Printable View
Well just the moose tag allocation the mnr has dropped the doe tag allocations in most areas.. my area 73 will see a reduction from 2100 tags last year to 1600 this year and area 72a will go from 800 to 600 . looks like there is going to be more strategic applications this year with deer as well as moose
Are the tag allocations for 2014 in the regs? I see the draw results for 2013, but can't find the information for 2014.
No ..i have a person who works in the mnr... the should be online in a few days from what i have been told...what area are you interested in ????
55B - expecting it to remain the same @650
yes 650 55a drops from 600 to 500
Thanks for the heads up. The quotas are on the MNR site now:
http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/en/Business...02_173985.html
Scroll down to the deer section.
exellent... he said they would be on in a few days... just took me longer to open my email, and post... thanks RF2
Quota has gone down by a third in the area that I usually apply in (64a). Based on my experience last year, plus the hard winter we had, I would have to say that I agree with the MNR's decision.
yes .. rf2 i would have thought it would have been lower in my areas as well...
What does it look like in 65?
2600 same as last yearQuote:
Originally Posted by 3Wheelerdude
http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/stdprodcons...rod_086768.pdf
Unchanged in our WMU (82a) at 6100.
65 stayed the same @ 2600, my other area stayed the same to.
I'm not applying for a Doe tag this year. seems the population in my hunting area has dropped.
We saw tons of deer in 64A last year, but down 500, maybe we just saw all the deer in the zone on the one farm, oh well.
Does anyone have the numbers from last year? Everything that comes up in a search points to this years numbers...
I'm just curious to compare and maybe get an idea which areas were hit the hardest.
Have been trying to find last years numbers as well Rugger.
500 for my WMU. Not sure if its up or down, but working on the premise it's the same as Werners being next door, am guessing its the same decrease as well.
This years regs have the 2013 draw results with include tag quotas and numbers of applicants.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rugger
http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/stdprodcons...ent/239849.pdf
Page 9 has the 2013 numbers.
Ok, I must be seeing something wrong. Followed Werners directions.
2013 quota 2,200 (page 9)
http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/stdprodcons...ent/239849.pdf
2014 quota 500
http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/stdprodcons...rod_086768.pdf
We havent filled a tag in 4 years, and most years before I joined filling 1 was the norm. In the 3 years Ive hunted there weve seen 6 with no shots. Maybe thats why :)
They have increased tags in 78 by 200, and I thought that they would have been reduced because of the winter.
Are you in 53A? That looks correct - you'll probably have a lot better hunting in 3-4 years. Quite a while back (2005 or so??) they cut 55B from 600 down to 100 for a few years. Helped the deer rebound - now they're back to 650. Almost a 40% success rate.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBen
They have cut the doe tags back by 75% in wmu 49 where we hunt. Probably the right decision I think.
Yeah, 53A. Ive said for as long as Ive been going numbers were thin..If they've been issuing 2,200 antlerless and dropping it 500 suddenly. Between that and what might be a spike in the untouchables :scream:
Hopefully your right and this puts the brakes on, with a chance to rebound. I know from the family for the 20years they've hunted it, good years would see 2 tagged, the others it was 50/50 vs 1 or tag soup for them.
53a has always been tough JBen, Have had a family cottage near vankoughnet for 40 years and can honestly say in the last 20 the deer are spread out pretty thin.I hunted the area a few years with 1 sighting and no shot, we would always see moose though.I believe that not as much logging takes place and that could explain things to some degree.
Now I enjoy the 3 month archery season near home in Ancaster where I can purchase up to 3 extra tags but I miss hunting the big bush near the cottage.
Thanks N Ont. :thumbup:
Didn't think to look there.
My early bow hunt, WNU 46, from 2000 to 450 tags!!!! 78% cut....
And where I live, from 2200 to 500....... I guess all the deer I'm seen must be buck without antlers!
Lots of logging around Vankoughnet for the past five years (that's where I get my tree tops from), and both camps that I know have filled up pretty much all their tags for many years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunter John
I think it has to do with the amount of snow we got this year, they might anticipate for once.....
While this past winter definitely plays a part in the reduced tags and I believe its a good thing and I am sure there are areas that still support a decent deer population. What I know is that the last few years running trail cams in our area is moose outnumber deer 3 to 1. Bear seems to be about 4 to 1 wolf about 2 to 1 and way more turkeys than deer.
Just curious but do you get your tree tops from Connway?
Nice to see they MNR make changes in those areas that were impacted this past winter. I hunt in southern ontario and have no change to our numbers. Wmu 87 is the same. Also 79d for gun and no change.
I've been doing some heavy duty bush cruisin' in 73 since turkey started and I gotta tell ya,it doesn't look good. Turkey was down a lot this year and I haven't whacked a 'yote since March of last year. Last fall Deer hunt was a bust,too,except on several farms around Millbrook and Pontypool where bow hunters cleaned up. Even on the ATV last week,there's very little sign. This fall could be another tough year.Quote:
Originally Posted by mark270wsm
went from 1600 to 1200 in 48... i was one of the 12% that didnt draw a tag last year, so will have a harder chance this year... ah well never shot a doe before only bucks... even though last year the does were practically trying to get shot... guess they know lol
Quote:
Originally Posted by seabast
Northern deer hunters are starting to feel the moose hunters pain. At least you can still hunt an antlered animal. Waiting to see how the WMUs for the controlled hunt are affected.Quote:
Originally Posted by seabast
Wow.......75% reduction in 49......where I hunt there is tons of does........doesn't make sense to me to have that huge of a reduction....we just went back 25 yrs again to a 25% success rate....unbelievable!!!!
Ouch, WMU 67 just got spanked. How could it go from being able to buy 7 additional tags not so long ago to a mere 400 available tags for over 5,000 applicants. Glad I sold my properties and moved on!
WMU QUOTA 1ST 2ND % CHANCE (2013)
67 800 3,417 1,939 23
400 (2014)
I like the move by MNR. I've always felt they moved the quotas about 10 years late (after a significant change in deer pops). It seems they are being more pro-active now.
If we were to have another brutal winter this year and the harvest isn't cut we could looking at years to recover. Time to manage the herd intelligently I say.
You got that one right! But our deer camp on 60 has not been affected so I can't complain to much.....Quote:
Originally Posted by delmer
I agree. This winter was absolutely brutal. Ive been reminding all our hunters to get their applications in every time I see them as the success rate for anterless tags was going to be very low. And im right. 4500 down to 1100.Quote:
Originally Posted by terrym
As someone who spends a significant amount of time in WMU 49 (its minutes away from my house, and my camp is there) I am 100% with this reduction. This past winter was the worst winter I have seen in my entire life. It was brutally cold at times, with tremendous amounts of snowfall.Quote:
Originally Posted by Deerslayer99
But this shouldnt really phase you. It was maybe only 4 years ago tag numbers were this low. 2008 was a bad winter as well. Deer populations are incredibly sensitive to winter, both on the good side and bad side. A couple easy winters and the bush will be overflowing with deer again. Right now, they are not, on a whole for the unit, overflowing.
I hate to see the reductions in antlerless tags as well inWMU 49 and WMU 53a as I hunt them both.Thegame cameras and what I see is showing me a lot of does, similar to lastyear.What I haven’t seen yet are any fawns.If most of the deer aborted and we haveanother bad winter we are going to be sorry.I have to agree with the MNR on this one, better to be safe this yearthan sorry next.
Sorry to hear that but I'm not too surprised. My camp is in 49, just outside of Huntsville, and we've had a very healthy population of deer for years now. Last time the tag numbers dropped I went nine straight years without an antlerless tag. I hope I don't have a streak like that again. At that time the MNR was saying numbers were low but we were seeing anywhere from five to fifteen plus does a week with no tags.Quote:
Originally Posted by blasted_saber
I was hoping for an extra doe tag in 63B.........nice holiday up in Lanark
The problem is #49 is a large unit and several different deer yards are involved. The reality is our deer population is a product of the winter (deer yard) capacity. Your particular area may have better wintering grounds than other parts of #49. We haven't shot a doe in 3 years and actually see very few. I rather be cautious than sorry. What if we have another bad winter?
I agree and I have no issue with being cautious. We had a few frustrating years where we couldn't get doe tags but where tripping over does. I saw seven does all well within shooting range in a 24 hour period. I was actually taking pictures of one when a buck happened by. I was so used to seeing does that I was caught off guard. I did manage to put my camera down and pick my gun up and drop him though.Quote:
Originally Posted by terrym
It's interesting, some people think it was a terrible winter but for others it was just like it suppose to be, 2007 was much colder I believe and the snow fall in 208 was pretty good too. Older folks, 70+, I talk to didn't like it but are not that impress, "just a regular winter"..... The MNR never went on the ground to check anything, they probably have some kind scale, Deer tag/Snow fall and that's how they decide!I guess they have to chose somehow...
Now if they are so worry abut the deer population they should let us shot yotes without a tag in these areas.
Was out for a drive in 74B saturday night. In an hour of driving, late at night, I spotted no less than 5 deer out by the roadways.
Our camp, since 1963, is in WMU 49. I have personally not had a shot.. period in the last 4 years. We ( 7 hunters) have got 1 doe per year over the last 5 years (with average sightings of 2 does per week and that is hunting dawn to dark) and we have had a handful of doe tags, which obviously didn't matter. So the reduction in our area for us is quite meaningless.
As an older (experienced) hunter I look to the positive, come the rut, the BIG boys will have to be searching for does over a much wider area, and I will be ready to meet and greet them !
Did I read correctly, 6000 doe tags for area 47? Please help me read again!
This is the Loring area!!
That is correct. MNR is trying to reduce the Loring deer herd because it is viewed to be above the areas wintering capacity. If you noticed for 2013, they gave everyone a tag (6172 tags) that applied for a first choice in this WMU.Quote:
Originally Posted by JF Sabou
I had wondered about that stat... figured something didn't add up statistically if they had an exact number of applicants for a set number of tags. I wonder how many additional tags will be available later in the season...Quote:
Originally Posted by werner.reiche
I found it a small reduction after the winter. Manitoulin 43B reduced 1000 tags and 350 for 43. My area, 42 stayed the same.
The report I got was a significant death toll in Loring. This is an interesting post!
One of my gang lives in WMU 49 (McKellar), and told me the deer herd there was way down. This concerned me, so I asked a couple of our guys who cottage near Loring to ask the locals how the yard fared last winter. The info they got was that there were more deer in the Loring yard than any time in recent memory. Their leaving the quota around 6000 makes sense in that light.
This makes me think back to the winters of 59 to 61 when a series of harsh winters and high wolf numbers caused the virtual elimination of all the other yards in Parry Sound leaving only Loring as a refuge for the deer. Remnant herds were reported to have moved to Loring for security.
In recent years there have also been 500 additional antlerless archery tags made available in this unit. It'll be interesting to see if these will be offered this season.
49 had extra tags last season. If you didnt get one, you didnt apply.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al7mm
i have my doubts, while parts of ontario did have a "severe winter" to your southern standards (i'll admit you guys got crapped on with snow) we actually had a pretty easy winter up here outside of lots of cold days, but still nothing in comparison to what i remember growing up in loring... i actually had less snow at my place this year than in the previous 3 years... so i would think our deer wintered well... a tag reduction in loring would serve good, they say the numbers are above sustainable there, but from what i had seen the last few times i have hunted there, there is far less deer than there used to be, plus far more hunters... havent hunted in there for a couple years mind ya, as i have some very nice bucks that frequent the trails behind my house :)Quote:
Originally Posted by JF Sabou
Additional Deer Sealnumbers are up now, in WMU 47 they have 250 this year and 750 last year.From what I heard the deer in WMU 47 didwell, whereas the deer South in 49 and 53a didn’t do as well.You can see this in the numbers forAntlerless Tags and Additional Deer Seal.Quote:
Originally Posted by northernontario
Note that the extra seals in WMU47 are bow only this year as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Found
my area (82A) has only antlerless tags available for the additional tags. I wonder why they'd required antlerless only. Deer herd too high?
Dan O.
Yes. Thats the reasonQuote:
Originally Posted by DanO
If that's the case why no additional tags for gun and 450 bow only? Doesn't make sense... If they wanted to reduce deer herd open it up for gun season.Quote:
Originally Posted by blasted_saber
Gun control? Someone wants to reduce the use of guns in the area?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardrack
I'm wondering if 49 they just want to really lower deer herd #'s to help the moose.
We had 14 guys at deer camp last year, hunted 5 days straight. We shot one doe and only seen another doe and fawn. Dogging all day the last few days as we all had antlerless tags as well. Not one buck seen either.....Shot 6 deer the year before and probably 7-8 the year before that.....
Wondering if other 49 hunters noticed the same or did we just have an off year??? (West side of Hwy 11 we hunt)
I hunt #49 between Maple Island and Ardbeg. We shot 3 bucks for 5 hunters and one guy missed one. We only saw one doe all week which we passed on. In fact we haven't shot a doe in the last 3 years but usually manage 3 or 4 bucks for the 5 hunters in camp. We are seeing less does for sure. Last year we all drew doe tags and they were also selling surplus doe tags in 49 which baffled us. As for moose, we usually bump at least one during our week up there. Dont even apply for tags up there as they are rarer than pope sheet.Quote:
Originally Posted by SongDog
It isn't uncommon to see more wolves than deer in 48.
We had a 25% reduction. 1600 down to 1200 tags.
HA
I think you're right. It's the same strategy in zone 48. everybody got doe tags last year but there were no deer. I think they're going to try to reduce the deer to help the moose avoid the brain parasite carried by the deer.Quote:
Originally Posted by SongDog
Dan O.
There's a lot of speculation in this topic about why tag numbers are adjusted.
Call a biologist in your area of concern, if they have any empirical data to back up their decisions you'll have your answer.
Email OFAH and see if they can come up with a reasonable answer.
The OMNR for the most part has managed hunter numbers and try to make it look like they manage the resource.
If they actually managed the resource, we would see study results and small annual adjustments instead of knee jerk reactions like this year.
Someone in the Minden/Bancroft office must be asleep at their desk ! (or there's nobody at the desk).I can't believe that I'm not seeing any doe tag reductions for WMU 60! The Minden area alone has two provincial snow courses, and the OWSI data clearly indicated that the deer were in trouble as early as late January. Worst winter on record since 1956. Estimated 90% fawn crop loss, yet no cuts. Most of the deer between Fenelon Falls and Dorset were bone racks by the time mid-April was here. IMO, Anyone shooting does and/or fawns in 60 this fall will just be shooting themselves in the foot. It's now the middle of July, and I still haven't seen a single fawn. My five game cameras show nothing but dry does, and overall numbers on all my cameras are down by probably 65%. I don't think that many of our yearlings, or mature bucks made the winter either (based on what I'm seeing on my cams). Talk to all the farmers who are cutting hay. No fawns are being seen in my area. Hope we don't get another spanker of a winter. This might be a good fall to fill a bear tag for the freezer !
Need to disagree with the "small annual adjustments". When a severe winter hits and there is significant winter kill, an immediate and dramatic change in the number of antlerless tags is required. What MNR has been doing in the past was small and infrequent changes - usually too small and five years too late to do much good. What they are doing now is active management - but as Fenelon points out - maybe not enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ont_Excal
We've had so many mild winters that deer were not acclimated to one of such severity as last year.
I have no doubt that deer faired much better in the agricultural belt than further north.
I just have to look at how Michigan and Ohio manage their big game.
They are by far more proactive on a yearly basis with real data to support changes and not knee jerk reactions.
Their system is more productive and stable when reviewed over time.
If we have another winter like the one we just had then the deer herds will really be decimated. Hunters just have to be intelligent here and make decisions that will manage the herds if the MNR doesn't react effectively in your corner of an WMU . Some of these zones are pretty big and not all areas have the same quality cover and wintering yards. Distribution is not an even thing throughout a unit. We haven't killed any does in 3 years and definitely will not again this year. Will it make any difference? I can't answer that as I can't control what the other camps in our area do but every doe who survives the hunting season and winter usually means 2 live deer in the Spring.
"Infrequent changes in the past" Exactly my point.Quote:
Originally Posted by werner.reiche
Just some additional thoughts to consider going forward.
Any work being done to protect winter yards??
Do they supplement feed so as not to lose a crop of fawns?? Had this been in place during last winter I'm thinking that we would have different results this year.
What about forestry practices that benefit the big game population??
Interesting topic.
Protecting deer yards and supplemental feeding are not in the MNRs mandate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ont_Excal
One problem with supplemental feeding is that it should be started in December if it is too be of much use. By the time you realize you're having a bad winter, its too late to do much.
Forestry practices that benefit deer are not of much interest to anyone in that managing for wildlife is generally contradictory to managing for commercial harvest. Improving wintering areas would involve planting white cedar stands which are slow growing and difficult to get started where there are large numbers of deer eating them. It's not a problem with a simple solution.
MNR has a mandate to manage all aspects of our resources.
The fact is they set policy and choose not to implement a lot of management tools for the sake of convenience.
They could change policy and improve mandates but I don't think they will.
Last winter we knew by January that it would be a tough one and the MNR could have erred on the side of caught by implementing a feeding program. Would that have saved a crop of fawns from being aborted?? Don't know for sure but it sure wouldn't have hurt.
In a balanced approach to timber management wildlife benefits but here in Ontario they still have the clear-cut mentality. Progressive jurisdictions have gone to a selective harvest over 30 years ago. However the MNR is still stuck in the 60s.
Browse grown for big game has to see a continuous effort over decades. Not a simple solution in the short term.
With all the biologists on staff we should have a better effort for our tax dollars.