.
Wolves on the other hand hunt in packs. While a few wolves worry the cow and distract her the others can grab the calf. I think that's where the calves are going. The other thing, wolves teach their young how to hunt and kill often leaving the animal uneaten.

---

My friends in Wawa, the Soo, and Timmins tell me otherwise..... Bears take more than there share of calves in the spring im told. I have no reason to doubt them, as they spend a lot of time in the bush or on the lakes. In fact, this past fall while archery hunting for moose is an excellent example. I was sitting at a lake calling across the bay, my back was to the bush and was nestled in some shrubs surrounding me and eyes out over the lake, montana cow moose decoy set up infront and to my right 10 yards on the shoreline, and if youve ever seen one of these decoys, they look very real, but small in comparison to life size. Anyways, i was probably on my 5th set of calls, when from behind me i could hear the pounding of an animal charging in my direction in a gallop. I knew from the earth pounding it was of substantial weight and knew it was a bear. I wont lie, it startled the hell out of me and i stood up and turned around to see it stopped after it finally seen me at 10 yards. Once he knew i was there he was out of there, but he was damned well charging my decoy as im sure from his vantage point my decoy looked like a calf, and with me calling knew there was a moose in the area. This was late september when a calf is well on its way in growth and he was coming for it.......so spring time theres not a hope in hell they would think twice about grabbin some tasty moose meat..... And i cant really blame the greasy bastards, cause theres nothing like moose meat!! The wolves for sure are taking there toll on the calf numbers as well im sure. Ive been moose hunting for 12 years or so, and in that time have only laid eyes on 2 calves, lots of cows on there own, and more than enough bulls. Same as fresh tracks, very few cows have calves tagging along.

I dont know what the problem is but i certainly dont think cuts the MNR over the years has helped anything! i refuse to believe Fish and wildlife should a revenue generator for tge province! The focus should be sustaining and managing the resourses! Like anything, you get what put into it, seems the prov has only been cutting or taking on too many occasions.

Politics have no business in our Natural Resources.

I saw a big cow moose one year, that a buddy had shot. It had deep scratches on both sides of its haunches, where a very large bear had grabbed her. Some were not healed up yet. I couldn't spread my fingers wide enough to fit the scratches. No doubt, a bear grabbed her when she was calving. Probably pulled the calf out of her.

Maybe,we need to scrap the entire multi-license system throughout the province and adapt the same selective harvest system we use for Deer because it has worked very well in virtually every WMU. Limiting the number of Cows and Calves and requiring two or three tags per Bull is the way to go as a blanket policy.

That's pretty much the way it's done now. The option of cutting calf tags, or shortening the calf season will have no impact, in my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TurkeyRookie

If only everyone actually needed a tag...

---

I agree

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rick_iles

That's pretty much the way it's done now. The option of cutting calf tags, or shortening the calf season will have no impact, in my opinion.

---

Requiring up to fifteen licenses in some WMU's to get one adult tag and in some areas,almost issuing no tags,at all while allowing wide open calf harvest sure isn't working,either,though,is it? IMHO,it's only exacerbating the situation. Personally,I think we've headed entirely in the wrong direction. We've actually tied hunting opportunities to a "revenue generation tool" by guaranteeing tag sales by playing footloose and fancy with the harvest system and it can't continue as it is. Reducing the calf harvest by including them in an antlerless category and returning the southern area WMU's to hunting every second year needs to be seriously investigated because,I think,we're at a tipping point with Moose populations in Ontario. Between eliminating spring Bear hunting and messing with our selective harvest system for Moose,FUBAR is the best description available.