Printable View
I phoned MNR to inquire if a licence was required for an on leash tracking dog and was told yes it was .I also asked if
a separate dog licence was required for each species of game the answer --- yes.
Has anyone on the forum got a different answer from them on this subject ?
I understand that you cannot hunt with dogs in some WMU's but you can still track with them is this correct?
Also, If this discussion has already been had please refer me .
No special license required for small game.
Is there a special license for 'tracking'? Normally a big game license for a dog covers all of bear/deer/moose - it's one license.
I think they did away with the requirement for a dog license for raccoons.
You can track big game with the dog on a leash in WMUs where dogs are generally prohibited for big game hunting or during bow season.
Thanks WernerQuote:
Originally Posted by werner.reiche
If then you only need one dog licence to hunt, Deer,Bear or Moose and there is not a species specific dog licence nor a separate " Tracking Dog " licence ,then logically I only need one dog licence to either hunt or track Deer,Bear or Moose where permitted.
This makes more sense than the info that the MNR provided since you cannot hunt Elk with a dog
but you can use a leashed tracking dog to help locate shot game.
Just checked the regs - license is still required for raccoon hunting.Quote:
Originally Posted by kunuka
They list a 'dog' license under each of deer/bear/moose - but its the same license. You buy one for the dog, but it's good for all three.
Not much in the regs related to tracking:
NEW – Use of Tracking Dogs for Big Game Retrieval
The use of leashed dogs to track and retrieve wounded big game is now permitted during all big game hunting seasons. For more information, please call 1-800-667-1940.
Page 5
Called 1-800-667-1940. again and got the same person she quoted from the fish and game act for ELK and stated "the leashed dog must be licensed"
and also said that "Moose and Deer dog licences are the same but Bear dog licences may be separate .LOL
She is seeking clarification and will call me back.
Yes you need a license and yes it is for each species. Please check out the link in my signature
Cass , Signature ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Cass
Biggamesearchon.com
one license for all species - not a separate one for each, correct?Quote:
Originally Posted by Cass
I am getting conflicting information. How can dog licences be species specific ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Cass
Dog Licenses are issued by the MNR for the purpose of hunting not tracking, when Elk hunting you are not allowed to hunt with dogs
But when tracking injured or downed Elk with a dog you are required to have a "licensed"dog on a leash no longer than 10 M . Dog licences are not available for Elk hunting therefore dog licencing for hunting or on leash tracking is not species specific,logically?
I hope the MNR gets back to me on that Question today!Quote:
Originally Posted by werner.reiche
Spoke to Damion at MnrQuote:
Originally Posted by kunuka
His interpretation is one dog licence all species tracking or hunting.
I will keep on pushing them for an email statement that I can publish .
For hunting with dogs see page 14 of the 2014 regs, there is a licence listed for each species, but the same cost, when I go to the MNR website it only lists one licence available.
For tracking wounded game, as said above leashed tracking dogs are now allowed as of 2014 "in all areas with open hunting seasons" as printed on pg 6 of the 2013 regs.
Below is from sec. 86 (4) of the regs which states tracking dogs need a licence, the wording reads that all 3 conditions must be met (licenced, on a leash, AND in control):
86(4) Despite subsections (2) and (3), in any part of Ontario described in subsection
(5), a person may use a dog to search for an elk, moose or deer that has already
been lawfully wounded in the hunt if,
(a) a licence has been issued in respect of the dog for the purpose of
hunting;
(b) the dog is kept on a leash that has a maximum length of 10 metres;
and
(c) the dog is under the physical control of the person. O. Reg. 171/13,
s. 4.
Just to throw another curve, I am waiting to hear if I can track with my dog without being a hunter myself. Licence for the dog but none for me.
I'm sure you can walk your dog where ever and when ever you like.;)
Jozsef
Careful you don't break the law,..and do jail time. It's you're responsibility, to get the correct answer, not the ministry!:silly:
This was my understanding last season as they requested that my dogs all be licenced for deer and bear. (Reference the Maple Office) This meant that I was to purchase a dog licence for deer and yet another for bear as we were hunting both.{$26.46 for each dog} If I was only going to track a wounded I still required the dog to be licenced for the game we would be tracking. Interesting you can not hunt elk with a dog, but you can track a wounded with a dog but no licence is required. This mine set comes from the party hunting as all hunter in camp if hunting deer require a deer licence and if hunting bear in conduction with deer require each hunter to have a bear licence. I know of many camps that each hunter has a deer licence but only have token "camp" licences for bear.Quote:
Originally Posted by kunuka
Frankly , this dog issue is a pure money grab. The request to track wounded game was to help find game that would have otherwise lost. Why penalize or tax a hunter that uses his dog to find wounded game. To request that a dog be licenced for all bear, moose and deer is insane. The idea of licencing was to have monies generated to offset the costs of lost dogs during hunts. It is obvious that once the fees were put in place the monies were turned to general funds, and now a realization that more funds can be generated by requesting dogs be licenced for each big game. We are not too far from requesting dogs be licenced for small game..When we turn a dog loose he is not going to understand he is not licenced for what his nose picks up an follows, but we will be held responsible.
Someone's logic when establishing this fee structure was with the mandate that each hunter in camp requires a licence. If the camp is hunting deer all member require a deer licence. If bear are hunted in conjunction with deer all hunter require a bear licence. There are many camps that purchase only one bear licence (we can call it a camp licence) that is basically illegal. Everyone in the camp requires a bear licence when party hunting. Now they want the same for dogs.
Dick
Quote:
Originally Posted by BDH
Only one person needs to buy a dog license - and that is good for anyone to use the dog.
I had a look at my dog license and it says deer/moose. I had thought it included bear too, but I guess it does not - so your assertion that you had to buy 2 (1 deer, 1 bear is correct).
Only one person needs to buy a dog license - and that is good for anyone to use the dog.
Correct Werner, only the owner of the dog needs to have the dog licence, but again one for each deer and bear. Not sure on the moose as I don't hunt them.
Dick
I had to go buy the licenses for our dogs, it has been a while but I thought it was the actual dog that had a license, not the hunter who used the dog.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDH
So it is a licensed dog, not a dog license.
It seems really stupid that you are charged for using a dog to track, I really doubt there will be too many hunters dropping $30 to have fido at home licensed to hunt, I don't know the numbers but I am almost positive that the gangs with 15 dogs to hunt in Eastern Ontario are not dropping $400+ on licensing their dogs for deer hunting.
Go money grab.
when you buy the dog license it is for all the dogs you own,you do not buy each dog a separate license.We use our own bluetick to track wounded bear, we buy the dog license for bear. just to be on the safe side in case he gets loose and starts to run the bear.
NO this not so! You licence each dog you have, for each game you will be hunting. One licence for deer, another licence for bear. The licence asks for the breed, colour ,age and gender. If you have 4 dogs, that is four licences for deer, four licences for bear if you are hunting both. I don't agree with this but that is the way it was told to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by gowbushkon
Did I purchase licences for my 6 dogs for deer and bear; of course I did . The dogs are all the same colour and 4 are female, 2 are male, they all look the same age and we only hunted deer with dogs. To answer the question, I purchased two licence for my dogs to cover hunting deer.
The requirement to licence dogs is antiquated, adding the new law to allow tracking has the MNR not understanding their own law, giving us various interpretations which contradict from CO to CO.
Dick
The answer !Quote:
Originally Posted by kunuka
I purchased my Bear Tag and the hunting/tracking licences for my dog to day at Gagnon Sports in Oshawa .
The dog licence for deer and moose is combined at a cost of $13.23 total and covers both species.
The dog licence for the Bear is species specific at a cost of $13.23.
The dog "Tags" are specific to my dog having the gender,breed and age of the dog printed on them.
Thanks to all for their help.
I hope Sylkie is not going bear hunting :scream:Quote:
Originally Posted by kunuka
No Sylke is not going bear hunting but she will be at the camp for Deer and Moose season and will only be used on a tracking leadQuote:
Originally Posted by vom Dufenshmirtz
if we need her to track wounded game.The bear tag is in case we run into a bear as was the case last year.
Way too much worry here if you only use it for tracking.... What is the fine anyway?
I do not know the fine for either tracking with or hunting with an unlicensed dog if that is your question?Quote:
Originally Posted by seabast
Yes, that was my question. Just wondering if it's even worth it to get a tag if you take into account the odd of been charged/the cost of the tag over decades. So far I have not meet a CO that asked me for the dog license, but I haven't been control that many time either. Not that I care to pay $14 but I just don't think about it until I'm at the camp.Quote:
Originally Posted by kunuka
Just another wonderful example of our convoluted and inconsistent regs.!
The primary purpose of them should be to ensure ethical hunting and respectful long term management of natural resources. However, the foremost priority seems to be often the revenue hunting creates.
Not only are we already paying more than most in North America in tags (per hunter for the same privileges), but these rules are likely to paint ethical hunters (those who follow common sense, but not the letter of the regs. due to lack of reading them over and over again) with the same brush as real poachers.
Thanks for the update. I learned a bit from this.Quote:
Originally Posted by kunuka
The laughable part of this whole deal was the MNR info line could not tell me this with any degree of certainty!Quote:
Originally Posted by werner.reiche
well I donot need a licence for my beagles to hunt small game at home so I can not see getting a licence to track a deer on a leash .DUTCH
As part of the group that really pushed for this legalization I will say the MNR doesn't really know the particulars themselves. We have been looking for clarification since it was passed with no real avail. Makes me glad I hunt where dogs can be used regardless.
It is for WMUs that do not allow hunting with dogs. This is actually a good thing - areas that traditionally could not use dogs at all can at least now use them to track wounded game as long as they are leashed and not running at large.Quote:
Originally Posted by dutchhunter
no kidding, I had no idea it wasn't allowed in some places, we've been doing it here for close to 20 years, thought everyone did :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Cass
No dogs for any bow seasons. No dogs for 64a/66 muzzle loader season, but are allowed for rifle. No dogs in 65 at all - not sure which of the 3 wmu's you fall in - but the WMU boundaries that meet at Kemptville all seem to have different rules for dogs.Quote:
Originally Posted by MikePal
Only ever used them during rifle in 66A....not need for ML season....the deer falls where it's hit :)Quote:
Originally Posted by werner.reiche
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox
I'm positive the gangs with lots of dogs do spend the dollars on licences..... they are the ones the ministry will ask for each and every dog licence to be produced... if we have 10 dogs tied up, when the ministry comes in, we produce 10 licences... money grab for sure... but... gotta pay if ya wanna play
It does not matter what the law is. Common sense has to rule sometimes. If I have a deer down and it gets dark, I go get my Labrador. I just keep him on a long leash and trail along behind. It usually takes him about 2 minutes to find it.
Good luck explaining to the CO that the law doesn't matter and common sense rules when you're caught tracking a deer with an unlicensed dog.... Not sure what part of that is the common sense part....
The privilege to have dogs running at large for the purpose of big game hunting is one thing. And I guess the pros and cons of it and how much (it at all) you should pay for this can be debated. Where one sits on this debate would depend on if one is into drives or rather solitude stand hunting (so the discussion might be different by WMU as some might not be overly suitable for drives using dogs).
However, the need for a dog licence to track wounded game is ridiculous! The reality is that the average hunter gets ONE deer tag. We are not talking about a professional tracker.
Not tracking with a dog, because you missed getting a dog licence that year, is highly unethical and that person should get charged for letting the meat spoil. That is something a CO should enforce.
There are jurisdictions where you get charged if you are engaged in hunting and cannot prove that you own or at least have access to (within reasonable time) a suitable dog for tracking!
Common sense to me is following the law and avoiding Q&A with the CO.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cass
Me as well Werner
Well we could go all the way with this - and make dogs mandatory for all hunting, and while were at it adopt the tag use laws that Alaska has - if you draw blood that's it for your tag - you find your wounded animal or your tag's no good. Not sure how the tag use could be enforced. (Ted Nugent got busted for that one).Quote:
Originally Posted by Waftrudnir
Although I would be absolutely in favour of seeing the "drawing blood concept" reflected in our regs, I would most likely represent a minority on that one. The "access to dog" requirement is pretty much out of question, considering the ROI on a single tag. However, it wouldn't be impossible if we'd had a large enough volunteer basis (people with dogs you could call up if you need to for a very limited fee).Quote:
Originally Posted by werner.reiche
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cass
Common sense is twofold:
First, you don’t want to get charged, because in the end nobody will ask if you were ethically right or wrong.
Second, if those rules don't make ANY sense (other than a money grab), we should advocate to have them thoroughly reviewed.
Our regs are convoluted and should be simplified as it happened recently in some states. Reality is that we still have to overcome religious stipulations (aka Sunday gun hunting), WW2 left overs (caliber restrictions) and a whole bunch of other (at the time) well-meant requirements as well as municipality imposed restrictions and fees (and the fact that we even have them in the first place).
And, that’s only for the administrative/general part. If you look at the actual resource management and the multi-tier structure; i.e. native, commercial, taxpayer, it’s a whole different discussion.
However, before getting even involved in any such discussions, we need to openly agree that the status quo is not acceptable. And that lack of the latter (which some may also call common sense) is what upsets me.
I ywas wondering about the draw blood cut your tag idea when a few guys were posting about shooting two or more turkeys with there bows and never finding them .but carry on hunting .were do you draw the line .Dutch
I think Werner is right as he mentioned this one together with the dog requirement in one post as they are interrelated.Quote:
Originally Posted by dutchhunter
Say if you had a suitable dog and would make a real effort (using the dog and other means) to search for wounded game (be it small or big game), chances are you'll find it. If not, carry on.
However, that opens up a lot of other issues; e.g. dog training/qualification, access to other properties in pursuit of wounded game, dispatching of game after legal shooting hours, dispatching by other means than permitted arms for big game, holding of game by dog (dog is off leash), etc.
It’s really a concept I like, but differs from the current (which very unfortunately rewards poor marksmanship).
When we had a CO camping at our doorstep last deer season, one of the first things he asked to see was our dog licenses, before he even asked to see our licenses. (Of note - he had absolutely no use for our PAL's however, and when we got to shooting the afterwards he said it's a federal law and he refused to enforce it.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Cass
I haven't read the entire thread, I've just skipped over it a bit but - licenses are required for deer/moose, and a separate license for bear. From my understanding, a dog NEEDS to be licensed for the animal it is tracking as well - even if not "running" that animal.
Just in case somebody would like to continue entertaining the idea of tracking as a service:
As an example, I found some statistics of a small group who’s offering it as a professional service (unfortunately not in English). Keep in mind that the statistics include vehicle collisions as well.
http://www.nachsuchenprofis.de/index...istik-20092010
“Kontrollsuche” means verifying that the animal was not wounded or at least not substantial enough to allow or warrant tracking
“Erfolgreiche Nachsuchen” means successful
“Fehlsuchen” means unsuccessful tracking
I found in another article how much the guy charges:
Cost for travel 0.5EUR/km (or membership fee), 20EUR for a check or if unsuccessful, 30EUR for successful tracking (game weight below 50kg), 50EUR (game weight above 50kg).
Again, just an example as the fees seem to be all over the map depending on who is offering tracking as a service.
Do the numbers and you’ll see that it is not overly lucrative ..
By the way, in case you wonder the breed of dogs is a Hanover Hound. Supposing, they are not for sale to the general public to avoid show dog breeding – which happened to way too many hunting breeds.