Distress Call - What's happening to our moose? OOD Hunting Annual

Its the first article I read when I opened my latest issue of OOD. Given the author, I let myself believe that it would live up to its title.

I like Bruce Ranta's articles. His combination of scientific knowledge, hunting experience and direct style usually result in articles that offer more take-aways than the typically light-weight OOD pieces. But this time the author seems to have pulled his punches.

I've no doubt that someone like Bruce Ranta has some well-grounded opinions on the matter of Ontario's moose problems, and someday I'd like to hear those opinions. For now what we got was something that sounded like it was written by MNRF communications staff.

Perhaps as the discussion and study of the issue moves forward we will hear less Jolanta Kowalski and more Valerius Geist.

I read the article recently. I suppose the author didn't put forth any strong opinion on the reason for the decline because he, like the rest of the us, doesn't really have a good explanation for why the population is in decline. I doubt that there is one single factor that is leading to the decline.

Anyone that spends considerable time in the bush will tell you what's happening to the moose population for the most part, bears and wolves !!!!! There's no doubt other factors are at play, but I firmly believe predation plays a huge part.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rick_iles

Anyone that spends considerable time in the bush will tell you what's happening to the moose population for the most part, bears and wolves !!!!! There's no doubt other factors are at play, but I firmly believe predation plays a huge part.

---

If we add to the fact that hunters without adult tags take a lot more calves than in the past along with increases in Coyote,Black Bear and Wolf populations preying on Moose calves for food,we've unwittingly set up a perfect storm. The old adage that "the road to hell is paved with good intentions" seems to apply to this issue,in spades. We've created a monster.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

If we add to the fact that hunters without adult tags take a lot more calves than in the past along with increases in Coyote,Black Bear and Wolf populations preying on Moose calves for food,we've unwittingly set up a perfect storm. The old adage that "the road to hell is paved with good intentions" seems to apply to this issue,in spades. We've created a monster.

---

In fifteen b most of the cows had no calfs with them witch would leave me to think something got them before the season

I think you are bang on on that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by exgunner

In fifteen b most of the cows had no calfs with them witch would leave me to think something got them before the season

---

When they noticed the 'dry cows' during their winter surveys in 55B, the logic was that there were not enough bulls to breed them and they cut the bull tags to near zero. Never occurred to the great minds that maybe something was killing the calves?

The other thing that never crossed their minds is that when you sell a bunch of calf tags to guys applying for adult tags and they don't get any for several years - they become very efficient at calf hunting...they got that figured out after about 15 years.

Never give it much thought till after the deer hunt last year our trail cam had pictures of 3 cows in Aug, and during the deer hunt I walked up on 2 cows watched them for 45 mins and none off them had any calves with them.The bears are taking over where we are

I saw evidence of bear predation a few years ago. A cow was shot that had deep scratches on both haunches where a bear had grabbed her when she was calving, likely pulling the calf out of her. The scratches were wider than my big hands, and were not yet healed up.

There was an interesting article in the October issue of Petersen's Hunting magazine. The article was focused on the declining Moose populations Minnesota where Moose populations have declined from 9,000 in 2006 to 4,350 in the spring of 2014. The main argument has to do with an increase in the average temperatures and a resulting increase parasites such as ticks, liver flukes and brain worm.
They also touched on habitat loss. You can see this in northern Ontario by the closing of pulp and paper mills and the subsequent decline in logging.
I think that a combination of factors are responsible for the declining Moose populations, not just any one factor.

I think also that the number of cows being killed mistakenly as calves, especially yearlings with cows, has a negative impact. They are cows that aren't around any more to give birth to calves

I have heard of bear following cows that getting ready to calf.


One guy I know had a cow hanging around his backyard for a few days. She looked distressed, when he went out for a better look he could tell she was getting ready to calf, but she was lookin into the bush all the time. There was a large bear sitting about 75 yards away waiting for that calf to drop.


We seen 3 cows last moose hunt, two had calves and we shot both and I shot the dry cow. I hate doing that and we got another cow tag this year. I'm hopin we don't fill it.

Anyone who is seriously interested in learning more about this subject needs to google and read about the decline of the bow valley moose population. Bow valley is in Banff national Park AB and historically had a very stable moose population up unitl the 70's. Being in a national park allows the allocation of substantial resources for research.

Basically, 20-30 years into the studies now, and the result is they have no idea why the moose population continues to decline. They've been able to eliminate the effects of predation, hunting and loss of habitat as major factors. It's a puzzle.

major difference is that hunting is not a factor. In a perfect world, the killing of a calf would cause the mother to go into estris right away. But without the bulls, she will not get caught. Add a lot of crossbow hunter/poachers, the numbers will decline. Some areas have more than enough guide outfitters to control the tags. Like 21b, it has 8 working the area. No chance of a mose tag there.

you also have the gta moving out at alarming rates, Parry Sound is almost part of it, or it seems to be. Displacing not just the moose, but other animals into the territory normillay ocupied by moose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolfhunter

major difference is that hunting is not a factor. In a perfect world, the killing of a calf would cause the mother to go into estris right away. But without the bulls, she will not get caught. Add a lot of crossbow hunter/poachers, the numbers will decline. Some areas have more than enough guide outfitters to control the tags. Like 21b, it has 8 working the area. No chance of a mose tag there.

you also have the gta moving out at alarming rates, Parry Sound is almost part of it, or it seems to be. Displacing not just the moose, but other animals into the territory normillay ocupied by moose.

---

Thanks for putting hunters with crossbows and poachers in the same category, on a slippery slope with that one.

the idea that there are a lot more "bow hunters" due to crossbows. A lot of other provinces have banned crossbows for use during a bow season. Some even outright call them poacher tools..... Regardless a lot of weekend warriors use the crossbow without the same skill as a horizontal bow thus increasing the amount of hunters during bow season. Someone also commented that due to wounding, a lot of animals are shot, but run for miles and die somewhere a few miles away, never retrieving their kill. but going out and doing the same again the next day.

Well … never thought of it that way but I guess I do a lot of poaching now and 20 year's past as I have 3 crossbow's in my fleet ? Pass the popcorn !!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolfhunter

weekend warriors use the crossbow without the same skill as a horizontal bow

---

What are the skills? I've never heard about these

I do not know if I'm weekend warrior or not and I do not have any bow, vertical or horizontal, skills. But every time I shoot deer with my crossbow it falls on its tracks. The crossbow should be properly sighted and with the right shot placement there should be no losses. The same is true for rifle or bow hunters.

so you agree that there is les skill required to shoot a crossbow over a compound or recurve bow, thus the attraction for those who think they can hunt with very little practice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolfhunter

so you agree that there is les skill required to shoot a crossbow over a compound or recurve bow, thus the attraction for those who think they can hunt with very little practice.

---

Well theres less skill involved with a longbow/recurve then a compound, so does that make those who use compounds poachers too?

And with due respect, you CAN use a crossbow with less practice then a horizontal bow. A modern crossbow requires little more practice then a rifle to become effective with if one limits shots to under 30m.

Putting the blame for calf mortality solely on bears and wolves when we have a system that permits harvesting calves is silly. Bears and wolves need to eat to survive. They also dont hold populations above the carrying capacity of the land they live on. If theirs an abundance of predators its because the land supports it. My camp has shot three calves in the past two seasons. Why should I turn around and blame predators for also doing that? We've got a pack of wolves on our property as well as a bear or two.

ALL factors need to be taken into consideration. Human (via hunting or other means), predators, competition from deer, disease, climate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolfhunter

the idea that there are a lot more "bow hunters" due to crossbows. A lot of other provinces have banned crossbows for use during a bow season. Some even outright call them poacher tools..... Regardless a lot of weekend warriors use the crossbow without the same skill as a horizontal bow thus increasing the amount of hunters during bow season. Someone also commented that due to wounding, a lot of animals are shot, but run for miles and die somewhere a few miles away, never retrieving their kill. but going out and doing the same again the next day.

---

Ignorance spread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolfhunter

the idea that there are a lot more "bow hunters" due to crossbows. A lot of other provinces have banned crossbows for use during a bow season. Some even outright call them poacher tools..... Regardless a lot of weekend warriors use the crossbow without the same skill as a horizontal bow thus increasing the amount of hunters during bow season. Someone also commented that due to wounding, a lot of animals are shot, but run for miles and die somewhere a few miles away, never retrieving their kill. but going out and doing the same again the next day.

---

They are banned in some provinces and states for use in the bow season... but the trend seems to be that more jurisdictions are opening archery seasons to crossbows - Michigan - long an opposed to crossbows - opened archery seasons to them 5 years ago.

"Someone also commented that due to wounding, a lot of animals are shot, but run for miles and die somewhere a few miles away, never retrieving their kill. but going out and doing the same again the next day."

So just how is that different from vertical bows? Are you a closet anti?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolfhunter

the idea that there are a lot more "bow hunters" due to crossbows. A lot of other provinces have banned crossbows for use during a bow season. Some even outright call them poacher tools..... Regardless a lot of weekend warriors use the crossbow without the same skill as a horizontal bow thus increasing the amount of hunters during bow season. Someone also commented that due to wounding, a lot of animals are shot, but run for miles and die somewhere a few miles away, never retrieving their kill. but going out and doing the same again the next day.

---

22LR is the most used poachers tool, it always has been. It was also the best tool for putting meat on the table for those families in desperate need.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolfhunter

the idea that there are a lot more "bow hunters" due to crossbows. A lot of other provinces have banned crossbows for use during a bow season. Some even outright call them poacher tools..... Regardless a lot of weekend warriors use the crossbow without the same skill as a horizontal bow thus increasing the amount of hunters during bow season. Someone also commented that due to wounding, a lot of animals are shot, but run for miles and die somewhere a few miles away, never retrieving their kill. but going out and doing the same again the next day.

---

I've never understood the rationale of the "no crossbow" regulations while allowing and promoting Archery seasons,in general. Thankfully,the overwhelming trend is for those jurisdictions to overturn anti-crossbow regulations ASAP. Where the original bias came from is anybody's guess,but,it was sheer ignorance and abject stupidity.

Maimly because it takes a higher skill set to shoot a verticle bow. There are tags for archery and tags for rifle. A crossbow takes the same skill as shooting rifle. since availability of an archery tag is greater, and sometimes over the counter, more hunters are turning to crossbows. They may shoot three or four shots and think that it is good enough. Go out in the feild the following week and hunt. See a moose and shoot it at 100 yards. Bolt goes in but only wounds moose. Moose crashes through woods runs off. Moose loses blood ecomes weak, gets killed by wolves.

In comparrison it is higher chance that a verticle bow hunter that has practiced all year, would not have shot the animal at that distance knowing his arrow would not make a kill. Even closer, arrows do wound but it seems that tracking that anmal would be far higher on the bowhunter's list.

Its why in certain provinces crossbows will never be part of archery. The attitude is, when crossbows are allowed in archery tournaments, then we will allow them in archery season. I know a lot of responders are crossbow hunters and I have nothing against that form of hunting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolfhunter

Maimly because it takes a higher skill set to shoot a verticle bow. There are tags for archery and tags for rifle. A crossbow takes the same skill as shooting rifle. since availability of an archery tag is greater, and sometimes over the counter, more hunters are turning to crossbows. They may shoot three or four shots and think that it is good enough. Go out in the feild the following week and hunt. See a moose and shoot it at 100 yards. Bolt goes in but only wounds moose. Moose crashes through woods runs off. Moose loses blood ecomes weak, gets killed by wolves.

In comparrison it is higher chance that a verticle bow hunter that has practiced all year, would not have shot the animal at that distance knowing his arrow would not make a kill. Even closer, arrows do wound but it seems that tracking that anmal would be far higher on the bowhunter's list.

Its why in certain provinces crossbows will never be part of archery. The attitude is, when crossbows are allowed in archery tournaments, then we will allow them in archery season. I know a lot of responders are crossbow hunters and I have nothing against that form of hunting.

---

Yukon and Newfoundland are the only provinces where they are illegal - some other provinces allow them only during mz or rifle seasons (which doesn't really impact the wounding argument).

http://www.tenpointcrossbows.com/can...w-regulations/

Oregon is the only state where they are illegal - as in Canada, many of the states do have restrictions though.

http://www.tenpointcrossbows.com/uni...w-regulations/

Come on guys - we all know the increasing cougar population in Ontario is responsible for decrease in the moose population.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolfhunter

Maimly because it takes a higher skill set to shoot a verticle bow. There are tags for archery and tags for rifle. A crossbow takes the same skill as shooting rifle. since availability of an archery tag is greater, and sometimes over the counter, more hunters are turning to crossbows. They may shoot three or four shots and think that it is good enough. Go out in the feild the following week and hunt. See a moose and shoot it at 100 yards. Bolt goes in but only wounds moose. Moose crashes through woods runs off. Moose loses blood ecomes weak, gets killed by wolves.

In comparrison it is higher chance that a verticle bow hunter that has practiced all year, would not have shot the animal at that distance knowing his arrow would not make a kill. Even closer, arrows do wound but it seems that tracking that anmal would be far higher on the bowhunter's list.

Its why in certain provinces crossbows will never be part of archery. The attitude is, when crossbows are allowed in archery tournaments, then we will allow them in archery season. I know a lot of responders are crossbow hunters and I have nothing against that form of hunting.

---

You assume a lot, you assume that vertical bow shooters practice and are ethical, you also assume that crossbow shooters do not practice and are not ethical. The range for a crossbow and a vertical bow are the same. The amount of practice on new vertical bows are minimal, with proper fitment you can shoot a vertical bow as easily as a crossbow.

People can shoot vertical bows beyond their capabilities the same way they can shoot crossbows beyond their capabilities the same way as rifle or shotgun shooters can shoot beyond the capabilities.

I am sorry but your justification is invalid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

You assume a lot, you assume that vertical bow shooters practice and are ethical, you also assume that crossbow shooters do not practice and are not ethical. The range for a crossbow and a vertical bow are the same. The amount of practice on new vertical bows are minimal, with proper fitment you can shoot a vertical bow as easily as a crossbow.

People can shoot vertical bows beyond their capabilities the same way they can shoot crossbows beyond their capabilities the same way as rifle or shotgun shooters can shoot beyond the capabilities.

I am sorry but your justification is invalid.

---

Yup that about sums it up. I didn't have the time or place to practise with a vertical bow when I first got into bow hunting. I bought a crossbow so I could practise a little and still be confident of an ethical kill. I think you're a vertical bow guy fishing for an argument. BTW the crossbow is very effective.
Dan O.

You assume a lot, you assume that vertical bow shooters practice and are ethical, you also assume that crossbow shooters do not practice and are not ethical. The range for a crossbow and a vertical bow are the same. The amount of practice on new vertical bows are minimal, with proper fitment you can shoot a vertical bow as easily as a crossbow.

People can shoot vertical bows beyond their capabilities the same way they can shoot crossbows beyond their capabilities the same way as rifle or shotgun shooters can shoot beyond the capabilities.

I am sorry but your justification is invalid.




very well said.

stop the use of atv other than game retrevial and you will see the population grow .. with the advancemnt of technology and use of radios cell phones gps ect we have given the moose no chance .

I'm still of the thoughts that either this survey or the last survey was flawed. Or perhaps both were flawed.

Many factors have not changed significantly IMO
1. We have had hunters hunting with this lottery/allocation system since IIRC 1982.
2. Spring Bear was cancelled in 1999. Surely this would have been realized in the survey 4 years ago.
3. Wolf populations I don't think have changed that significantly, and like has been said they rise and fall with carrying capacity (available food).


Perhaps it is the thing with WT Deer encroaching on traditional moose habitat?
Perhaps it is more successful hunts made possible by progressing technology...Perhaps using this technology to great success killing more calves. When the current Moose allotment system was devised allowing for all to hunt calves was a bad idea.

But I still lean towards botched surveys...maybe I'm in denial.

FW

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

You assume a lot, you assume that vertical bow shooters practice and are ethical, you also assume that crossbow shooters do not practice and are not ethical. The range for a crossbow and a vertical bow are the same. The amount of practice on new vertical bows are minimal, with proper fitment you can shoot a vertical bow as easily as a crossbow.

People can shoot vertical bows beyond their capabilities the same way they can shoot crossbows beyond their capabilities the same way as rifle or shotgun shooters can shoot beyond the capabilities.

I am sorry but your justification is invalid.

---

Nailed it ! A bad shot is a bad shot ! Be it a crossbow , vertical bow , rifle , shotgun can't call a bullet or arrow back. Alot of vertical guy's are reaching out now to extended distance's as well, as the compound world get's faster almost per year. No basis or evidence in this conversation. Dead end.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mark270wsm

stop the use of atv other than game retrevial and you will see the population grow .. with the advancemnt of technology and use of radios cell phones gps ect we have given the moose no chance .

---

Sh-h-h-,quiet. We don't need to be giving these Liberal idiots any ideas.

It is more common to see a verticle bowhunter shoot 1,000 arrows through their bow than it is to hear or see a crossbow shooter do the same. Thats only 3 arrows a day guys, something most bowhunters do at least. I now that crossbow guys don't do the same or you'd hear of more limbs blowing up. Man they almost dryfire those puppies. It takes almost no skill to shoot them. Great weekend warrior weapon.

Its not the whole picture there are a lot of other factors as well, these guys don't help.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolfhunter

It is more common to see a verticle bowhunter shoot 1,000 arrows through their bow than it is to hear or see a crossbow shooter do the same. Thats only 3 arrows a day guys, something most bowhunters do at least. I now that crossbow guys don't do the same or you'd hear of more limbs blowing up. Man they almost dryfire those puppies. It takes almost no skill to shoot them. Great weekend warrior weapon.

Its not the whole picture there are a lot of other factors as well, these guys don't help.

---

Nothing says that anyone who shoots a vertical bow has to practice, they do not have to know where there arrow is going and they do not have to keep a close distance.

You are simply stating that people who shoot crossbows are unethical poachers, this pisses me and a lot of people on here off. Hunters are hunters, proper hunters practice ethical hunting no matter then tool that they are using to hunt, be that a bow, a shotgun, a rifle, a crossbow.

No, I'm saying unethical hunters, and poachers use crossbows. you obviously don't shoot a vertical bow, or you would realize that even drawing one takes a skill. Especially when you have game under you.

I'm new here so do you attack those who differ from you? Do you always Hijack threads because you are pissed off? this thread is about the decline of moose. So I suggest crossbows sales increase have proportionally had effect in moose populations.

Fact Crossbows are silent, Crossbows are easier to use, Fact there has been an increase of people in archery draws. There has been an increase of wounded moose, and moose found abandoned (Parry Sound MNR) this combined with increased sales and deer being pushed into traditionally moose territory, and an increase in bear populations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolfhunter

No, I'm saying unethical hunters, and poachers use crossbows. you obviously don't shoot a vertical bow, or you would realize that even drawing one takes a skill. Especially when you have game under you.

I'm new here so do you attack those who differ from you? Do you always Hijack threads because you are pissed off? this thread is about the decline of moose. So I suggest crossbows sales increase have proportionally had effect in moose populations.

Fact Crossbows are silent, Crossbows are easier to use, Fact there has been an increase of people in archery draws. There has been an increase of wounded moose, and moose found abandoned (Parry Sound MNR) this combined with increased sales and deer being pushed into traditionally moose territory, and an increase in bear populations.

---

That's ignorance at its worst...

As far as crossbows effect on the moose population.... completely insignificant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolfhunter

No, I'm saying unethical hunters, and poachers use crossbows. you obviously don't shoot a vertical bow, or you would realize that even drawing one takes a skill. Especially when you have game under you.

I'm new here so do you attack those who differ from you? Do you always Hijack threads because you are pissed off? this thread is about the decline of moose. So I suggest crossbows sales increase have proportionally had effect in moose populations.

Fact Crossbows are silent, Crossbows are easier to use, Fact there has been an increase of people in archery draws. There has been an increase of wounded moose, and moose found abandoned (Parry Sound MNR) this combined with increased sales and deer being pushed into traditionally moose territory, and an increase in bear populations.

---

I started shooting a longbow at the age of 8, grandpa bought me a compound bow when I was 10. I do not shoot vertical since I did not have land to shoot my longbow until about a month ago. I was advised by my doctor not to shoot a compound bow with any hunting weight anymore due to many tears in my rotator cuff.

I used to hit a pie plate with every shot at 20 yards with the 40lb long bow, all instinctual shooting, no sights.

Thank-you for making assumptions without knowing me.

You highjacked the thread by saying that all crossbow hunters are poachers.

The decline in moose population has a lot to do with an increase in hunters being able to get into moose areas. Before 4x4 was standard, atvs did not exist and we had a lower hunter population we had more moose.

In my opinion we have the dumbest moose draw system ever, why we are sending 95% of hunters with moose licenses out to kill off a whole generation of moose in beyond me. If we have such a problem with moose populations why do we still have a calf tag with a license purchase? Why not have a $5 fee to be part of a draw then if successful you purchase a license for say $30 for a calf, $40 for a cow and $50 for a bull. Party hunting fees can be included as well, meaning that if someone is successful on a draw then a group of people can join that person for a fee. This would mean that more then 1 person would be included on a single tag, 2-3 or more people for 1 moose, like they do in Quebec.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

The decline in moose population has a lot to do with an increase in hunters being able to get into moose areas. Before 4x4 was standard, atvs did not exist and we had a lower hunter population we had more moose.

In my opinion we have the dumbest moose draw system ever, why we are sending 95% of hunters with moose licenses out to kill off a whole generation of moose in beyond me. If we have such a problem with moose populations why do we still have a calf tag with a license purchase?

---

Correct me if i'm wrong. But I believe the Distress Call article stated that the highest hunter success rate was back in the 1960's (1965?). Before the big 4x4's we have today. I don't believe that hunter success rates are the problem. They have certainly not increased.

100% agree about your comment regarding calf tags.

Habitat seems to make the most sense to me. With the logging industry nearly non-existent, new cuts don't exist in abundance. Studies have shown that prior to heavy logging, there was a much lower moose population than exists today. Without suitable habitat, no creature can exist in abundance.

Predator populations may also be an issue, however, habitat that is conducive to predators (heavy bush, not clear cuts, or new cuts) may also be driving their populations up, creating greater stress on game animals such as moose. In the area I hunt, 19; the population of rabbits is quite high, telling me that the animals that are usually food for wolves are thriving. Is this due to suitable habitat for that species? It seems correlate well...

I'm not sure we can solely state that predator populations have devastated the moose population, but with an increase in predators it certainly doesn't help.

FishFrenzy

Oh sorry, are we back on track with this thread now? I must have missed the memo. :silly:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LowbanksArcher

Correct me if i'm wrong. But I believe the Distress Call article stated that the highest hunter success rate was back in the 1960's (1965?). Before the big 4x4's we have today. I don't believe that hunter success rates are the problem. They have certainly not increased.

100% agree about your comment regarding calf tags.

---

Percentage of successful hunters was higher in the 60s, but I bet the number of moose hunters out there is a lot higher now. I would much rather have a shot at a bull every 5 years then have no moose in Ontario. I agree that predators have an impact on calves, but why do we go out and shoot only calves when the rest of the calves that we do not shoot are eaten by wolves and bears. If we had a system where we shot bulls only for a few years the population would rebound, as long as there were still enough bulls to tend the cows. If we drop bull and cow calves within the first year we now only have older cows and bulls to make another baby. Do this for 20 years and you see how bad things can get in a population. Sometimes you need to leave the young ones and take out the old ones.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

Percentage of successful hunters was higher in the 60s, but I bet the number of moose hunters out there is a lot higher now.

---

Actually, I believe it wasn't a percentage, it was a total quantity. I shouldn't have used the word success 'rate'. The article showed that over 15,000 moose were taken in one season in the 60's. Whereas today, we're closer to 5000 annually. (this obviously not considering the native's hunting, since those numbers are anybodies guess). I don't recall if calves were included in these numbers. Yes, I find a system that guarantees nearly everyone to be able to kill a calf, ridiculous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

Percentage of successful hunters was higher in the 60s, but I bet the number of moose hunters out there is a lot higher now. I would much rather have a shot at a bull every 5 years then have no moose in Ontario. I agree that predators have an impact on calves, but why do we go out and shoot only calves when the rest of the calves that we do not shoot are eaten by wolves and bears. If we had a system where we shot bulls only for a few years the population would rebound, as long as there were still enough bulls to tend the cows. If we drop bull and cow calves within the first year we now only have older cows and bulls to make another baby. Do this for 20 years and you see how bad things can get in a population. Sometimes you need to leave the young ones and take out the old ones.

---

I absolutely agree. Why does the OMNR steadfastly refuse to implement the exact same selective harvest system for Moose as we use for Deer? It has sure worked wonders for the Deer herd. Four or five years of that system for Moose would go a long way to fixing the problems. Would anyone care to take a wild guess?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

I absolutely agree. Why does the OMNR steadfastly refuse to implement the exact same selective harvest system for Moose as we use for Deer? It has sure worked wonders for the Deer herd. Four or five years of that system for Moose would go a long way to fixing the problems. Would anyone care to take a wild guess?

---

I suppose they don't have any scientific evidence that the approach will work for moose? Rather than firing from the hip, they're investigating and will adjust the system once they better understand the underlying issues surrounding the population. (wild guess, not fact by any means)

It's difficult to fix a problem that we don't have a firm understanding of - the article / this thread brings forward many theories, most of which are valid.

FishFrenzy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FishFrenzy

I suppose they don't have any scientific evidence that the approach will work for moose? Rather than firing from the hip, they're investigating and will adjust the system once they better understand the underlying issues surrounding the population. (wild guess, not fact by any means)

It's difficult to fix a problem that we don't have a firm understanding of - the article / this thread brings forward many theories, most of which are valid.

FishFrenzy

---

I think it is because they would lose money

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolfhunter

No, I'm saying unethical hunters, and poachers use crossbows. you obviously don't shoot a vertical bow, or you would realize that even drawing one takes a skill. Especially when you have game under you.

I'm new here so do you attack those who differ from you? Do you always Hijack threads because you are pissed off? this thread is about the decline of moose. So I suggest crossbows sales increase have proportionally had effect in moose populations.
Fact Crossbows are silent, Crossbows are easier to use, Fact there has been an increase of people in archery draws. There has been an increase of wounded moose, and moose found abandoned (Parry Sound MNR) this combined with increased sales and deer being pushed into traditionally moose territory, and an increase in bear populations.

---

Great I'm a poacher again this time just reinforced….. Thank's for the label! A poaching I will go !! And I thought I was a hunter for the last couple decades ? How wrong I am?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Exo200

Great I'm a poacher again this time just reinforced….. Thank's for the label! A poaching I will go !! And I thought I was a hunter for the last couple decades ? How wrong I am?

---

I think you're twisting it a little. He said poachers will tend to use xbows. Not xbow users are poachers.

Perhap's But no sense in labeling a group? stop poaching we as a collective group have to stay together!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolfhunter

No, I'm saying unethical hunters, and poachers use crossbows. you obviously don't shoot a vertical bow, or you would realize that even drawing one takes a skill. Especially when you have game under you.

I'm new here so do you attack those who differ from you? Do you always Hijack threads because you are pissed off? this thread is about the decline of moose. So I suggest crossbows sales increase have proportionally had effect in moose populations.

Fact Crossbows are silent, Crossbows are easier to use, Fact there has been an increase of people in archery draws. There has been an increase of wounded moose, and moose found abandoned (Parry Sound MNR) this combined with increased sales and deer being pushed into traditionally moose territory, and an increase in bear populations.

---

I hunt with a crossbow now, as my shoulder injury prevents me using a compound. I always shot a compound, and before that I had recurve bows. The guys I hunt with all use crossbows, I have yet to see a crossbow that was silent ! Mine is louder than my compound was. My buddy's Excal is louder yet. I think you are also reaching when you say crossbows result in more wounded moose, and moose abandoned. Most often, guys that yap about crossbows, don't have one and know very little about them.

So...xbows are easy to use and give unfair advantage because of this ease of mastery but yet they lead to more lost game because people can't master them?

News / Canada
Declining moose populations in some areas of Ontario puzzles biologists

The decline of moose populations in certain parts of Ontario reflects a growing concern across some other parts of North America.

http://www.reddit.com/static/spreddit6.gif








http://www.thestar.com/content/dam/t....letterbox.jpg BRUCE BUMSTEAD / CP
A bull moose is seen in this file photo in Manitoba. That province as well as parts of Ontario are seeing declining numbers.






By: Curtis Rush Sports reporter, Published on Wed Oct 16 2013






Moose populations are thinning out in certain parts of Ontario, mirroring a disturbing pattern across other parts of North America.

Why the numbers are dropping in certain areas — while they are climbing in others — isn’t known.

In one part of Minnesota, moose populations have declined to fewer than 100 from 4,000 in the 1990s.

Wildlife officials in the northeast have suspended all moose hunting until research provides more answers.

“Something’s changed,” Nicholas DeCesare, a biologist with the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, told the New York Times.

“There’s fewer moose out there, and hunters are working harder to find them.”

Brant Allison, senior northwest regional biologist with Ontario’s Ministry of Natural Resources, says that moose “are important to the biodiversity of the province.”

Allison said he is seeing declines in Canadian jurisdictions near Minnesota, including Manitoba and the northwestern and northeastern parts of Ontario.

“We are definitely concerned,” he said, adding that biologists in Ontario have been in touch with their counterparts in Minnesota and Manitoba to see what the current research reveals.

“We are watching. They’re still trying to figure it out,” he said.

In the southeast part of Manitoba, some of the moose hunts have been closed for roughly past year.

Although several factors may be at play, climate change has been identified as a possible explanation.

In the Cariboo Mountains of British Columbia, a recent study found that an epidemic of pine bark beetles led to a loss of trees and left the moose more exposed to human and animal predators.

Last April in Smithers, a moose severely infested with ticks had to be euthanized after it wandered into the flower section of a Safeway grocery store.

In Montana, moose hunting permits fell to 362 last year, from 769 in 1995, the New York Times has reported.

Overall, however, the moose population in Ontario is regarded as healthy, with a population estimated at about 105,000, accounting for about 10 per cent of the North American population.

The areas of concern are the northwestern part of Ontario such as the Kenora-Dryden region, as well as an area running along the north shore of Lake Huron, from Sault Ste. Marie and Wawa to the Quebec border.

The Ministry of Nature Resources has identified issues such as habitat, climate, parasites, predation and harvesting by hunters.

On the positive side, moose numbers appear to have increased in the southern portion of the province, particularly in and adjacent to Algonquin Provincial Park.

The ministry monitors moose populations by aerial inventory surveys and post card survey information collected each year from moose hunters.

In the 1980s, Ontario saw the moose population dip to around 80,000. After strict controls were put in place on moose hunting, the numbers climbed back.

Could anyone tell me why mnr would put out 641 more cow (breeding stock/ mothers) tags in 2014 over 2013 across ontario? Instead of blaming each other we need to look at the missmanagement of our natural resources!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bowhunter54

Could anyone tell me why mnr would put out 641 more cow (breeding stock/ mothers) tags in 2014 over 2013 across ontario? Instead of blaming each other we need to look at the missmanagement of our natural resources!!

---

What is the distribution of those tags? Ontario is an enormous province and the addition of tags in an area that can support wont have any effect on the moose in an area that can't.

From the article you posted above

"Overall, however, the moose population in Ontario is regarded as healthy, with a population estimated at about 105,000, accounting for about 10 per cent of the North American population."

program mismanagement , days getting warmer and non ethical hunters. first the mnr should know increasing cows and calf numbers to be taken will reduce population numbers in the years to come, they should seek the farmers advice you dont keep increasing cows taken and think your herd will expand, ethical hunters should know there max distance for shooting and when a moose is hit take the time to look for sign heard of hunters hitting moose and just looking where it was shot no blood they dont go any farther sometimes blood may not start for some yards but some hunters are road hunters if its not dropped there maybe the next one will be. with weather getting warmer its puts stress on the moose and with bear numbers increasing they dont have an easy moment . most ministry bioligists wont seek imput they are stubborn and think they know best until the resource is in serious need of help then they blame other factors never admitting it may have been what they did its sad from the early days when the ministry was properly funded and the people working there cared more for the resource than how much the job paid.

I'm new to moose hunting.. Well hunting in general. This year will be my first year hunting moose..
I do not understand the reason behind hunting calf's.. I mean what logic is it to give calf tags to everyone?
How do hunting calves help the moose population?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by topher

I'm new to moose hunting.. Well hunting in general. This year will be my first year hunting moose..
I do not understand the reason behind hunting calf's.. I mean what logic is it to give calf tags to everyone?
How do hunting calves help the moose population?

---

A number of reasons

Its easier to kill a bull then a calf. If we allowed everyone to hunt bulls we'd wipe moose out quickly. Hunting calves is actually pretty challenging. Deer are very different. They have a higher fecundity rate and a much higher overall population. We can allow everyone to have a tag for a buck.

It allows everyone to hunt moose. If we only hunted adults most people wouldnt draw a tag and wouldnt hunt moose.

Calves are not part of the breeding population. For some species (I dont know about moose in Ontario in particular) biologists dont factor in non-breeding members of a population at all in terms of population health. Unless the individual is contributing RIGHT NOW to the breeding health of a herd they arent factored in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by topher

I'm new to moose hunting.. Well hunting in general. This year will be my first year hunting moose..
I do not understand the reason behind hunting calf's.. I mean what logic is it to give calf tags to everyone?
How do hunting calves help the moose population?

---

I believe the rationale for allowing the calf harvest was that a high percentage of calves are taken in their first year by preditors, or otherwise don't make it through their first winter. I recall the figure of. 40% mortality the first year. I guess the idea was/is to allow hunters to take those calves, as opposed to predation. My opinion is the predators will still take their 40% of the calves, regardless of what percentage are taken by hunters. Like previously posted, calves are harder to hunt. Our group has only taken three calves in over 35 years. We don't target calves, and have only happened upon the three we did get. By allowing every moose licence to come with a calf game seal, it increases hunting opportunities, creating more revenue, in my opinion !

Understand it would suck.. But what about going an elk style draw? But with gaurenteed group sizes etc.. Using a small entry free.. $10 or so.. Then if you have a gurenteed group your.group buys a tag for $50

Well for one, it would be lost revenue. The elk draw is so small its insignificant. The moose draw in its current format generates a lot of revenue.

And we know when it comes to the government it's all about the $$$$$$$$'s

Well sure it is. Given the massive cuts MNR has experienced lately I cant really blame them for not going with a strategy which would reduce revenue significantly.

Ive got no issues paying my $50 for a calf tag. Now, I only travel 30 minutes from home, and most of the time have a group large enough for a bull tag, so I know im different then the majority of the provinces moose hunters. Maybe if I traveled 12 hours I'd be different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blasted_saber

What is the distribution of those tags? Ontario is an enormous province and the addition of tags in an area that can support wont have any effect on the moose in an area that can't.

From the article you posted above

"Overall, however, the moose population in Ontario is regarded as healthy, with a population estimated at about 105,000, accounting for about 10 per cent of the North American population."

---

New provincial estimate is 82,600 moose not 105,000. I also know that MNR has target for bull to cow ratios in a population. Some WMUs have populations that are heavily skewed towards cows so when the MNR sometimes allocates more cow tags to bring the bull:cow ratio back into their ideal range.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rick_iles

I believe the rationale for allowing the calf harvest was that a high percentage of calves are taken in their first year by preditors, or otherwise don't make it through their first winter. I recall the figure of. 40% mortality the first year. I guess the idea was/is to allow hunters to take those calves, as opposed to predation. My opinion is the predators will still take their 40% of the calves, regardless of what percentage are taken by hunters. Like previously posted, calves are harder to hunt. Our group has only taken three calves in over 35 years. We don't target calves, and have only happened upon the three we did get. By allowing every moose licence to come with a calf game seal, it increases hunting opportunities, creating more revenue, in my opinion !

---

That's right - in one of Bruce Ranta's previous articles he states that when the selective harvest system was brought in, the MNR had to create an unregulated calf harvest system in order to sell the selective harvest system to hunters. The theory (which is still supported for many populations) is that hunters would harvest some animals that would die otherwise, so there would be no impact on the population in the end. However, there are some units where hunters take a boatload of calves every year, so calf mortality is almost certainly additive in those areas. But that's not a universal truth across all WMUs - it's only an issue in some areas.

Our group would gladly trade our 14 calf tags for one adult tag (no guaranteed group size in our WMU this year).

Seems ridiculous that after two "comprehensive" moose tag allocation reviews (1992 & 2010) by the MNR(F), the discussion and issues remain virtually unchanged.

"Ive got no issues paying my $50 for a calf tag."

Wait till you pay 50 bucks and get no tags! I hunt in area 48 and there has been a few weeks were our group of seven gets to hunt grouse only

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cricket

"Ive got no issues paying my $50 for a calf tag."

Wait till you pay 50 bucks and get no tags! I hunt in area 48 and there has been a few weeks were our group of seven gets to hunt grouse only

---

Well if that was the case I wouldnt hunt moose. But for most of us it is not the case. Im VERY fortunate to have been born into an established camp where I can hunt moose, bear, and deer with some expectation of success and tags.

Never mind bears, wolves, calf tags and cow harvest. The unregulated and unlimited native/métis harvest is certainly a larger factor

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rockyboy

Never mind bears, wolves, calf tags and cow harvest. The unregulated and unlimited native/métis harvest is certainly a larger factor

---

Really? Do you have the numbers to back this up?

Essentially we have an unregulated and unlimited calf moose hunt by non-natives in this province every year.

No one does. That's the problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

Really? Do you have the numbers to back this up?

Essentially we have an unregulated and unlimited calf moose hunt by non-natives in this province every year.

---

Seriously we are still blaming this problem on the " non native" calf hunt. People feel your head and start asking people how many calves they shoot each year! Having a calf tag issued to every hunter is not the problem in my opinion. Far more moose taken each year by the natives. Far more moose shot and not retrieved each year than calves shot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donnie7

Far more moose shot and not retrieved each year than calves shot.

---

Dumbest thing I've read today (and I've read some dumb stuff). I feel my brain atrophied reading this.

Many factors. Two years ago we shot cow 2nd day of archery season and we did not want to go home so we found a butcher one hour away. No problem getting meat cut, but cooler was full of moose???? Ours was the only archery moose in shop and no open gun season? Must all be road kills.

The calf tag system has made zero difference in zone 48.

Ask any butcher where the majority of moose are coming from. Native harvest every time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rockyboy

Ask any butcher where the majority of moose are coming from. Native harvest every time.

---

"Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for or interpret information in a way that confirms one's beliefs or hypotheses. People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs. People also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing position."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by justinj

"Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for or interpret information in a way that confirms one's beliefs or hypotheses. People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs. People also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing position."

---

That rock in your driveway is keeping tigers away, you better not get rid of that rock or you will have a tiger problem.

The Wikipedia scholar is right. Year long open seasons and unlimited bag limits can't possibly be harmful for the population

Re: native hunting and moose - should be a pretty simple study to do... Correlate the WMUs with significant moose population declines with their distance from the nearest indian reserves...

55A, 55B and 48 aren't that far from Golden Lake. Are there reserves in/near other WMUs with moose population problems? Is there a WMU with a moose population that isn't near a reserve?

This isn't rocket science, the Ontario moose population and adult tag allocations continue to dwindle while more and more individuals are allowed year long and un-regulated access to this resource. What could possibly be the problem?????#$@%^

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rockyboy

The Wikipedia scholar is right. Year long open seasons and unlimited bag limits can't possibly be harmful for the population

---

No, I believe native hunting is a factor, and so are a lot of other things, including habitat reduction.

Without actually knowing the numbers, though, you can't say it is the primary factor.

You are right Justinj, management decisions without disclosure is impossible.

I think its a combination of ALL the above. Native hunters, Crossbows, deer pushed into area, increase of predators, city expansion. There are probably a few more as well, like restricting tags so guide outfits can use them, etc,etc,etc......

Some positive news coming out of Minnesota on short term moose population numbers:

http://mnoutdoorsman.com/forums/index.php?topic=30597.0

Interesting discussion on native hunting rights in Manitoba:

http://www.manitobahuntingforum.com/...arvesters.html

I think we had all better get used to hunting by First Nations people. It's not going anywhere soon. The Supreme court of the land has told us where we sit with regards to native allocation of the resource. Native access comes first. When conservation of the resource is put in jeopardy then the native harvest may be restricted however....the non-native harvest will be cut first. as long as there is a non-native harvest.... there may not be a conservation issue.


Bottom line is that the more First Nations populations there is....the more moose they have a need/desire/right for whether we like it or not. Similarly... the more non-native people there are hunting moose, the less moose there are to go around.

What we need to do is push for a non-native harvest system that more effectively allocates the resource to non-native people. What that means in my opinion is a change in attitudes. Hunting for non-natives is not a right but a privilege. We should realize that hunting for food is not a right. No non-native person has a right to hunt for food. We may eat what we hunt but that right can be taken away from us. Think of all the convicted poachers who have lost their privilege (and rightfully so).

In my opinion we need to tie an adult moose to a group of people not to individuals. There just aren't enough moose to continue with the hunting pressure we are exerting on them now. Not to mention all the other factors that may be affecting the populations.

We are our own worst enemies sometimes, especially when it comes to the moose draws. Many groups solicit applicants who have no intention of hunting. What this does is inflate the # of applicants for the now scarce tags available. Yes..... the present system has created that process but we can't have it both ways. The only way to correct this is a drastic change to the system and..... the MNR or whoever won't be able to keep everyone happy.

Again...in my opinion....a drastic change in attitudes is what it will take to protect our hunting heritage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rockyboy

You are right Justinj, management decisions without disclosure is impossible.

---

Can't argue with you on that one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redd foxx

I think we had all better get used to hunting by First Nations people. It's not going anywhere soon. The Supreme court of the land has told us where we sit with regards to native allocation of the resource. Native access comes first. When conservation of the resource is put in jeopardy then the native harvest may be restricted however....the non-native harvest will be cut first. as long as there is a non-native harvest.... there may not be a conservation issue.

---

The Native population in Ontario is growing at 5 times the rate of the non-native population (now 300,000+). This is multiplied by the fact that native population growth is in in areas with access to hunting whereby non-native population growth is almost entirely in urban/suburban areas.

If this trend continues we will almost certainly see a rapid acceleration of the decline of the moose population in Ontario.

We need better data, an immediate move to a temporary (3-5yr) mandatory reporting (to gather data) may make sense. I doubt it will happen but instituting this with a few (pilot) of the local native communities would also be helpful.

When a species has to be reintroduced then I believe all people's and groups should have to follow the way of hunters having to put in for tags. One year going up for the moose hunt guy told us moose have been hard to get because one native fellow usually has 11 moose by now and only had 2 hanging now

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by deerslayer

When a species has to be reintroduced then I believe all people's and groups should have to follow the way of hunters having to put in for tags. One year going up for the moose hunt guy told us moose have been hard to get because one native fellow usually has 11 moose by now and only had 2 hanging now

---

A 5 year moratorium on native harvest would give very interesting results on population levels

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boschmeister

The Native population in Ontario is growing at 5 times the rate of the non-native population (now 300,000+). This is multiplied by the fact that native population growth is in in areas with access to hunting whereby non-native population growth is almost entirely in urban/suburban areas.

If this trend continues we will almost certainly see a rapid acceleration of the decline of the moose population in Ontario.

We need better data, an immediate move to a temporary (3-5yr) mandatory reporting (to gather data) may make sense. I doubt it will happen but instituting this with a few (pilot) of the local native communities would also be helpful.

---

That population boom would mean that almost all of the 5x growth of the population (between 2006 and 2011, I read the census report as well) would now be represented by an age group of people that are less than 15yrs old (first nations between 0-24yrs old = nearly 50% of the entire population across Canada, 28% being 15 or less years of age). The current decline in moose populations wouldn't have a great deal to do with the boom in population as that age group (some obviously) aren't participating in full hunts as of yet. In the future, this may have an impact though.

As a First Nations person myself, I can tell you that I pay for my tags, and hunt like everyone else. Most all of the other members of the community that I know, or have spent time with in the outdoors also buy tags and hunt / fish within season. Despite the very broad brush that people like to paint with, not all members of the native community take 11 moose before the season opens. Like all demographics, there are always going to be a group of people that make others look bad.

Only 1 in 5 natives live on the reserve, so your notion that the population booms are happening in areas outside of city centres would be wrong. Just like the vast majority of Canadians, I live where there is work (the GTA) and an opportunity to provide for my family.

You can feel however you would like, but keep in mind not even biologists have a grasp on what factors are contributing to the decline. Pointing fingers at one group (natives, cross-bow hunters, lazy people not retrieving dead animals, ect....) isn't going to solve the issue. If you're concerned, write your MPP, the OFAH, and the MNR; have your voice heard. Only once people understand the issue can we begin to solve it. All groups within Ontario have a vested interest in the preservation of our heritage and culture - despite what many think, the Native community cares a great deal about wild game and the environment.

FishFrenzy

I agree that not every Native hunter would harvest 11 moose in a season. But the problem is that they can if they want. It's the lack of regulations that allows abuses. A single hunter who takes 11 moose, is sufficient to skew the population in an entire WMU.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rockyboy

I agree that not every Native hunter would harvest 11 moose in a season. But the problem is that they can if they want. It's the lack of regulations that allows abuses. A single hunter who takes 11 moose, is sufficient to skew the population in an entire WMU.

---

The same could be said about any poacher; the native community doesn't endorse mass killings. This one hunter may have also been providing meat to an entire community. Without first hand facts, it's very difficult to make a solid argument.

FishFrenzy

poachers!!! they get their moose everyyear!!!

Just go down to the tribs down at quinte there in the spring and you'll understand what rocky boy is sayin just on a smaller scale. They have the right to take what they want, when they want , and however much of it. Just the way it is and will be

I must say that all factors must be looked at and managed when or even if the ministry changes anything. It will be pointless if the ministry doesn't attempt to monitor native harvesting of moose especially from a numbers research stand point. I'm not blaming natives but the ministry this year targeted only non native, tax paying, licence purchasing hunters. So to me it appears they are pointing they finger at us alone when if there really needs to be a change all factors affecting moose numbers must be managed and that includes natives. Now if natives understand the moose numbers are dropping isn't it within their best interest to contribute to the research and help manage the heard rather then sit back and watch from the comfy entitlement chair?? Again not harping on native rights but I just don't understand why natives would not voluntarily enter the effort the save this valuable resource. Another note on our way back from archery last season we had seen 2 bulls and 1 cow, no calves. No chance for shots as moose were either not open or close enough. Not even our poacher crossbow partner could get off a wounding 200 yard shot....lol ( I had to) We stopped in wawa for gas and seen a couple of bull racks in a trailer driven by 2 guys. We had a chat and turns out they were American natives coming up to shoot our moose with rifles during the archery season... just because they can and they were quite arrogant about it almost laughing at our laws. Like most natives I have seen hunting they had 4 wheelers, large trucks and trailers etc... I don't see how we can allow that??!!! Like I said my hope is that all necessary changes need to be addressed and hopefully the native one will be as well and I know our government is too chicken to go there so I'm hoping the natives can open up that conversation

what measures do we take in Ontario to protect sensitive/critically important calving grounds? Other provinces close highways, fishing and water traffic if they have to. What sort of inconveniences are Ontarians willing to put up with to improve calving. The answer to this question, currently, is none.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nontypical

Just go down to the tribs down at quinte there in the spring and you'll understand what rocky boy is sayin just on a smaller scale. They have the right to take what they want, when they want , and however much of it. Just the way it is and will be

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tman

I must say that all factors must be looked at and managed when or even if the ministry changes anything. It will be pointless if the ministry doesn't attempt to monitor native harvesting of moose especially from a numbers research stand point. I'm not blaming natives but the ministry this year targeted only non native, tax paying, licence purchasing hunters. So to me it appears they are pointing they finger at us alone when if there really needs to be a change all factors affecting moose numbers must be managed and that includes natives. Now if natives understand the moose numbers are dropping isn't it within their best interest to contribute to the research and help manage the heard rather then sit back and watch from the comfy entitlement chair?? Again not harping on native rights but I just don't understand why natives would not voluntarily enter the effort the save this valuable resource. Another note on our way back from archery last season we had seen 2 bulls and 1 cow, no calves. No chance for shots as moose were either not open or close enough. Not even our poacher crossbow partner could get off a wounding 200 yard shot....lol ( I had to) We stopped in wawa for gas and seen a couple of bull racks in a trailer driven by 2 guys. We had a chat and turns out they were American natives coming up to shoot our moose with rifles during the archery season... just because they can and they were quite arrogant about it almost laughing at our laws. Like most natives I have seen hunting they had 4 wheelers, large trucks and trailers etc... I don't see how we can allow that??!!! Like I said my hope is that all necessary changes need to be addressed and hopefully the native one will be as well and I know our government is too chicken to go there so I'm hoping the natives can open up that conversation

---

Unfortunately,these posts are spot-on. First Nations treaties guarantees their right to hunt and fish when,where and how they deem necessary under the federal Indian Act. The provinces are totally impotent to intervene (Caledonia). There is,in effect,no such thing as an international border between Canada and The US when it comes to First Nations. The rights are guaranteed under The Charter of Rights and amendments to the US Constitution. Until our governments "grow a pair",recognize the position of the United Nations in declaring First Nations legislation as demeaning,racist and an effectual Apparthied Policy much like the former policies of South Africa,there will never be any hope for the First Nations of either country to eliminate poverty and despair.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by outdoorlife

what measures do we take in Ontario to protect sensitive/critically important calving grounds? Other provinces close highways, fishing and water traffic if they have to. What sort of inconveniences are Ontarians willing to put up with to improve calving. The answer to this question, currently, is none.

---

Moose don't really have 'calving grounds'...they calve where they live all year. I think you're confusing migrating caribou issues with moose issues - two totally different sets of problems.

..Unless you consider elimination of bears and wolves from calving grounds the issue.

How about the MNR closing the non resident hunt.
No more tags for non residents.
Just a thought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gunter

How about the MNR closing the non resident hunt.
No more tags for non residents.
Just a thought.

---

It wouldn't make any appreciable difference because the non-resident harvest is merely a drop-in-the-bucket compared to the rest of us. The entire south of Ontario below the French-Mattawa is already closed to non-resident Moose hunting and has been for decades..

The non-resident harvest is very small in most WMUs. Someone suggested closing down Aboriginal moose hunting for a period to see the population rebound, and yet no one has suggested closing down licensed hunting. A short-term closure of all moose hunting by all parties would likely result in an increase in moose populations, at least until skewed sex ratios became an issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by werner.reiche

Moose don't really have 'calving grounds'...they calve where they live all year. I think you're confusing migrating caribou issues with moose issues - two totally different sets of problems.

..Unless you consider elimination of bears and wolves from calving grounds the issue.

---

Perhaps "calving ground" not the best term. My understanding is a cow moose will not put up with very much human intrusion into a preferred calving area before abandoning it for future years. I'm sure they abandon those sites if they're bothered repeatedly by predators at them as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by outdoorlife

Perhaps "calving ground" not the best term. My understanding is a cow moose will not put up with very much human intrusion into a preferred calving area before abandoning it for future years.

---

Never heard that theory before and it doesn't make much sense, given that moose don't have a 'preferred calving area'. They calve where they live. What you seem to be saying is that human intrusion into moose range will cause moose to abandon the area, which we know to be false.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolfhunter

I think its a combination of ALL the above. Native hunters, Crossbows, deer pushed into area, increase of predators, city expansion. There are probably a few more as well, like restricting tags so guide outfits can use them, etc,etc,etc......

---

Hey, didn't you used to be HOWA 7mm??

I was lots of things

Aren't we all:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

It wouldn't make any appreciable difference because the non-resident harvest is merely a drop-in-the-bucket compared to the rest of us. The entire south of Ontario below the French-Mattawa is already closed to non-resident Moose hunting and has been for decades..

---

We were up in Gerelton 3 years ego for a archery moose hunt.
four of us from Ontario
All the rest of the archery hunters were from the states six in total.
I had a talk with them they come up every year easy to get tags they pay for them.
And yes they had 2 moose in the cooler.

How about we all don't buy a tag next year that will wake up the MNR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moe

Maybe not selling over 100,000 calf tags would help a little bit?

---

That would be a great start!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by werner.reiche

Moose don't really have 'calving grounds'...they calve where they live all year. I think you're confusing migrating caribou issues with moose issues - two totally different sets of problems.

..Unless you consider elimination of bears and wolves from calving grounds the issue.

---

I was into the impression that cows do have a calving ground, a place they give birth every years (if nothing pouch them out of the area).
With selective logging, this is kind of things they look for, they can not cut a tree 300ft around such an area, same with hawk and owl nest, and so on..... A couple of years ago while getting firewood on crown, I meet the person in charge of selecting trees and looking for such things. I was quite envious......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seabast

I was into the impression that cows do have a calving ground, a place they give birth every years (if nothing pouch them out of the area).
With selective logging, this is kind of things they look for, they can not cut a tree 300ft around such an area, same with hawk and owl nest, and so on..... A couple of years ago while getting firewood on crown, I meet the person in charge of selecting trees and looking for such things. I was quite envious......

---

Never heard of that before. Only protection given is a buffer around streams and ponds. Re: nesting trees - only the tree is protected with a blue W - no buffer around it.

Identifying a calving ground as you have described would require collaring the cow and following her around to see where she calves....do you really think this is done???

They do protect some areas for moose "moose pastures"...and do cuts to improve moose habitat though.

No need to boycott the moose draw in future years - it's already started! More and more guys on this forum have already stated that they've given up and have quit huntin moose. Many more are going to other provinces. Once these guys stop going they will probably never return. That revenue is lost forever and also the extra tags that they've purchased for the wives, kids, relatives etc (to improve their odds in the draw) ..

Wait till the moose hunt is over this year and more guys see nothing, nothing, and nothing! They too will drop out. I've been moosin for 27 yrs and we have done extremely well BUT the last 3 yrs have been brutal. Lucky to hear a couple and see one or two. Sure not like it was! Now I hear rumblings of units being closed to sport hunting. These are the same units the MNR wanted the excessive moose reduction in the first place - part of the "starve the wolfs out" save a caribou mentality! Rather then a management program reducing predators and keeping other game populations high (with all the revenues generated) our MNR is creating a wasteland which eliminates sport hunting and also threatens the numbers available for native harvest. Sportsmen and natives should be united against this plan and not blaming and finger pointing each other!

And to think those biologists went to school and were educated to take this direction is mind-boggling. And the bean collectors counting the tax dollars allowed this to happen! WOW! This is turning into Laurel & Hardy "Who's on first.."

good luck to all .. I leave on Tuesday for what may be my last moose hunt in Ontario .... we will see???

Skeeter

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by werner.reiche

Never heard of that before. Only protection given is a buffer around streams and ponds. Re: nesting trees - only the tree is protected with a blue W - no buffer around it.

Identifying a calving ground as you have described would require collaring the cow and following her around to see where she calves....do you really think this is done???

They do protect some areas for moose "moose pastures"...and do cuts to improve moose habitat though.

---

Also to some extent , winter yarding areas are protected.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SK33T3R

No need to boycott the moose draw in future years - it's already started! More and more guys on this forum have already stated that they've given up and have quit huntin moose. Many more are going to other provinces. Once these guys stop going they will probably never return. That revenue is lost forever and also the extra tags that they've purchased for the wives, kids, relatives etc (to improve their odds in the draw) ..

Wait till the moose hunt is over this year and more guys see nothing, nothing, and nothing! They too will drop out. I've been moosin for 27 yrs and we have done extremely well BUT the last 3 yrs have been brutal. Lucky to hear a couple and see one or two. Sure not like it was! Now I hear rumblings of units being closed to sport hunting. These are the same units the MNR wanted the excessive moose reduction in the first place - part of the "starve the wolfs out" save a caribou mentality! Rather then a management program reducing predators and keeping other game populations high (with all the revenues generated) our MNR is creating a wasteland which eliminates sport hunting and also threatens the numbers available for native harvest. Sportsmen and natives should be united against this plan and not blaming and finger pointing each other!

And to think those biologists went to school and were educated to take this direction is mind-boggling. And the bean collectors counting the tax dollars allowed this to happen! WOW! This is turning into Laurel & Hardy "Who's on first.."

good luck to all .. I leave on Tuesday for what may be my last moose hunt in Ontario .... we will see???

Skeeter

---

I have never heard of any movement afoot of WMU's being closed to sport hunting and I wouldn't believe a word of it. Do you have any links or any provable, supportive information to support the claim?

I doubt the OFAH has the stomach to lobby against the unregulated native harvest.

In regard to hunting privileges by natives, we don't need new laws we just need the police etc to enforce what is already law Natives by treaty rights can hunt unoccupied land, that does not include mines, forestation and oil wells they are not allowed to hunt, without a license, but they can hunt on their own territory any time without a license any time, just not your backyard.

Quote:

---

How about the MNR closing the non resident hunt.
No more tags for non residents.
Just a thought.

---

I don't think this would bode well with the tourist operators who rely on this tourism for their livelihood. The cancellation of the spring bear hunt hit them hard enough.

Quote:

---

I had a talk with them they come up every year easy to get tags they pay for them.
And yes they had 2 moose in the cooler.

---

If you know of lodges, etc that are selling outfitter moose tags to clients...call the MNRF. It is illegal for them to do so.

Hence why I hunt Quebec. Ontario will never see another dollar of mine for moose. Quebec has it right, the management is above par compared to Ontario and other provinces. The mandatory reporting of every animal taken has/does help with the management, they take hunter input on management ideas, no offence to natives, but there is no native hunt, they are to hunt under the same rules and regulations as the non natives, in most cases its two licences required per one moose (three in some areas), seasons are generally a couple weeks not months, they acknowledge the predators and adjust seasons and limits to regulate on a yearly basis, biologists and wildlife techs spend all year in the bush doing research not just flying around in a chopper a couple times a winter, they create habitats (ie: controlled cuts) to keep animals healthy during harsh conditions if needed, and unlike Ontario aren't concerned about the revenue, they will make whatever changes necessary to keep the population of game stable.

example: A moose hunt in our ZEC generally is as follows: three licences for one moose, moose allowed would be bulls only and every second year would be bull, cow, and calf.
Recently the area had experienced an increase in "dry cow" harvest between the years of 2007-2010, in 2011 they implemented a cow draw for residents only until 2017 for x number of tags per year. Since then the number of cows have increased as well as cows with calves have increased drastically in two years, and now to help build the population even further, they have prohibited a calf harvest for the next two years. So yes for me, it will be bull only hunting for the next two years, which I'm ok with. Point being, issues are addressed immediately to benefit the population, they don't talk about it for years and only play with tag numbers.


Ontario could learn a thing or two from this system, and if they want to maintain any kind of moose hunt in the province, there are some changes to be made immediately.

Having a ZEC system would be the best. A well managed ZEC is profitable, and there is $ incentive to ensure healthy population levels. It also eliminates turf wars between hunt groups on crown land.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cumminsdsl

Hence why I hunt Quebec. Ontario will never see another dollar of mine for moose. Quebec has it right, the management is above par compared to Ontario and other provinces. The mandatory reporting of every animal taken has/does help with the management, they take hunter input on management ideas, no offence to natives, but there is no native hunt, they are to hunt under the same rules and regulations as the non natives, in most cases its two licences required per one moose (three in some areas), seasons are generally a couple weeks not months, they acknowledge the predators and adjust seasons and limits to regulate on a yearly basis, biologists and wildlife techs spend all year in the bush doing research not just flying around in a chopper a couple times a winter, they create habitats (ie: controlled cuts) to keep animals healthy during harsh conditions if needed, and unlike Ontario aren't concerned about the revenue, they will make whatever changes necessary to keep the population of game stable.

example: A moose hunt in our ZEC generally is as follows: three licences for one moose, moose allowed would be bulls only and every second year would be bull, cow, and calf.
Recently the area had experienced an increase in "dry cow" harvest between the years of 2007-2010, in 2011 they implemented a cow draw for residents only until 2017 for x number of tags per year. Since then the number of cows have increased as well as cows with calves have increased drastically in two years, and now to help build the population even further, they have prohibited a calf harvest for the next two years. So yes for me, it will be bull only hunting for the next two years, which I'm ok with. Point being, issues are addressed immediately to benefit the population, they don't talk about it for years and only play with tag numbers.


Ontario could learn a thing or two from this system, and if they want to maintain any kind of moose hunt in the province, there are some changes to be made immediately.

---

Great post and information. I wholeheartedly agree!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cumminsdsl

Hence why I hunt Quebec. Ontario will never see another dollar of mine for moose. Quebec has it right, the management is above par compared to Ontario and other provinces. The mandatory reporting of every animal taken has/does help with the management, they take hunter input on management ideas, no offence to natives, but there is no native hunt, they are to hunt under the same rules and regulations as the non natives, in most cases its two licences required per one moose (three in some areas), seasons are generally a couple weeks not months, they acknowledge the predators and adjust seasons and limits to regulate on a yearly basis, biologists and wildlife techs spend all year in the bush doing research not just flying around in a chopper a couple times a winter, they create habitats (ie: controlled cuts) to keep animals healthy during harsh conditions if needed, and unlike Ontario aren't concerned about the revenue, they will make whatever changes necessary to keep the population of game stable.

example: A moose hunt in our ZEC generally is as follows: three licences for one moose, moose allowed would be bulls only and every second year would be bull, cow, and calf.
Recently the area had experienced an increase in "dry cow" harvest between the years of 2007-2010, in 2011 they implemented a cow draw for residents only until 2017 for x number of tags per year. Since then the number of cows have increased as well as cows with calves have increased drastically in two years, and now to help build the population even further, they have prohibited a calf harvest for the next two years. So yes for me, it will be bull only hunting for the next two years, which I'm ok with. Point being, issues are addressed immediately to benefit the population, they don't talk about it for years and only play with tag numbers.


Ontario could learn a thing or two from this system, and if they want to maintain any kind of moose hunt in the province, there are some changes to be made immediately.

---

Sure sounds like they are doing it right, but I have a question. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I thought most First Nation treaty hunting and fishing rights were federally controlled, not provincial. If Quebec has somehow managed to circumvent this, then Ontario should grow a set and implement some of the same practices to better manage the herd. But when it comes to natives, I really can't see Queens Park doing anything.

The one big complaint I hear from Quebeckers and foreigners (anyone else) alike, is that because there is no party hunting, when the 2-3 tags are used, you are forced to stop hunting moose, which for me would be a major deterrent considering the time and money spent on a week long moose hunt. At the very least there better be some real good fishing or even bear hunting available if I use my tag in the first couple of days and have to sit around on my arse for the rest of the week.

Cheers

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smitty55

Sure sounds like they are doing it right, but I have a question. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I thought most First Nation treaty hunting and fishing rights were federally controlled, not provincial. If Quebec has somehow managed to circumvent this, then Ontario should grow a set and implement some of the same practices to better manage the herd. But when it comes to natives, I really can't see Queens Park doing anything.

The one big complaint I hear from Quebeckers and foreigners (anyone else) alike, is that because there is no party hunting, when the 2-3 tags are used, you are forced to stop hunting moose, which for me would be a major deterrent considering the time and money spent on a week long moose hunt. At the very least there better be some real good fishing or even bear hunting available if I use my tag in the first couple of days and have to sit around on my arse for the rest of the week.

Cheers

---

I am not sure as to how they have regulated the natives, but do know there are only two areas in the southern part of the province that natives can execute their harvest right, and is still watched closely by the MNRF. The camp that is next to us (2km away) is owned by a native (also a Québec resident) and he hunts and fishes Algonquin Park and elsewhere in Ontario every year because they can "do what they want". I am keeping in his good books though, so I can purchase his camp when he finally decides to sell, lol.

And yes, unfortunately once your tag is on an animal, your hunt for that species is over. We generally hunt birds, fish, cut wood, work on the camp and stands/trails, and of course have the odd pint, sometimes even before 11am:rolleyes:.

Saying that, we generally have no more than 6 guys in our camp and even though we would be allowed, we don't shoot more than one (unless a calf), mainly for our own management and our deer hunt usually fills the freezer. But I will ask if one can still go alongside someone that is still legal to hunt and call or something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FishFrenzy

Only 1 in 5 natives live on the reserve, so your notion that the population booms are happening in areas outside of city centres would be wrong. Just like the vast majority of Canadians, I live where there is work (the GTA) and an opportunity to provide for my family.

You can feel however you would like, but keep in mind not even biologists have a grasp on what factors are contributing to the decline. Pointing fingers at one group (natives, cross-bow hunters, lazy people not retrieving dead animals, ect....) isn't going to solve the issue. If you're concerned, write your MPP, the OFAH, and the MNR; have your voice heard. Only once people understand the issue can we begin to solve it. All groups within Ontario have a vested interest in the preservation of our heritage and culture - despite what many think, the Native community cares a great deal about wild game and the environment.

FishFrenzy

---

I don't think anyone is pointing a single finger, there are multiple issues but unfortunately there is a lack of data. As good stewards of the land I believe Natives and non-Natives should be reporting kills until we can figure this out.

I agree that the example of one Native member taking 11 moose before the season opens is not representative but a few cases of this in an area can severely impact populations.

You are right that only 1 in 5 Ontario Natives live on reserves yet nearly 50% (140k) enjoy the same hunting rights of those who live on reserves (Status). There are about 125k Natives living in cities in Southern Ontario. Its probably safe to say that 150k or 50% of the Native population in Ontario is within reasonable distance (weekend/day trip) to moose hunting grounds (most of which are likely status). That's a pretty big pool of potential hunters not to mention those Native hunters who are willing to travel from southern Ontario just like me.