Ontario’s sweeping Moose Project proposal leaves hunters reeling. Have your say now.

After seeing unprecedented tag cuts in 2014, moose hunters face even more restrictions in 2015

MNRF-proposed moose hunting changes could affect your 2015 hunt and beyond.
Will you speak out? Visit www.ofah.org/moose for more information and see the OFAH provincial press release here: http://www.ofah.org/news/sweeping-mo...oposal-ontario.

Between Feb 6, 2015 and March 9, 2015 the MNRF is inviting the public to comment on the proposed moose hunting changes for 2015 and 2016.

Go to the Environmental Registry (EBR) http://www.ebr.gov.on.ca and search for posting #012-3413 to read about the proposed changes. Write a formal comment by clicking on the SUBMIT COMMENT button.

And you can join the discussion online with @ofah using the hashtag #ONMoose.

Galen Eagle
Manager of Communications
OFAH

Good, they should do more.

I want moose in Ontario in the future.

I would rather have moose to hunt 20 years from now when I can take my kids than have better odds of a tag now. Bring back the spring bear hunt, limit or eliminate calf and possible cow hunting, come up with a solution for the first nations that doesn't involve shooting more than they need or can eat. I want the moose population to bounce back even if it means reduced hunting opportunities in the interim.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hunterdave

I would rather have moose to hunt 20 years from now when I can take my kids than have better odds of a tag now. Bring back the spring bear hunt, limit or eliminate calf and possible cow hunting, come up with a solution for the first nations that doesn't involve shooting more than they need or can eat. I want the moose population to bounce back even if it means reduced hunting opportunities in the interim.

---

Where is that darn "Like" button.

Bring in a bull only system with a lottery, I don't care how many moose calves die in the winter, if we as hunters go in and shoot 100 moose calves than that is a guarantee that 100 calves die before they have a shot.

Why are we still shooting cows? No logic at all to the current system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

Good, they should do more.

I want moose in Ontario in the future.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hunterdave

I would rather have moose to hunt 20 years from now when I can take my kids than have better odds of a tag now.

---

Nice to see responses like these.

Moose numbers are down not just in Ontario but elsewhere. I gather there's some panic in Minnesota, for example. I can't claim to have any handle on actual moose numbers, actual population trends, or causes, but I do know I see a lot of complaints about how bad things are.

Something has to be done ... not sure I like seeing the OFAH push back.

i dont like the idea of only shortning the calf season, making the calf season only 2 weeks is only gonna compress all the hunters into the bush at the same time, posibly uping the number of moose taken, as they will be forced to move around alot more, and be more hunters in the bush to take them. we need limit calf harvest, i cant say it enough

We have very little control over mother nature. Can't really do much about bears and wolves or the severity of winters. What we can control is how many and what we kill and to some extent the habitat, especially the winter yarding areas. We need to reduce the harvest, plain and simple. Protect the cows and reduce the bull harvest for however long it takes to allow the herd to recover or at least match the carrying capacity. Nobody wants to make those decisions but we have no choice. Moose are not as spread out as deer nor are bulls as productive as breeders. A bull is done for the year after 3 cows if lucky. Remove too many bulls and you will have dry cows going into the winter yards. A dry cow eats as much as a pregnant one. All this points to the same solution. We need to reduce the kill.

We may need to reduce the southern 6-day hunt to every second year like it used to be,also. With cutting the northern calf harvest way back,all those calf hunters will come south. It'll be a mess. I sure hope they thought of that,too.

Hunter density can be easily controlled with tags. They could even go to date specific tags if needed. Drastic but maybe a solution?

Why doesn't the OFAH offer other solutions?

What I'm getting from the OFAH article is not that they are taking issue with conservation measures in general. The issue seems to be that the MNR is reducing hunting opportunities while still soaking money out of hunters. Why not drastically reduce the number of calf tags issued instead of cutting back the open season on calves to achieve the end goal? The answer is fairly obvious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iannolan

What I'm getting from the OFAH article is not that they are taking issue with conservation measures in general. The issue seems to be that the MNR is reducing hunting opportunities while still soaking money out of hunters. Why not drastically reduce the number of calf tags issued instead of cutting back the open season on calves to achieve the end goal? The answer is fairly obvious.

---

Hunters are the only ones putting money into this.

If you choose not to moose hunt and choose not to buy a tag then you save money.

If you choose to spend your money for a 2 week calf hunt then you made that choice.

I still want more restrictions.

I wonder if the OFAH people will actually read this, many members do not want to pay the OFAH to push back where more should actually be done.

Most hunters only hunt one or (the lucky ones) 2 weeks anyway. This will only restrict locals. And it will put EVERYONE in the bush at the SAME TIME....possibly penalize shift workers who may not get one of those 2 weeks off.......

I would be in favour of tags/lottery/points system for calves, perhaps make calves worth half a cow tag in number of points/GGS etc.

More and more I'm thinking FW may become a fall bear hunter, or a deer hunter. Looks like I'll get to try my hand at fall turkey too.

I completely agree that there needs to be more restrictions. I just take issue with the fact that revenue for the province trumps sound management strategies. I would like to believe that less hunters will choose to buy a calf tag as a result of the changes but will the change be significant enough to make a difference? The way to guarantee that less calves are taken is to reduce the number of tags issued. Making the hunt less appealing by reducing the number of days in the season is a half hearted attempt to do something to address the problem without affecting the cash cow that hunters are for the province.

Managing our moose herd as a cash flow asset is wrong on all counts. Wildlife management should be science based not fiscal or political based.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by terrym

Managing our moose herd as a cash flow asset is wrong on all counts. Wildlife management should be science based not fiscal or political based.

---

OFAH? MNRF? Are you there? Pay attention to this.^^^^^^

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hunterdave

OFAH? MNRF? Are you there? Pay attention to this.^^^^^^

---

…I guess not. There were many, many good posts on here and I feel that there is a general consensus when it comes to calves, cows, bear & wolf as well as the aboriginal harvest.
I don’t see anything of that being addressed by the OFAH! If that’s all they are going to fight for, they won’t see a single penny from me again.

OFAH has offered a solution, I got an FaceBook message last night to fill out your oppostion to bill/proposition http://news.ontario.ca/mnr/en/2015/0...n-efforts.html and complete the Completing a short online survey, completing the, Commenting on regulatory proposals in notice 012-3413 on the Environmental Registry. I am not a moose hunter yet, but here is your chance to comment.

Here is the actual link for comments page, as shown in post above. http://www.ebr.gov.on.ca/ERS-WEB-Ext...U2&language=en

I am thoroughly dismayed at the heavy allocation of tags to outfitters, and do believe, based on the amount of advertising in ODD Mag this month, it is in OFAH best interests to stay mum (read avertising revenue) could risk a showdown with us the readers of ODD Mag. They (OFAH) are walking a fine line between our (hunters) and the advertising money IMHO......

The wording in the 2016 regulations changes:
Description of Regulation:




Moose play an important role in Ontario’s ecosystems and are an integral
component of the province’s rich biodiversity. Moose contribute economic and
ecological benefits to the people of Ontario, and are highly valued by
Aboriginal Peoples. Recent population surveys showed declines in moose
populations in many parts of northern Ontario, a trend also being seen in other
North American jurisdictions.

The Moose Project was undertaken to explore potential management actions to
address or mitigate pressures on moose populations such as harvest, predation,
parasites, climate and changing habitat. During the first phase of
consultations, opportunities for early action to support healthy and resilient
moose populations in Ontario were identified. In response, as an initial step
and beginning in 2015, the following moose harvest management strategy is being
proposed: limiting the calf moose hunting season across northern Ontario to a
two week period.

In addition, Ontario will continue to extend opportunities to discuss new
moose population objectives and, based on input received, will address the
broader range of pressures on the moose population (such as climate change,
diseases and interactions with other species (i.e., deer, bear and wolf
populations)). There will be further opportunity to discuss and comment on
additional actions in coming months.

Harvest management strategy proposed for implementation beginning in 2015:


• Establish a two-week resident and non-resident open hunting season for calf
and adult moose across northern Ontario, beginning on the Saturday closest to
October 22; all allowable firearms (as per existing seasons) could be used
during this season. Outside of this two-week season, calf moose could not be
harvested. Hunting for an adult moose would still be permitted for the remainder
of the open season with a valid moose licence and in accordance with existing
rules.

For implementation in 2016:

• Delay the start of resident and non-resident moose hunting seasons across
much of northern Ontario by one week.

To implement the proposed changes, amendments to various regulations under
the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act (FWCA) would be required to establish new
seasons based on age or other factors, change the seasons for resident and
non-resident moose hunting and make associated consequential amendments:

A) In Wildlife Management Units (WMUs) 1A, 1C, 1D, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7A, 7B, 8,
9A, 9B, 11A, 11B, 12A, 12B, 13, 14, 15A, 15B, 16A, 16B, 16C, 17, 18A, 18B, 19,
21A, 21B, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38,
39, 40, 41, and 42
i. establish an open season for calf and adult moose
which would begin the Saturday closest to October 22 and end on the second
following Friday, in any year; all allowable firearms could be used during this
season.

B) Beginning in 2016, change the opening date of the resident and
non-resident moose hunting seasons in WMUs 5, 6, 7A, 7B, 8, 9A, 9B, 11A, 11B,
12A, 12B, 13, 14, 15A, 15B, 19, 21A, 21B, 22, 23, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34,
35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, and 42 to begin one week later.



Purpose of Regulation:




To consult on proposed amendments to moose hunting regulations as part of the
Moose Project, in order to support healthy and resilient moose populations that
provide ecological, social, economic and cultural benefits to the people of
Ontario.

Eliminate calf hunting and reduce number of cows take some of the gun tags and put them into bow hunting, it's harder to get the moose into bow range hopefully means less moose taken more people getting into bows means same money for ministry and gives the same opportunities to hunters

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waftrudnir

…I guess not. There were many, many good posts on here and I feel that there is a general consensus when it comes to calves, cows, bear & wolf as well as the aboriginal harvest.
I don’t see anything of that being addressed by the OFAH! If that’s all they are going to fight for, they won’t see a single penny from me again.

---

If you don't see any of that then you aren't looking. I'm a former board member and I've seen the letter that OFAH sent to the MNR with their concerns and recommendations, including Aboriginal harvest, predator hunting, etc. Open your eyes - the OFAH is accomplishing way more than the people on this forum, most of who probably won't even take the time to submit a comment on the proposal. Less talk, more walk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dude Bro

If you don't see any of that then you aren't looking. I'm a former board member and I've seen the letter that OFAH sent to the MNR with their concerns and recommendations, including Aboriginal harvest, predator hunting, etc. Open your eyes - the OFAH is accomplishing way more than the people on this forum, most of who probably won't even take the time to submit a comment on the proposal. Less talk, more walk.

---

look at the press release and what's being focused on

Look back to the start of the tag system and last year to the reduction of the tags in WMU's. As always in the past the only action taken by MNR is to target the licence buying hunters. Here we go again starting this year only the licenced hunters are being targeted. The MNR knows how many tags they issue but they also stated they have no numbers for number of moose harvested by select groups. This band aid solution will only require more cuts later and that will also be from the licence buying hunters later. That's you and me. Nothing implemented by the MNR before has made a difference so why will this work? If the MNR wants to increase the moose population start by addressing everyone that plays a role in this. I have been around too long and have seen nothing work to date.:sad:

I understand them wanting to reduce the calves taken by limiting the hunt, However, outside of those 2 weeks, if a cow is taken that has a calf, the calf probably won't survive the winter alone. They have good intentions but I am not sure it is that well thought out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jakezilla

I understand them wanting to reduce the calves taken by limiting the hunt, However, outside of those 2 weeks, if a cow is taken that has a calf, the calf probably won't survive the winter alone. They have good intentions but I am not sure it is that well thought out.

---

Good point.

I must admit I'm shocked at the negativity towards the OFAH in this thread. The fact is the MNR is trying to control the moose population issue simply by controlling the legal hunters. There are so many other factors involved that need to be looked at. This MNR change is not the answer. So the OFAH put out a notice suggesting people make comments. Getting everyone involved and making comments is a good thing. We all have ideas, they all need to be looked at. Sadly I'm pretty sure the MNR has already decided and will make this change no matter what people say. But controlling hunter only, is not the solution. I agree, there needs to be change, but the MNR is trying to make a minor change while keeping all the licence revenue and its not nearly enough. Many hunters agree change is needed, this issue is the MNR isn't using good science to do it.

Discussions are GOOD.
The fact that OFAH and MNR are both encouraging us to provide feedback and express opinions is also GOOD.
I hope everyone who is commenting here is also putting their comments on the designated page. My comments were submitted there this evening and I don't mind sharing them here as well. Keep in mind that I am by no means a "die hard" moose hunter. :)

Here are my ideas:

1- Stop the moose hunt in Ontario for 2016 and 2017 seasons. This should include all outfitters. No tags sold and no moose hunt of any kind allowed until 2018.

2- For 2018 and 2019 seasons, only allow adult bulls to be harvested. Limited number of tags will be sold. Everyone will apply as equals without a preferred pool or any type of priority coming into play.

3- If a tangible improvement in the moose population occurs, we can then come up with additional moose hunting opportunities in some WMUs by the fall of 2020.

It is up to us to protect moose numbers in Ontario today, so that the future generations can enjoy having healthy populations of this magnificent animal. It has been my privilege to participate in two moose hunts in the past 35 years of hunting in Ontario, and although my group was never successful in a harvest, the hunt was no less than magical. It would be a shame for Ontario's younger hunters to lose their chances of going moose hunting in the coming decades.

#1 Reduce tags. #2 Reduce predators. #3 Shorten season. Not sure how many moose are taken in December with snowmobiles but have heard stories that it is quite easy. Why would you have or need a three month season on moose when pretty much everyone agrees they are in trouble. The aboriginals should also only be allowed to ha

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bushman

#1 Reduce tags. #2 Reduce predators. #3 Shorten season. Not sure how many moose are taken in December with snowmobiles but have heard stories that it is quite easy. Why would you have or need a three month season on moose when pretty much everyone agrees they are in trouble. The aboriginals should also only be allowed to ha

---

COMPUTER FROZE
Aboriginals should only be allowed to harvest in a set time frame,not at will and for subsistance,not to sell. Not picking on aboriginals here as i have aboriginal friends who completely agree with me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waftrudnir

look at the press release and what's being focused on

---

My point is that the press release isn't the only thing that the OFAH is doing. You're right that the press release doesn't hammer that point home, but probably only because they've already hammered it home directly to the mnr and in most of the media interviews that I heard last year after the massive tag cuts. Do they really need to re-hash every point in every press release?

I don't care what others have to say about this , but I believe we should at least eliminate, the non resident moose hunt.
I know its a money thing for outfitters but if we, as residents can't get a license , it does not make sense that only the rich can.
This is just my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JUDGE

I don't care what others have to say about this , but I believe we should at least eliminate, the non resident moose hunt.
I know its a money thing for outfitters but if we, as residents can't get a license , it does not make sense that only the rich can.
This is just my opinion.

---

And one with which I agree. Residents/tax payers first (well... first in line after the FN). Especially since many of the lodge owners themselves aren't residents or Canadian citizens.

One of the bullwark principles of hunting is conservation. Quite clearly,Moose populations are dropping across the board. We can't insist that Natural Resources is wrong,citing only anecdotal observations from some hunters in various areas,to the contrary. Our ONLY choice is to take biological scientific evidence at face value,BUT,we must ensure that there's no political interference in the process. Blindly rubber-stamping bureaucratic decisions has proven that we should never trust politicians. That's where organizations like OFAH come into play using sensible,non-partisan observation. To that end,their reputation is unrivalled and above reproach. If there was ever a time for effective lobbying,this is it. We all know that there's some extremely significant issues with this matter and a "one-size-fits-all" solution isn't an option. Likwise,finger-pointing and "would,shoulda,coulda" rhetoric is equally unhelpful. As hunters,we need to be the driving force behind all actions taken or risk appearing two-faced and self-serving feeding the sure-as-God-made-little-green-apples animal rights and anti-hunting front that's sure to be all over this thing. It'll be like swimming in quicksand if we're not careful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

One of the bullwark principles of hunting is conservation. Quite clearly,Moose populations are dropping across the board. We can't insist that Natural Resources is wrong,citing only anecdotal observations from some hunters in various areas,to the contrary. Our ONLY choice is to take biological scientific evidence at face value,BUT,we must ensure that there's no political interference in the process. Blindly rubber-stamping bureaucratic decisions has proven that we should never trust politicians. That's where organizations like OFAH come into play using sensible,non-partisan observation. To that end,their reputation is unrivalled and above reproach. If there was ever a time for effective lobbying,this is it. We all know that there's some extremely significant issues with this matter and a "one-size-fits-all" solution isn't an option. Likwise,finger-pointing and "would,shoulda,coulda" rhetoric is equally unhelpful. As hunters,we need to be the driving force behind all actions taken or risk appearing two-faced and self-serving feeding the sure-as-God-made-little-green-apples animal rights and anti-hunting front that's sure to be all over this thing. It'll be like swimming in quicksand if we're not careful.

---

Really?

So, we should not make any changes right now to reduce the moose that are taken so that they can take another 10 years to determine with the help of biologists what may be a better way to solve this problem?

Stop killing moose that can have babies and stop killing their babies.

If I have a farm and I want to increase numbers I don't kill off 50% of the babies and 5% of the adult females, I kill only some of the males and use the rest to breed the adult females and the young adult females as they come into maturity. I also selectively kill the adult males, not just every one I see.

I would much rather we stop shooting moose period because if we take so long that the government has a chance to talk about this again there will not be enough moose to recover.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

Really?

So, we should not make any changes right now to reduce the moose that are taken so that they can take another 10 years to determine with the help of biologists what may be a better way to solve this problem?

Stop killing moose that can have babies and stop killing their babies.

If I have a farm and I want to increase numbers I don't kill off 50% of the babies and 5% of the adult females, I kill only some of the males and use the rest to breed the adult females and the young adult females as they come into maturity. I also selectively kill the adult males, not just every one I see.

I would much rather we stop shooting moose period because if we take so long that the government has a chance to talk about this again there will not be enough moose to recover.

---

Do I understand correctly that it's your position the Moose hunt should be shut down entirely? How do we maintain any sense of balance with that approach? That's like throwing the baby out with the bath water. Remember,once something like this is lost,it's gone forever. Do we really want to go there?

Western Ontario, shut the moose season down in wmu 7b, 8 and have resident only for wmu #5. Make decisions wmu specific.

As long as a hunter has a calf tag, and he see's one, he will shoot it. Even if deep down he knows he shouldn't take the calf.

We would run the risk of skewing the sex ratio so much that overall breeding would decline. The only way to avoid this would be to drastically reduce hunting opportunities. Conservation trumps hunting opportunities, but there are options that preserve more hunting opportunities and allow moose populations to increase.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

... If there was ever a time for effective lobbying,this is it. ...

---

Absolutely!

X4..Im in..Stop the moose hunt for 3 or 4 years..every year guys get on here and complain about seeing no moose..Now they are complaing about the season being shortened..and the rant goes on..

Yes I have moose hunted for 28 years..enjoyed every minute of it..but I am like some of the other guys..not seeing any..its a real bummer.. When I have gone from seeing 22 moose in a single season..to going out 22 times and only seeing one....yes, something has to be done..

Watch the same thing will happen to the deer...Like I told one guy in our deer group in the controlled hunt..how many do we need...Leave some for your kids to hunt..His reply was " they give me tags, so Im going to fill them"..

All in all..no body will like what is going to happen..so lets go kill them all..Then we can sit around the back yard and pretend..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chris lavoie

As long as a hunter has a calf tag, and he see's one, he will shoot it. Even if deep down he knows he shouldn't take the calf.

---

umm... yeah... "slaps forehead" kinda sounds like you just agread with what ive bin argueing for 3 days LOL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

Nice to see responses like these.

Moose numbers are down not just in Ontario but elsewhere. I gather there's some panic in Minnesota, for example. I can't claim to have any handle on actual moose numbers, actual population trends, or causes, but I do know I see a lot of complaints about how bad things are.

Something has to be done ... not sure I like seeing the OFAH push back.

---

Terry
With regards to the OFAH pushing back there are a few issues that have been overlooked and should be addressed
1- consider this, opening weekend and you have a cow tag in your pocket, cow with calf walks in front of you in a cut, in 2014 you were able to shoot both now all of a sudden you cant, you gonna shoot the cow and orphan the calf , tell me wheres the Logic?
2-moving the opener in 2016 to the second week, how is that going to help the moose population, trust me the success rate will go through the roof, a lot more gangs will be teaming up to fill tags and the chances of accidents are going to increase
i can go on but I'm sure everyone has an opinion, I'm all for change, BUT don't just shove these ridiculous proposals down our throats with out thinking them through

But then again its not actually about saving the moose, if you look into this and read between the lines the MNR still needs to get their monies some how and how better a way to keep the money from licenses coming in than having a "2 week window to hunt calves"

so instead of giving the calf a chance to survive we are gonna just outright shoot it? kinda like a doctor telling a cancer patient, you may make it, but why risk it, we have approved assisted suicide, so im gonna go ahead with that...

i have a calf hanging around my place with no mama, looks good and healthy...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chris lavoie

Western Ontario, shut the moose season down in wmu 7b, 8 and have resident only for wmu #5. Make decisions wmu specific.

As long as a hunter has a calf tag, and he see's one, he will shoot it. Even if deep down he knows he shouldn't take the calf.

---

I agree with changes being unit specific, BUT what will happen is a massive influx of hunters going to WMU's with minimal changes WMU 21A is a good example
And DO NOT close the hunt at all, once its closed we WILL NEVER get it back

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishy steve

so instead of giving the calf a chance to survive we are gonna just outright shoot it? kinda like a doctor telling a cancer patient, you may make it, but why risk it, we have approved assisted suicide, so im gonna go ahead with that...

i have a calf hanging around my place with no mama, looks good and healthy...

---

A lot of hunters will, we can all say what we want sitting behind a key board but when you're out in the bush and its standing there chances are that 90% of hunters will take the calf!!
I say just stop the calf hunt for about 5-7 yrs and see if this actually does help in increasing the moose herd

They don't have to shut it down. They already have the perfect tool to manage it, " the tag system". All they have to do is reduce the tags. In some units not so much, in others drastically. One thing that will be tricky during the no calf season is party hunting. By law you need to be in communication with a tag holder. So if the guy with the tag is 10kms away and you don't have a calf tag to hunt off of you in theory are hunting illegally. most of moose country doesn't have reliable cell service if any and radios are no hell. People will have to hunt closer during the no calves season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 270 WBY

I say just stop the calf hunt for about 5-7 yrs and see if this actually does help in increasing the moose herd

---

I agree. That and reduce the cow tags. You also have to be careful to not over harvest bulls. They aren't as agressive breeders as deer are and you don't want a bunch of dry cows going into winter. You should almost think of retarding the bull harvest to make sure enough are around to breed as many cows as possible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by terrym

They don't have to shut it down. They already have the perfect tool to manage it, " the tag system". All they have to do is reduce the tags. In some units not so much, in others drastically. One thing that will be tricky during the no calf season is party hunting. By law you need to be in communication with a tag holder. So if the guy with the tag is 10kms away and you don't have a calf tag to hunt off of you in theory are hunting illegally. most of moose country doesn't have reliable cell service if any and radios are no hell. People will have to hunt closer during the no calves season.

---

Terry you know damn well what goes on during the moose hunt, 10kms is nothing!!
What we truly need is a bigger CO presence

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by terrym

I agree. That and reduce the cow tags. You also have to be careful yo not over harvest bulls. They aren't as agressive breeders as deer are and you don't want a bunch of dry cows going into winter. You should almost think of retarding the bull harvest to make sure enough are around to breed as many cows as possible.

---

A lot of mature healthy bulls are taken during the archery season before they actually breed and lets not get started on the NATIVE hunt

as i said before i live and hunt in 48 where we have a calf tag draw, and we have a ton of moose... so dont need to shut it down completely, just limit the tags, currently there are around a 100000 calf tags... if only 1% of those are filled thats still a 1000 calves taken...

I like the letter from OFAH to MNR, quite forceful.
It's dated June 2014. Where's the response? One of the biggest issues here is the lack of transparency from MNR as highlighted in the OFAH letter.
MNR should publish all available stats (collected with our money) and explain the reasoning behind the proposed changes.
I disagree with some posters implying that only the harvest can be managed (and then only in specific groups, which is absurd in its own right!), the habitat and predation should be managed as well. Both have been done successfully in other countries.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 270 WBY

Terry you know damn well what goes on during the moose hunt, 10kms is nothing!!
What we truly need is a bigger CO presence

---

Which is my point. If your buddy has the adult tag and you cant hunt calves that week you by law need to be within effective communication of him or you can ge charged. With the hole this Province is in financially we will be lucky to hang on to the few CO's we have now. The MNR is the easiest budget to raid and steal from. I don't think all of the ramifications of this new policy have sunk in yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by terrym

They don't have to shut it down. They already have the perfect tool to manage it, " the tag system". All they have to do is reduce the tags. In some units not so much, in others drastically. One thing that will be tricky during the no calf season is party hunting. By law you need to be in communication with a tag holder. So if the guy with the tag is 10kms away and you don't have a calf tag to hunt off of you in theory are hunting illegally. most of moose country doesn't have reliable cell service if any and radios are no hell. People will have to hunt closer during the no calves season.

---

so it will force hunters to hunt legaly? dirty buggers they are

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vincreasem Dufenshmirtz

I like the letter from OFAH to MNR, quite forceful.
It's dated June 2014. Where's the response? One of the biggest issues here is the lack of transparency from MNR as highlighted in the OFAH letter.
MNR should publish all available stats (collected with our money) and explain the reasoning behind the proposed changes.
I disagree with some posters implying that only the harvest can be managed (and then only in specific groups, which is absurd in its own right!), the habitat and predation should be managed as well. Both have been done successfully in other countries.

---

You can Increase the pressure on predators like wolves and bears but the reality is not many people hunt wolves and bears. It will have some impact but is nowhere near what some think it is. We also don't really know how extensive the native harvest is or at least they aren't making that public. so yes, the humans are the single most " controllable" variable in managing moose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishy steve

so it will force hunters to hunt legaly? dirty buggers they are

---

Laugh all you want but many hunters will be in a position where a cranky CO could lay a charge.

if they were hunting legaly there would be no issues... ranks up there with poaching... if they shot a bull moose 10 kms from the tag owner while calf hunting they have shot a moose without a tag... its illegal now...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by terrym

You can Increase the pressure on predators like wolves and bears but the reality is not many people hunt wolves and bears. It will have some impact but is nowhere near what some think it is. We also don't really know how extensive the native harvest is or at least they aren't making that public. so yes, the humans are the single most " controllable" variable in managing moose.

---

The FN hunters take a BOATLOAD of moose!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishy steve

if they were hunting legaly there would be no issues... ranks up there with poaching... if they shot a bull moose 10 kms from the tag owner while calf hunting they have shot a moose without a tag... its illegal now...

---

You're not getting my point. Before, you could be moose hunting 10kms away from the tag holder and if you had a calf license it was perfectly legal. Now you can't hunt calves so will have to be in constant contact with the tag holder. I can see alot of bear licenses getting sold this fall to get around this. Maybe thats what they are hoping for $$$$$

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 270 WBY

The FN hunters take a BOATLOAD of moose!!

---

Everybody knows that but it's never going to change. When have they ever actually lost ground / rights in recent history?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by terrym

You're not getting my point. Before, you could be moose hunting 10kms away from the tag holder and if you had a calf license it was perfectly legal. Now you can't hunt calves so will have to be in constant contact with the tag holder. I can see alot of bear licenses getting sold this fall to get around this. Maybe thats what they are hoping for $$$$$

---

providing you only shot a calf... if you were to take a bull or cow you would be illegal... because what if after you shot your moose, another group member shoots a moose as well, as he had no clue you shot your moose...

Party Hunting
A person may hunt moose, deer or black bear in a party even if the person has previously attached his or her game seal to a moose, deer or black bear. A person may also hunt elk in a party with some restrictions in addition to the conditions listed below - see page 53 for more information on Modified Party Hunting for Elk. The term "Party Hunting" means two or more persons hunting during an open season for moose, elk, deer or black bear under all of the following conditions:

1. Each person has a valid licence to hunt the big game species being hunted.
2. The total number of moose, elk, deer or black bear killed by the party does not exceed the total number of game seals held by the members of the party licensed to hunt that species.
3. The total number of moose, elk, deer or black bear of a specified sex, age or type killed by the party does not exceed the total number of game seals validated for that sex, age, or type that are held by members of the party.
4. All members of the party hunt together in the same Wildlife Management Unit or portion thereof for which the game seal is valid.
5. Each member of the party hunts within five kilometres of the person who holds the game seal that is valid for the wildlife being hunted.
6. Each member of the party must be able to reliably and immediately communicate with other members of the party.
7. All members of the party, including the person who holds the seal that is valid for the wildlife that the party is hunting, actively participate

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishy steve

providing you only shot a calf... if you were to take a bull or cow you would be illegal... because what if after you shot your moose, another group member shoots a moose as well, as he had no clue you shot your moose...

---

That's right. Not that a situation like that ever happens. .............:ninja:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by terrym

They don't have to shut it down. They already have the perfect tool to manage it, " the tag system". All they have to do is reduce the tags. In some units not so much, in others drastically. One thing that will be tricky during the no calf season is party hunting. By law you need to be in communication with a tag holder. So if the guy with the tag is 10kms away and you don't have a calf tag to hunt off of you in theory are hunting illegally. most of moose country doesn't have reliable cell service if any and radios are no hell. People will have to hunt closer during the no calves season.

---

The easiest way around this little technicality is for a hunter who has a Moose license without a tag MUST ​hunt within the 5km limit as set out in the Act in the same manner which now exists when the hunter has already used a tag. Easy-peasy.

I look at calf tags the same way I look at hen pheasant limits. If you want a wild population don't shoot the breeders and don't shoot the babies.

I'll still buy a moose tag because I want to support the MNRF and also, if I am lucky enough to get a tag, then maybe get myself some moose meat.

My concern would be as previously posted. A hunter with a cow tag only shoots the cow, the calf has almost zero chance of survival. Personally, I don't think hunters take as many calves as one might think. In 35 years of moose hunting, never missing a single year, our group has only taken 3 calves. Two of those were with the cow that was also taken.
Quite possibly a mandatory harvest reporting system for all hunters, licenced or native would at least result in some data.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 270 WBY

A lot of hunters will, we can all say what we want sitting behind a key board but when you're out in the bush and its standing there chances are that 90% of hunters will take the calf!!
I say just stop the calf hunt for about 5-7 yrs and see if this actually does help in increasing the moose herd

---

We have had a calf tag in zone 48 for over 10 years. Data suggests it hasn't helped increase the moose population.

Courts have ruled that FN hunters are bound by conservation concerns. I'd say there are some conservation concerns regarding moose in Ontario. Perhaps courts will rule that under these conditions FN hunters will need to report their harvest so that the MNR can manage moose with a complete set of harvest data? Am I dreaming?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanO

Courts have ruled that FN hunters are bound by conservation concerns. I'd say there are some conservation concerns regarding moose in Ontario. Perhaps courts will rule that under these conditions FN hunters will need to report their harvest so that the MNR can manage moose with a complete set of harvest data? Am I dreaming?

---

Yep,I'd say so. All this is covered by several treaties that,unless they get before the Supreme Court of Canada who is the ONLY authority to over-ride the Treaties,First Nations are sacrosanct. They could literally wipe out the entire herd and there isn't anything anyone can do about it.....not that they'd ever allow that to happen,of course.

CBC news had a story last night regarding wolf control by the BC and Alberta governements to protect caribou herds. Are wolves part of the problem in Ontario? I know bears are responsible for calf predation so I'm thinking the spring bear hunt needs expanding ASAP.

We can all agree to disagree about whats going on with moose populations. But we have a chance at least to have our opinion be heard, so we should all at least make use of that.

Its a shame that the changes they are proposing really have little chance of increasing the moose pop in ontario
The real issues that need tackling are First Nations harvest, predation, loss of habitat and not in that order!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanO

We have had a calf tag in zone 48 for over 10 years. Data suggests it hasn't helped increase the moose population.

---

must be a different 48 cause i have a ton of moose around my place...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 270 WBY

Its a shame that the changes they are proposing really have little chance of increasing the moose pop in ontario
The real issues that need tackling are First Nations harvest, predation, loss of habitat and not in that order!

---

right on!

you know it, I know it, and a bag of hammers knows it! Too bad the MNR, over-educated tax collectors don't know it!

The biggest issue in front of them is HOW TO KEEP THE $ FLOWING IN!

[QUOTE=SK33T3R;874905]right on!

you know it, I know it, and a bag of hammers knows it! Too bad the MNR, over-educated tax collectors don't know it!

The biggest issue in front of them is HOW TO KEEP THE $ FLOWING IN![/QUOTE

The money coming in is number one on the agenda not the well being of the moose herd

I can't believe some hunters have suggested closing the season. Might as well just close the deer season too since numbers are low and tags have also been cut.

Nothing will help the moose herd until every hunter has to be licenced and following the same rules.

We can blame predators about the loss of moose until the cows (no pun intended) come home. The biggest threat to the populations are us humans. There are too many of us for the moose population to go around. Might as well face it....the First Nation harvest is not going to change any time soon, you can try to kill all the predators you want but won't be able to and that is just nature taking its course anyways. So we have a choice....change what we do as far as the harvest or kill them until they're all gone and then whine about something else.

We need to comment on the proposals and if we don't like it....come up with some good suggestions to fix it.

If the MNRF was serious about the declining numbers, they would suspend calf and cow hunting in WMUs that show diminished populations for a couple of years. As a moose hunter, I would support this approach. I do not agree with the shortened calf season, as I believe it will lead to orphaned calves after week 2 that will not make it through the winter (ie can shoot the cow but after week 2 must let it's calf walk because it is out of season). But, the reality is that the MNRF wants hunter's money, and they won't get it by closing down seasons in specific WMUs.

Regardless of what the aerial surveys say, there are still large pockets of moose in some areas that have been identified as declining. The problem is that the data is extrapolated for the entire WMU, so if they survey a barren area, the assumption is made that the entire area is in the same state. I'm in an area that has good moose numbers contrary to what the survey implies, but can't get an adult tag, even though we see them on a daily basis during the season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishy steve

must be a different 48 cause i have a ton of moose around my place...

---

I'm not doubting your word Steve. The MNR stated that the evidence indicates the calf tag system hasn't made much difference in zone 48. They don't issue very many tags in 48 for that reason. There aren't many moose in the area of my camp (west of Deep River). Zone 48 is so large I'm not surprized there would be pockets of higher density.

ya that is the problem is the size of 48... when i started hunting the area there were very few moose, now we have more moose than deer, but deer seem to be bouncing back right now to, so that could even result in a negative impact on the moose... time shall tell...

All of these are excellent proposals posted here,but,every one of them will negatively impact revenue generation,to some extent, into government coffers. If they're posted to the E.B.R.,I'm very intereseted to see if the OMNRF actually impliment them or,as I suspect, this is simply an exercise in paying lip service to the problem while government,as usual,sucks and blows at the same time. Honestly,I'm not overly optimistic.

I've been reading the newer comments from all of the other threads on this forum and several on CGN and there's one thing that no one has mentioned,yet,is the high degree of mechanization of Moose hunting in this province. Everybody and their uncle is using ATV's to gain access to areas that,traditonally,have only been able to be accessed either by boat,aircraft or on foot. Many American and western Canada areas have seen ATV use disallowed for hunting. Maybe,it's something we should look at,also.

I think the use of ATV's has impacted all forms of hunting. When closing a road is suggested there's a near revolt. Snowmobiles have done the same thing to the trout populations in many Ontario lakes. Not many guys willing to portage in through the bugs when they can roar into the lake on a sled.

Some areas should be closed to ATV travel for sure.

Bingo. I have been saying this for years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

I've been reading the newer comments from all of the other threads on this forum and several on CGN and there's one thing that no one has mentioned,yet,is the high degree of mechanization of Moose hunting in this province. Everybody and their uncle is using ATV's to gain access to areas that,traditonally,have only been able to be accessed either by boat,aircraft or on foot. Many American and western Canada areas have seen ATV use disallowed for hunting. Maybe,it's something we should look at,also.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanO

I think the use of ATV's has impacted all forms of hunting. When closing a road is suggested there's a near revolt. Snowmobiles have done the same thing to the trout populations in many Ontario lakes. Not many guys willing to portage in through the bugs when they can roar into the lake on a sled.

Some areas should be closed to ATV travel for sure.

---

I would agree and go along with that as long as it was applied equally to all involved. That has been done to us as hunters and fishers in numerous areas over the years. Unfortunately it dosnt apply to F.N. and outfitters, it only benifits and protects both. Do not hold your breath waiting for that to happen thow.

Moose numbers are down across their range. Probably a bit optimistic to blame predators or First Nations -- or hunters.

Thing is, you can only manage what you can control. For the MNR, that's hunters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

Moose numbers are down across their range. Probably a bit optimistic to blame predators or First Nations -- or hunters.

Thing is, you can only manage what you can control. For the MNR, that's hunters.

---

Exactly. Also I would be curious just how many wolves actually get shot by sport hunters? My guess ( and that is all it is a guess) is that trappers probably take 100x more wolves and the no hunting laws don't affect those guys. I would also guess the MNR have a pretty darn good idea how many moose the first nations take. They just don't make that information public but I would think it is definitely factored in when setting tag quotas. We can point the finger at the other guy all we want but in the end we need to reduce the hunting pressure. We can debate effective and fair tag allocation all we want that's a seperate subject but first we need to reduce the amount of moose killed and especially the breeding females.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by terrym

Exactly. Also I would be curious just how many wolves actually get shot by sport hunters? My guess ( and that is all it is a guess) is that trappers probably take 100x more wolves and the no hunting laws don't affect those guys. I would also guess the MNR have a pretty darn good idea how many moose the first nations take. They just don't make that information public but I would think it is definitely factored in when setting tag quotas. We can point the finger at the other guy all we want but in the end we need to reduce the hunting pressure. We can debate effective and fair tag allocation all we want that's a seperate subject but first we need to reduce the amount of moose killed and especially the breeding females.

---

EXACTLY. WELL SAID terrym. As I posted previously. #1- Reduce tags. #2- Reduce predators #3- Shorten season. And in my opinion, #1 is or should be a no brainer to rhe mnr. Limited antlerless tags brought our deer herds back for some time . Then lo and behold someone had a brain cramp at mnr and they handed tags out like candy,up to 7 per person or per game hog would be more accurate, per year. End result ,the fewest deer we have had in over 20 years. They claim it had nothing to do with the extra tags but was caused by weather and coyotes. In my opinion the mnr is always 5-10 years behind before they react and when they do it is usually over the top or little or nothing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

I've been reading the newer comments from all of the other threads on this forum and several on CGN and there's one thing that no one has mentioned,yet,is the high degree of mechanization of Moose hunting in this province. Everybody and their uncle is using ATV's to gain access to areas that,traditonally,have only been able to be accessed either by boat,aircraft or on foot. Many American and western Canada areas have seen ATV use disallowed for hunting. Maybe,it's something we should look at,also.

---

I don't think closing off areas to ATV's etc is a very good idea at all! Doing so will only concentrate most the hunters to the limited areas they can access. Also we do have an aging hunter population with limited mobility. There would be a huge drop in hunter #'s if these older hunters were now squeezed out of the game. This country is our country! It belongs to ALL OF US! Access to all of the crown land is our right NOT A PRIVILEGE! Seasons, limits, management of our game - NOT our hunters is the way it should work!
Closing access will only benefit the select few to an exclusive area of land that they don't own or pay taxes for! WE ALL PAY and we should all use it.

Also if access is denied then ATV sales will plummet. Most of the moose hunters only use their ATV for a couple weeks a year! In a nutshell - If the gov't is concerned about revenue - closing off crown access would be a disaster!

Fished out trout lakes by snowmobilers! Don't blame the snowmobile! Either slot size or reduce the limit! Pretty easy cure to the ailment if you ask me.

^^^
Agreed.

Blows my mind how easily some are willing to give up their rights.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by terrym

Exactly. Also I would be curious just how many wolves actually get shot by sport hunters? My guess ( and that is all it is a guess) is that trappers probably take 100x more wolves and the no hunting laws don't affect those guys. I would also guess the MNR have a pretty darn good idea how many moose the first nations take. They just don't make that information public but I would think it is definitely factored in when setting tag quotas. We can point the finger at the other guy all we want but in the end we need to reduce the hunting pressure. We can debate effective and fair tag allocation all we want that's a seperate subject but first we need to reduce the amount of moose killed and especially the breeding females.

---

I agree without having any data on how many wolves taken under small game licences prior to the seal system then no one knows the impact the seal system has caused , I'd be willing to bet the number of wolves taken by hunters is quite small , the amount of wolves taken by trappers is a known number because of our mandatory reporting requirement .

If we truly wanted data on where our calves where ending up our MNR needs to use the technology available and do some VIT implants and get some data on mortality causes in calves and the ability to collar them when they are born , sometimes I wonder why we always do things years to late in the province

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SK33T3R

I don't think closing off areas to ATV's etc is a very good idea at all! Doing so will only concentrate most the hunters to the limited areas they can access. Also we do have an aging hunter population with limited mobility. There would be a huge drop in hunter #'s if these older hunters were now squeezed out of the game. This country is our country! It belongs to ALL OF US! Access to all of the crown land is our right NOT A PRIVILEGE! Seasons, limits, management of our game - NOT our hunters is the way it should work!
Closing access will only benefit the select few to an exclusive area of land that they don't own or pay taxes for! WE ALL PAY and we should all use it.

Also if access is denied then ATV sales will plummet. Most of the moose hunters only use their ATV for a couple weeks a year! In a nutshell - If the gov't is concerned about revenue - closing off crown access would be a disaster!

Fished out trout lakes by snowmobilers! Don't blame the snowmobile! Either slot size or reduce the limit! Pretty easy cure to the ailment if you ask me.

---

First,let me state,catagorically,that I'm not in favor of banning the use of ATV's for Moose hunting,altogether. Having said that,if it's clearly demonstarted and deemed necessary to close some areas to motorized use,then I may not like it,but,I'll support it as long as it's inclusive to everyone. There's only a couple of things with your assumptions that aren't quite correct. That's that nowhere has there ever been an outright denial of access of Crown Land by anyone,anywhere,in Ontario,except for the usual restrictions for logging and mining safety. I agree that access by everyone is a right,but,how it's accessed is not. Use of any motorized vehicle is by provincial regulation,therefore,is a priviledge which can disappear with the stroke of pen.
The assumption that ATV sales will be affected is equally in error. More people use them than snowmobiles,simply because they can be used,virtually,year round where snow machines can only be used for,maybe,three months out of the entire year. ATV sales have dwarfed snow mobile sales by almost 80% in the last ten years. There's 50X more non-hunters than hunters who use ATV's.
While it's true that Moose hunter demographics have shifted to older hunters,the vast majority are road hunters.To say that they would be impacted by ATV use restrictions may be somewhat accurate,but,personally,I doubt that would stop any of them Moose hunting completely. I'm getting very close to that demographic and it sure as he** won't be stopping this guy,let me tell ya. LOL

I agree that ATVs should be disallowed for moose hunting, but other vehicles like trucks still allowed. This way some of the deeper areas only accessible by ATVs are protected while the logging roads are still accessible to everyone.

I have seen it, like I am sure most of us, on opening day the endless procession of ATVs even in areas hard to get to. To me who likes to hike to my hunting spot, they are a constant and unwelcome, noisy intrusion. They scour the land, and the moose have nowhere to hide.

Time to even out the odds a bit and scale down on the technology.

I believe that much of our frustration comes from the feeling that, in the context of Ontario's long-declining moose population, we hunters are not being listened to.

I've attended the consultations, I've posted on the EBR, I've participated in the workshops and conferences and I've seen the who's who of Ontario's hunting community stand up and address the Minister or Deputy Minister. I can tell you that much of what has been suggested in this thread is consistent with what people have been saying to the MNR for years. Yet the MNR's response sometimes consists of some minor tinkering around the edges (think of the moose tag review 5 years ago) or, like the recently announced changes, have no resemblance to any suggestions that the hunting community has put forth.

I'm starting to lose faith in whatever it is that goes on at the Provincial Big Game Advisory Committee level. Are our representative organizations just as frustrated as we are, or are they part of the problem?

Part of my professional work involves soliciting public input in the context of developing policies and regulations, and when I saw the MNR's most recent opinion survey: (http://apps.mnr.gov.on.ca/apps/dashb...moose-project/), I laughed out loud. There is no directly useful information to be gathered from this survey. Its only role is to allow policy-makers to say they've consulted. I've seen this kind of thing before; the survey is nothing more than a placebo.

No wonder we feel that no one is listening to us.

Why can't I get to any page but pg 1?

I feel that ATV use should never be banned. People with health conditions should be allowed to hunt as well. If people are not allowed a quad how many moose do you think would get shot and lost because people are too lazy to track them down or how much of a moose would be retrieved, would we all have to take horses up ? If you don't like quads hunt somewhere where they can not get to. Put laws and quotas in on how many moose are allowed or shut it down all together.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by millwrong82

I feel that ATV use should never be banned. People with health conditions should be allowed to hunt as well. If people are not allowed a quad how many moose do you think would get shot and lost because people are too lazy to track them down or how much of a moose would be retrieved, would we all have to take horses up ? If you don't like quads hunt somewhere where they can not get to. Put laws and quotas in on how many moose are allowed or shut it down all together.

---

I don't think it's a question of not liking ATV's. It's a question of an unfair balance toward the hunter than toward the animals. One needs to ask "what did we do before we had ATV's"? Answering that question would go a long way to a sensible solution. People shooting Moose and abandoning the carcass because they're too lazy to pack it out need to pay $5K fines and do serious jail time. There's simply no excuse for that BS. While physically challenged hunters are accomodated through special arrangements with reards to all hunting,it's certainly not for the ill or the weak. Using that as an excuse to justify using ATV's as a blanket policy will not hold water,at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

I don't think it's a question of not liking ATV's. It's a question of an unfair balance toward the hunter than toward the animals. One needs to ask "what did we do before we had ATV's"? Answering that question would go a long way to a sensible solution. People shooting Moose and abandoning the carcass because they're too lazy to pack it out need to pay $5K fines and do serious jail time. There's simply no excuse for that BS. While physically challenged hunters are accomodated through special arrangements with reards to all hunting,it's certainly not for the ill or the weak. Using that as an excuse to justify using ATV's as a blanket policy will not hold water,at all.

---

Exactly! Trimmer 21 gets it. In the olden days when there were plenty of moose, there weren't that many people using ATVs. Now they are like mosquitoes in Moose country tearing down the logging roads and side trails leaving no stones unturned. The balance has been tipped too far toward the hunter with everyone having ATVs. Time to go back to basics a bit or we will have no more moose to hunt, and neither will our children.

[QUOTE=SK33T3R;875847]I don't think closing off areas to ATV's etc is a very good idea at all! Doing so will only concentrate most the hunters to the limited areas they can access. Also we do have an aging hunter population with limited mobility. There would be a huge drop in hunter #'s if these older hunters were now squeezed out of the game. This country is our country! It belongs to ALL OF US! Access to all of the crown land is our right NOT A PRIVILEGE! Seasons, limits, management of our game - NOT our hunters is the way it should work!
Closing access will only benefit the select few to an exclusive area of land that they don't own or pay taxes for! WE ALL PAY and we should all use it.

You have the right to access Crown land. You DON"T have the right to ride your ATV there. Big difference.

No one is saying Crown land should be entirely closed to ATV use. If a small percentage was closed to ATV traffic it would have minimal impact on hunting areas allowed.

I often wonder how hunters survived pre - 1980s when ATVs did not exist .... Oh wait, I know. They got off their "you know what" and walked.

Also if access is denied then ATV sales will plummet. Most of the moose hunters only use their ATV for a couple weeks a year! In a nutshell - If the gov't is concerned about revenue - closing off crown access would be a disaster!

This is nonsensical. Didn't realize the primary mandate of the MNR was to bolster ATV sales in Ontario ...

Fished out trout lakes by snowmobilers! Don't blame the snowmobile! Either slot size or reduce the limit! Pretty easy cure to the ailment if you ask me.

Actually one should blame the snowmobile. It results in greatly increased pressure, which means fewer fish regardless of slot sizes and limit reductions.

Increased access = decreased quality. This is true for hunting, fishing, camping sites, etc.

yep while we are at it lets take the motors off the boats and canoes, take the scopes off the rifles , take away crossbows and compounds and go to only stick and string , heck why not gps and radios as well , afterall everyone of these things help people take more game , or maybe we could see our MNR actually find the real root of the problem and work to fix it

[QUOTE=buckchaser;876030]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SK33T3R

I don't think closing off areas to ATV's etc is a very good idea at all! Doing so will only concentrate most the hunters to the limited areas they can access. Also we do have an aging hunter population with limited mobility. There would be a huge drop in hunter #'s if these older hunters were now squeezed out of the game. This country is our country! It belongs to ALL OF US! Access to all of the crown land is our right NOT A PRIVILEGE! Seasons, limits, management of our game - NOT our hunters is the way it should work!
Closing access will only benefit the select few to an exclusive area of land that they don't own or pay taxes for! WE ALL PAY and we should all use it.

You have the right to access Crown land. You DON"T have the right to ride your ATV there. Big difference.

No one is saying Crown land should be entirely closed to ATV use. If a small percentage was closed to ATV traffic it would have minimal impact on hunting areas allowed.

I often wonder how hunters survived pre - 1980s when ATVs did not exist .... Oh wait, I know. They got off their "you know what" and walked.

Also if access is denied then ATV sales will plummet. Most of the moose hunters only use their ATV for a couple weeks a year! In a nutshell - If the gov't is concerned about revenue - closing off crown access would be a disaster!

This is nonsensical. Didn't realize the primary mandate of the MNR was to bolster ATV sales in Ontario ...

Fished out trout lakes by snowmobilers! Don't blame the snowmobile! Either slot size or reduce the limit! Pretty easy cure to the ailment if you ask me.

Actually one should blame the snowmobile. It results in greatly increased pressure, which means fewer fish regardless of slot sizes and limit reductions.

Increased access = decreased quality. This is true for hunting, fishing, camping sites, etc.

---

wow! touchy SUBJECT! AND BOLD PRINT TOO BOOT!

An ATV or a snowmobile is just technology - just like all the other technology out there today! It's like blaming the gun for the murder! DUH! conservation - to me - always meant wise use - not no use! The MNR can factor in all this technology into the plan but I guess it's just easier to shut everything down! Sure would be nice for that outfitter way back in that flies in his clients or for you young bucks that have more brawn then brains and can get in further then us old guys. It would not matter how many guys were motoring around or how deep they went - If they ain't got the tag then what harm is it!

Increased access = decreased quality ??

for who? try telling that to a guy who got way in there - he'd say it was quality for him!

I'm really surprised that hunters are blaming hunters for the moose mess. We only pull on the oars as they say - we didn't steer us to where we are today!

Ontario is already behind the curve for ATV access. Many Western states/provinces have limited access to certain areas for ATVs.

It's not rocket science. If you greatly increase the ability of a hunter to cover ground, chances are they will shoot more moose.

Rather than covering a few kilometers per day by foot, hunters on an ATV can cover dozens or hundreds. Combined with more road/trail access, this undeniably results in hunters being able to cover a larger area and increases pressure on the moose population.

I'm not saying ATV's should be banned or excessively limited. But it should at least be examined as a contributing factor to Ontario's moose problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buckchaser

Ontario is already behind the curve for ATV access. Many Western states/provinces have limited access to certain areas for ATVs.

It's not rocket science. If you greatly increase the ability of a hunter to cover ground, chances are they will shoot more moose.

Rather than covering a few kilometers per day by foot, hunters on an ATV can cover dozens or hundreds. Combined with more road/trail access, this undeniably results in hunters being able to cover a larger area and increases pressure on the moose population.

I'm not saying ATV's should be banned or excessively limited. But it should at least be examined as a contributing factor to Ontario's moose problem.

---

Ya'know this access thing is going to hurt me big time.
I hunt within 1/2 kilometer of hwy 11.
All the other hunters think the grass is greener the deeper they go - and I'm all for it! Go deep and keep goin! If access is denied then these guys might figure out what I'm doin and that would be a bad thing!


:-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trappermatt

yep while we are at it lets take the motors off the boats and canoes, take the scopes off the rifles , take away crossbows and compounds and go to only stick and string , heck why not gps and radios as well , afterall everyone of these things help people take more game , or maybe we could see our MNR actually find the real root of the problem and work to fix it

---

Don't give those Liberal idiots any more dumb ideas. They can come up with enough of their own. LOL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

Don't give those Liberal idiots any more dumb ideas. They can come up with enough of their own. LOL

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trappermatt

yep while we are at it lets take the motors off the boats and canoes, take the scopes off the rifles , take away crossbows and compounds and go to only stick and string , heck why not gps and radios as well , afterall everyone of these things help people take more game , or maybe we could see our MNR actually find the real root of the problem and work to fix it

---

You missed one DRONES

I'm just catching up on this thread and doing a lot of skimming, so apologies if I'm bringing back any issues that have already been discussed.

First off, I'm not big on the shortened calf season, I would rather a more limited calf tag allocation. As some have said already, the important thing with calf tags I think is to allow cow hunters to humanely harvest the calves of the cows they kill, rather than letting them starve and go to waste. So at minimum I think any group that is allocated a cow tag (if we're not suspending cow tags altogether) should get one or two calf tags to go with it, to be used at any time in the season.

The big unknown for me is, under what circumstances does most of the calf harvest occur? Is it (a) successful cow hunters taking their catch's offspring, as I just described? Is it (b) large groups with one or two adult tags, filling many of their calf tags while they're in the bush? Or is it (c) individuals and small groups who don't get an adult tag, going on a calf hunt?

If it's (a), then there's not much to be gained by reducing the calf harvest, since the orphaned calves will probably die anyway. If it's (b), then limit each group's calf tags to one or two per cow tag... but continue issuing a calf tag to small groups that don't get an adult tag, because I like the idea that you can still go hunting if you don't win the draw. If it's (c), then ONLY give calf tags to cow tag winners; the "everyone can go hunting" principle will have to be sacrificed for conservation.

Secondly, the other thing I don't know is, what is the purpose of the delayed season start? Is it to give bulls a chance to impregnate some cows before getting shot? If that's the intent (and if it really works that way), I can support it. If it's to reduce harvest by giving hunters a disadvantage, then I don't support it, I would rather they just cut back on tags. I would rather get tags less often, and go on fewer moose hunts, but have a higher chance of success when I do - or need a bigger group, and have to share the meat more ways - than get more tags but never manage to fill them.

Couldn't agree more Buckchaser! I'm OK with a guy driving his ATV into the area he's going to hunt and using it to drag the animal out of the bush. What I'm against is hunting off of the ATV as you drive along. I know the gun isn't loaded but it doesn't take long to step off load and shoot. I realize it creates an enforcement nightmare.

I think some areas shouldn't be accessible to ATV's at all. Some areas should be left undisturbed. If hunters choose to walk these areas that's up to them and I am of the age where I'm limiting my success.

It's hard to close the barn door now that the horse (ATV) is out but limits should have been set years ago. The ATV industry and recreational lobby is very strong and it's not likely much is going to change.

I remember when winter ice fishing wasn't allowed prior to the invention of the snowmobile. The snowmobile industry lobbied the govt and winter ice fishing for trout was initiated. End of the trout fishing in many non-stocked lakes.

Common sense would be to decrease cow and calf harvest based on WMU population as already mentioned, maybe split up some of the bigger WMU'S to a more manageable size. I like tweedwolfscreams idea of issuing a calf tag per group (calf tag per 3 - 10 hunters depending on population and goals). Should still keep the majority of hunters buying moose tags and decrease the harvest of calves.
The idea of only 2 weeks to shoot a calf. Too many groups with adult tags will pick these 2 weeks to increase their odds + all of the other groups that didn't get an adult tag = too many hunters = hunter frustration and safety issues.

Lets face it, the OMNRF has been tasked to put an action plan together to reverse the decline in moose numbers without negatively impacting revenue generation. In today's economic times no Ministry is going to be successful in proposing solutions that are going to negatively impact jobs / revenue in any area of the economy.
Stop the hunt all together - no hunters buying tags, gas, food lodging, northern outfitters struggle to make a living - not going to happen. Ban ATV's altogether - not going to happen - negative financial hit on our economy. They have to come up with a balanced approach (tag allocation) which continues to engage us hunters in the activity of moose hunting so that we will continue to buy licences thus generate $$$ in addition to increasing the moose population to more sustainable levels.

They also have to come up with an action plan to address many of the other factors that are impacting our moose herd (list already provided in the past 11 pages).
Access is a huge factor. Fresh timber cut in the area my group bow hunts 4 years ago - 8 moose taken off the one cut during rifle. Fresh cut last year maybe 10 km away, locals advised 6 moose already harvested before we got up there 2nd week of archery. (They weren't archery kills either). That is a lot of moose out of one small area of the WMU.

A lot of great ideas put forth so far in this post, the magic formula is there, But as said already the OMNRF has their solution in play just going through the bureaucratic motions.

Don't blame the players, blame the game. (government $$)
"E"

Trying to close out ATV's would be tough in todays world.

Limiting tags or eliminating calf/cow tags is the only way to go.

Then who cares where guys go on ATV's.. let them drive all over hells half acres. Use gas! Enjoy the north! see endless country! support the northern economy! Have a holiday!

Ultimately you will need a tag to get something.

It's easier for the MNR to issue illegal hunting fines - (which should be raised to a small mortgage) then it is to chase guys around on ATV's.

One thing about killing a moose - it needs to be brought back to camp, transported home, and put in a freezer.

And it's common nature for guys to yack!

Also we all as hunters need to help the MNR by turning these guys in!

we need to understand that they're stealing from us! not from the gov't etc.

WE ALL NEED TO ENFORCE THE LAWS.

I'm not a squealer or a rat and never have been but IF I'm be screwed because of those other guys then I'm going to be part of the solution!

Baby steps should be taken first before completely rearranging everything to something new and untested.

1) Reduce Non-Resident Moose tags
2) Open and Lengthen the Spring Bear hunt for Residents AND Non-Residents province wide
3) Remove the Wolf and Coyote tag system for Residents
4) Increase the cost for a Non-Resident Moose tag
5) Reduce the cost for a Non-Resident Wolf tag
6) Continue the FN hunts but crack down on the sale of meat
7) Make Harvest Reporting Mandatory for Big Game

Reducing (or eliminating) the calf season might be a good idea but I'm torn whether or not it's actually necessary and what the harvest % is considering there is NO MANDATORY HARVEST DATA COLLECTED BY THE OMNR SO THEY'RE BASING THE CHANGE BASED OFF EXTRAPOLATED DATA AND NOT FACTS.

Attachment 28690

For those interested in the long term result of shooting a cow versus a callf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by x_xeon_x

Baby steps should be taken first before completely rearranging everything to something new and untested.

1) Reduce Non-Resident Moose tags
2) Open and Lengthen the Spring Bear hunt for Residents AND Non-Residents province wide
3) Remove the Wolf and Coyote tag system for Residents
4) Increase the cost for a Non-Resident Moose tag
5) Reduce the cost for a Non-Resident Wolf tag
6) Continue the FN hunts but crack down on the sale of meat
7) Make Harvest Reporting Mandatory for Big Game

Reducing (or eliminating) the calf season might be a good idea but I'm torn whether or not it's actually necessary and what the harvest % is considering there is NO MANDATORY HARVEST DATA COLLECTED BY THE OMNR SO THEY'RE BASING THE CHANGE BASED OFF EXTRAPOLATED DATA AND NOT FACTS.

---

Number 6 will only happen if FN are willing.

Everyone whether we like it or not have to realize that the recent Supreme Court Rulings have made it quite clear that the Native Sustainable Hunt is a non-negotiable right which the MNR has little to no control over. Furthermore the MNR’s Political Whips / Masters have surely made it quite clear to MNR Staff that they are not to openly discuss the matter in any public forum or consultation so as to not disrupt the two decade / ongoing land claims negotiations.

There is promise however as some areas are implementing some of their own management plans .

http://www.algonquinsofpikwakanagan....821%20copy.pdf

http://www.bafn.ca/harvesting.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chameleon

Attachment 28690

For those interested in the long term result of shooting a cow versus a callf

---

This doesn't take into consideration the predation level of the second calf or the adult cow. This extrapolation is dated 1979. Since then,predator population has grown exponentially making predation figures all the more relevent. Good research,just out dated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

This doesn't take into consideration the predation level of the second calf or the adult cow. This extrapolation is dated 1979. Since then,predator population has grown exponentially making predation figures all the more relevent. Good research,just out dated.

---

I believe that's the data they used to justify the unrestricted calf harvest .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

This doesn't take into consideration the predation level of the second calf or the adult cow. This extrapolation is dated 1979. Since then,predator population has grown exponentially making predation figures all the more relevent. Good research,just out dated.

---

It actually does not need to take into consideration predation because it is related to hunting.

Let assume however that predation is as severe as you suggest by your statement that in all cases the second calf and the cow will always killed by predators.
If that were so then there would be “NO” moose.
Clearly not the case, if it was then we would not be having this discussion.

A well established fact however is adult bulls and cows are (less) unlikely to be killed by predators unless weaken by disease.
Making this even more relevant today if predation is as bad as you suggest.

What it really does emphasis however no matter what, is that reducing the Hunting related Cow Harvest is best way to go if the objective is to increase the population. I say even more so if the excessive predation is expected to continue.

However it is also known that a cow has a better chance of protecting one calf. Where as trying to protect two at the same time greatly increases the chance of both being kill during the predator attack.

The current draw system needs to be scrapped altogether.

A point system needs to be adopted. You're awarded one point for every year you're unsuccessful in the draw. A draw would still take place, but amongst the highest point holders first. That way everybody eventually gets a tag.

The draw should be either antlered or antlerless; no separate calf tags and no over the counter calf tags.

There should be only a nominal fee for entering the draw. You pay for the full licence if your application is successful.

No tag transfers- if you get an unwanted tag it goes back to the MNR and is awarded to the next person in line. Hunters who return unwanted tags retain their points.

An end to party hunting. Ontario may be the only jurisdiction in North America that allows it,and there's probably a reason for that.

I think that's the only way to make if fair for everybody.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chameleon

However it is also known that a cow has a better chance of protecting one calf. Where as trying to protect two at the same time greatly increases the chance of both being kill during the predator attack.

---

I certainly agree that not issuing as many Cow tags would be prudent because it sure has worked for the Deer population which is undeniable,but,by using the above rationale,would it not then follow that if one of two calves was taken by a predator and the hunter takes the second,that there would be an exponential population drop?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moe

I agree. :thumbup:

---

I dont....
'party hunting" should still be allowed
the rest I can live with

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 270 WBY

I dont....
'party hunting" should still be allowed
the rest I can live with

---

A limit to the 'party' size'? Locals that hunt near my camp (WMU42) have a party that is about 25 strong. They rarely get a tag and really play with the application system. They have strategically built tree stands (well over 40 that we have counted) and have hunting down to an academic process - if there are animals in the bush, they'll get them. Last fall they took 4 calves because they had no adult tags.

Other than that, it was hard to argue against with much else that 9.3mauser was suggesting. Well thought out post. Something has to change.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 270 WBY

I dont....
'party hunting" should still be allowed
the rest I can live with

---

And therein lies the problem with revamping Ontario's moose hunt into a sustainable model.

Ontario is miles behind most of North America in managing our large ungulates. Moose (as has been suggested several times) should be on a points system and the "party hunting" system should be scrapped or modified to resemble the elk system where only four hunters can be listed on a tag.

Under a points system most moose hunters would go hunting less frequently - but when they did go hunting they would have an actual tag and hopefully a better population to hunt.

Moose are like the "canary in the coal mine" for our modern ungulate populations. There are many forces at play (most which we don't understand very well) from hunting pressure to aboriginal harvest to forestry practices to climate change. The option of carrying on as we always have is going to continue to deliver diminishing returns and is not the way forward. Real change is needed - will the MNR have the stones to do it?

I hope party hunting will continue. I rather a group of 10 get a tag then groups of 4 getting one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buckchaser

Ontario is miles behind most of North America in managing our large ungulates. Moose (as has been suggested several times) should be on a points system and the "party hunting" system should be scrapped or modified to resemble the elk system where only four hunters can be listed on a tag.

Under a points system most moose hunters would go hunting less frequently - but when they did go hunting they would have an actual tag and hopefully a better population to hunt.

Moose are like the "canary in the coal mine" for our modern ungulate populations. There are many forces at play (most which we don't understand very well) from hunting pressure to aboriginal harvest to forestry practices to climate change. The option of carrying on as we always have is going to continue to deliver diminishing returns and is not the way forward. Real change is needed - will the MNR have the stones to do it?

---

Good post. I doubt the MNR has the courage for real change. Even on the forum here there is quite a bit of support for party hunting, even though I haven't seen any one argue that it's *not* part of the problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

I certainly agree that not issuing as many Cow tags would be prudent because it sure has worked for the Deer population which is undeniable,but,by using the above rationale,would it not then follow that if one of two calves was taken by a predator and the hunter takes the second,that there would be an exponential population drop?

---

The only way for there to be an exponential drop as you suggest is for there to be year(S) of repeated Calf Mortalities that exceeds calf age class recruitment levels required to off set the Adult Mortality Rate (especially as it pertains to replacement of those animal with the highest reproductive potential i.e.: Mature Cows and Mature Bulls.)
Which the Ontario Selective Adult Tag Harvest System is designed to control and prevent if managed as designed by annually adjusting the Adult Tag Allocation in order to maintain an annual average adult harvest rates (below 10 % of the know Area Population for population growth) or (up to 12 % for a stable population.)
The problem as I see it for some unknown reason those responsible for the management of the adult tag system in the past decided to or been directed to disregard the historical harvest data indicators and issue excessive Adult Tags year after year contrary to their own population harvest data indicating that tag reductions were necessary in order to prevent population decline.

Note:
That estimated predation related mortalities is also supposed to be factored into the annual adult tag level allocation decision process and adjusted accordingly as levels fluctuate over time in turn influencing the 10 to 12 % indicators I mentioned above.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by werner.reiche

And therein lies the problem with revamping Ontario's moose hunt into a sustainable model.

---

Really....please tell me how continuing "party hunting" will create a "problem"
I would really like to hear this

[QUOTE=Obi-wanShinobi;877648]I hope party hunting will continue. I rather a group of 10 get a tag then groups of 4 getting on

Agreed, BUT if the MNRF is to continue with the "calf" hunt it will be detrimental to the herd unless the party has a "cow plus 1 " which allows said group to harvest a calf if the cow has one(why orphan a calf) Harvest your adult moose then go fishing, shoot birds etc etc
Not to difficult to do!

I'm pretty sure the original intent of party hunting was not to have groups of 10 - 15 plus hunters looking to fill one tag. As such, a higher percentage of tags get filled because each tag has many hunters looking to fill it.

Unrestricted group size party hunting is fine when moose are plentiful - but clearly, they are not.

Also, the fact party hunting is not permitted for most big game hunting in North America tells you something about party hunting and its compatibility with wildlife management.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 270 WBY

Really....please tell me how continuing "party hunting" will create a "problem"
I would really like to hear this

---

Party hunting results in nearly every adult tag being filled.
With the high success rate, the MNR allocates less tags (as they should).
So there are more 'hunting opportunities' but they are lower quality.
Again, there's a good reason party hunting for moose is a rarity in the rest of the world - yet the MNR here in Ontario hangs on to it.
It is not a good game management strategy. It's geared entirely towards selling tags, not quality hunting opportunities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 270 WBY

I dont....
'party hunting" should still be allowed
the rest I can live with

---

Partying hunting is just too loosey goosey. Limit the size of the party and make those in the party register on the tag. I can't believe what happens in the camp next to me once somebody gets a tag .....any tag! Over 20 guys in two camps hunt on those tags. Once the guys realize they have a tag the call goes out to everybody and their brother to join the "party hunt". No wonder there's the odd mistake during the hunt.

I'd like to see QC's use of multiple tags required for a single moose implemented in Ontario as well - if you are 'party hunting' on an adult tag, when that tag get used, you're done.

QUOTE=270 WBY;877684]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Obi-wanShinobi

I hope party hunting will continue. I rather a group of 10 get a tag then groups of 4 getting on

Agreed, BUT if the MNRF is to continue with the "calf" hunt it will be detrimental to the herd unless the party has a "cow plus 1 " which allows said group to harvest a calf if the cow has one(why orphan a calf) Harvest your adult moose then go fishing, shoot birds etc etc
Not to difficult to do!

---

Actually the the shooting of the cow is more detrimental to the herd.
The calf's reproductive potential is zero in the first 18 month plus of life.
The cow's is proven and as they age maturing past their fifth year of life their reproductive potential tends to double at times even triple.
The chances of survival of the calf through the first year and half also increases dramatically when protected by it's mother. Another reason to reduce cow mortality rates especially iif population growth is required.

Well to those that think the calf restrictions are going fix the problem well think again.
I also don't believe for minute that the MNR Personnal responsible for its design believe so either.
I say don't be surprized to see even further drastic Adult tag reductions again this year as well .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by werner.reiche

Party hunting results in nearly every adult tag being filled.
With the high success rate, the MNR allocates less tags (as they should).
So there are more 'hunting opportunities' but they are lower quality.
Again, there's a good reason party hunting for moose is a rarity in the rest of the world - yet the MNR here in Ontario hangs on to it.
It is not a good game management strategy. It's geared entirely towards selling tags, not quality hunting opportunities.

---

B-I-N-G-O! "Geared toward selling tags" is dead on target. That's all this system has been about,from the get-go. If a hunter wants to stay in Pool 1 and remain in the draw,he/she must buy a tag which leaves the entire system open to manipulation and fraud. This is where guys get wives/girlfriends,their kids and older family members who will likely never hunt, to buy tags simply to scam the system and stay in the "preferred"status. The entire system has been completely corrupted. It'ss time to tear it down and start from scratch.

One would think by the way group hunting is being portrayed the tag fill rate is almost 100% when groups are involved.
Well heres a flash bulletin Ontario Adult Moose Tag Fill Rates most years translates onto on average a less than a 15% population harvest rate at best.




Less than 10% = usually results in population growth
10 to 12% = stable population
above 12% = population decline should be expect


Example for those interested.

WMU 48 harvest rate is set at 3%. for Licenced hunters.
The number of tags that have been made available annually since 2004 have been set to maintain that level on average.

WMU 48 Tag Allocation
2014
Gun Hunt
Bull Tags: 33. Cow Tags: 10. Calf Tags 29
Archery Tags
Bull Tags : 49 CowcTags : 27. Calf Tags : 18

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chameleon

QUOTE=270 WBY;877684]


Actually the the shooting of the cow is more detrimental to the herd.
The calf's reproductive potential is zero in the first 18 month plus of life.
The cow's is proven and as they age maturing past their fifth year of life their reproductive potential tends to double at times even triple.
The chances of survival of the calf through the first year and half also increases dramatically when protected by it's mother. Another reason to reduce cow mortality rates especially iif population growth is required.

Well to those that think the calf restrictions are going fix the problem well think again.
I also don't believe for minute that the MNR Personnal responsible for its design believe so either.
I say don't be surprized to see even further drastic Adult tag reductions again this year as well .

---

You are right with the further tag cuts this year. Apparently the Minister was at a meeting in Fort Francis last fall, regarding wood allocations. As a result of a question about the moose licences, he indicated " if you think it was hard to get a tag this year, wait until next year."

Adult Tag reduction / control = moose population growth
Calf Hunting Restrictions translate in reduced hunter particaption rate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rick_iles

You are right with the further tag cuts this year. Apparently the Minister was at a meeting in Fort Francis last fall, regarding wood allocations. As a result of a question about the moose licences, he indicated " if you think it was hard to get a tag this year, wait until next year."

---

Finally the hay days of unsustainable excess adult tag allocations may finally be over.
Now that is something I can support.
Unfortunately the result of the decades of MNR mis-managed excessive adult tag allocation my also now be used as an opportunity / rational for the MNR to dramatically restriction hunter access as well.
If the calf hunting restrictions approach is to be new norm then I say it is time to do away with group adult tag allocation as well.
The moose tag allocation lottery should be made into a straightforward individual selection process. Equal chance for everyone who wishes to apply. Then let the tag holder determine whom they wish to hunt with.

Or

If the (6 million dollar revenue driven) Group Favoured Lottery System is to be maintained as is.

I suggest that a NEW Hunting Season Model along with NEW Tag category be adopted.

"Calf Conservation Tag"

Restricted to ( A ) Pool First Choice Selection Only ( Individual / Group option)
( Restricted Use - WMU Specific issue)
100 % success tag allocation

I am certain Moose Hunting Harvest Rate Modeling will demonstrate :


Benefits:


Reduced Harvest Rate of all age classes.
Will distribute Hunter Participation more evenly across the whole hunting season.
Reduce Hunter Conflict.
Maximize Hunter Participation.
Reduce Draw System demands on Adult Tag Allocation.
Creates a Progresses Hunting pressure rate allowing for a gradual moose survival behaviour adaption timeline to occur.


I suggest that a THREE SEASONS Hunting Model be adopted as I have presented below which will also give anyone wishing to hunt moose a means to do so.
It was also creates a favourable gradually moose survival behaviour adaption timeline as the hunting season progresses in favour Cow/ Calf survival adaption.

First Season (duration 5 to 7 days)

ARCHERY Hunting ONLY

Archery Weapons ONLY

Limited Number of In-mature Bull Tags
Unlimited Archery Calf Hunting ( supported by the well established historical 0.18 success rate)

ARCHERY Calf Hunting Open to all those that entered the A / B Moose Tag Lottery
Also to include hunting opportunity to those that missed the lottery application cut off date.
"You snooze you loose"

Second Season (5 to 7 day duration)

Conservation Calf Tag Holders Hunting Only

Gun / Archery Weapons Permitted
Hunting restricted to ( Individual / Groups ) Conservation Tag Holders Only

Third Season (duration 7 to 28 days)

Adult Tag Holders Only

(Adjustable Adult Tag Numbers in conjunction with an Adjustable Season Length depended on changing WMU population objectives)

Gun / Archery Weapons

Hunting RESTRICTED to ( Individual / Group Adult Tag Holders) ONLY
(Group Members / Size Restricted to declaration at time Draw System Entry)

Conservation (designated ) Tag Holders - Participation Not Permitted
Limited Archery In-Mature Bull Tag Holders - Participation Not Permitted

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chameleon

One would think by the way group hunting is being portrayed the tag fill rate is almost 100% when groups are involved.
Well heres a flash bulletin Ontario Adult Moose Tag Fill Rates most years translates onto on average a less than a 15% population harvest rate at best.




Less than 10% = usually results in population growth
10 to 12% = stable population
above 12% = population decline should be expect


Example for those interested.

WMU 48 harvest rate is set at 3%. for Licenced hunters.
The number of tags that have been made available annually since 2004 have been set to maintain that level on average.

WMU 48 Tag Allocation
2014
Gun Hunt
Bull Tags: 33. Cow Tags: 10. Calf Tags 29
Archery Tags
Bull Tags : 49 CowcTags : 27. Calf Tags : 18

---

There are two major FN hunts in zone 48 and west of zone 48 in Alonquin Park. Would you have the data for those hunts? Number of tags? Success of hunts? ................EXACTLY! Nobody knows so the data is totally incomplete.

Pretty hard to manage a WMU when you're missing half (or more) of the data needed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DanO

There are two major FN hunts in zone 48 and west of zone 48 in Alonquin Park. Would you have the data for those hunts? Number of tags? Success of hunts? ................EXACTLY! Nobody knows so the data is totally incomplete.

Pretty hard to manage a WMU when you're missing half (or more) of the data needed.

---

The data you speak of is actually available online for all to see.
Plus the MNR in the Pembroke Area works hand in hand with implementation.
The last I heard in fact I believe the MNR and the Algonquins of Pikwakanagan associated with the websites I have listed below have offices located next to each other in Pembroke.


Hope this helps clear up some of your concerns about half the data missing.

http://www.bafn.ca/harvesting.html


http://www.algonquinsofpikwakanagan....821%20copy.pdf


But you also have to realize is that the recent Supreme Court Rulings have made it quite clear that the Native Sustainable Hunt is a non-negotiable right which the MNR has little to no control over. Furthermore the MNR’s Political Whips / Masters have surely made it quite clear to MNR Staff that they are not to openly discuss the matter in any public forum or consultation so as to not disrupt the two decade / ongoing land claims negotiations.

So as you can see contrary to popular belief / hearsay that at least the Algonquins of Pikwakanagan are in fact taking progressive steps in the right direction by being proactive, making concessions to share the resource when they really don‘t have under legal statue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chameleon

The data you speak of is actually available online for all to see.

---

Could you provide a link for it. I haven't been able to find any info on FN hunts in that area.

I see guidelines and information not links to data? I realize the MNR and FN offices are right beside each other and they do cooperate (the MNR has no choice basically) in the hunt. I also realize the FN hunt has priority over the resident Ontario hunt. Back to the harvest data please?

[QUOTE=werner.reiche;877703]Party hunting results in nearly every adult tag being filled.
With the high success rate, the MNR allocates less tags (as they should).
So there are more 'hunting opportunities' but they are lower quality.
Again, there's a good reason party hunting for moose is a rarity in the rest of the world - yet the MNR here in Ontario hangs on to it.
It is not a good game management strategy. It's geared entirely towards selling tags, not quality hunting opportunities.[/QUOTBe

I dont agree, very rarely do "hunting parties" fill all tags, but there are those few that do
Party hunting is a great way to hunt moose, it allows hunters who dont have the tag an opportunity to harvest an adult moose and adds more to the overall experience
There is a problem in Ontario and removing party hunting from the equation will not solve the issue, what the province needs to figure out is how to limit the amount of tags per group....

[QUOTE=270 WBY;877864]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by werner.reiche

.[/QUOTBe

Party hunting is a great way to hunt moose, it allows hunters who dont have the tag an opportunity to harvest an adult moose and adds more to the overall experience

---

The fact nearly 50 % of the application to the Tag draw represents individual application suggests to me that there are a lot of hunters who feel otherwise.
This despite the fact that 70 % that decide to go the route of a group application recieve a tag.
Where as 86 % of individual applications are unsuccessful.
Just image how hard it would be to get tag all the Individaul applications decided to apply as group.

I also contend that a majority of the 30 % in the group application system that failed to recieve a tag do so as result of applying to popular WMUs where demand exceeds supply year after year. Or they apply as a group knowing fully well that they will not be successful because they do not meet the group size criteria which in turn skew the results.

My main concern with ending party hunting in combination with radically reducing or even eliminating the calf harvest would be that in order to facilitate selection fairness and balance,the "pool1,2" qualification would need to be eliminated,also. We will need to impliment an adult Moose license "application" fee of a small nominal amount ($10-non refundable) with the full fee being payable only if the hunter is selected for an adult tag. After successful selection,the hunter would be eliminated from the next years adult draw to enable other unsuccessful hunters to have a chance at obtaining a tag. Most western US states have adopted that system with great success. Although it's highly restrictive,It's fair for everyone that applies.

[QUOTE=chameleon;877882]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 270 WBY

The fact nearly 50 % of the application to the Tag draw represents individual application suggests to me that there are a lot of hunters who feel otherwise.
This despite the fact that 70 % that decide to go the route of a group application recieve a tag.
Where as 14% of individul applications are successful.
I also contend that a majority of the 30 % in the group application system that failed to recieve a tag do so as result of applying to popular WMUs where demand exceeds supply year after year. Or they apply as a group knowing fully well that they will not be successful because they do not meet the group size criteria which in turn skew the results.

---

There are many out there that don't understand the lottery, despite the information being in the Regulation booklets. Many also don't understand statistics and think multiple individual applications is better than 1 group application.

Then you have those that understand the number and with a group larger than GGS will put in one application with the required GGS and then several individual applications. Don't forget the tag holders from last year will all be individual applicants as they don't count for GGS same as new hunters. This all goes to skew your numbers.

The major failing in Ontario's party hunting is that ONLY one person is named on the tag. And whether a tag was won through GGS, Large Group, or individual application the tag holder gets to decide who hunts on his tag, and what animal to put his tag on.

If we had a system where only people listed on the adult tag can hunt on it/fill it (kill the moose) that would allow us to continue party hunting in a controlled manner. Also I would like to see where in a group only 1 tag is issued per group application so that once the one moose is down those hunters are done (for moose, now out come the shottys for grouse, rabbits etc).

FW

[QUOTE=Fishy Wishy;877893]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chameleon

Also I would like to see where in a group only 1 tag is issued per group application so that once the one moose is down those hunters are done (for moose, now out come the shottys for grouse, rabbits etc).

FW

---

Agree.

If your name is associated with a successful adult tag from the draw then the opportunity to hunt an Adult then you forfeit your right to hunt a calf.

[QUOTE=chameleon;877904]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fishy Wishy

Agree.

If your name is associated with a successful adult tag from the draw then the opportunity to hunt an Adult then forfeit your right to hunt a calf.

---

Agree as well

The fact nearly 50 % of the application to the Tag draw represents individual application suggests to me that there are a lot of hunters who feel otherwise.

Re read what you just wrote
This is how the system is manipulated! Most of these individual APPLICANTS belong to a group who already have met the "minimum" requirement for an adult tag or 2 and instead of using all the "pool 1" apps they apply individually and this is how groups of 7-10 get 3-4 adult tags this is rampant in the northwest WMU's
Another point at least 1/2 or 25% of the individual apps are "pool 2" applicants

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by werner.reiche

I'd like to see QC's use of multiple tags required for a single moose implemented in Ontario as well - if you are 'party hunting' on an adult tag, when that tag get used, you're done.

---

Ive been saying this for the longest time
this system will work!!!!

Some good ideas posted thus far, some not so much ! I would hope you are sending your comments to the MNRF. I don't believe for one minute it will do any good, but you never know.

You can come up with as many permutations as you want about tag distribution but the simple reality is they ( MNR) have control over the amount of tags issued and therefor control over the harvest. They have a very good idea what the actual harvests are from licenses sold. If they feel a unit is overhunted they can simply cut the tags back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rick_iles

Some good ideas posted thus far, some not so much ! I would hope you are sending your comments to the MNRF. I don't believe for one minute it will do any good, but you never know.

---

This policy is already decided. Consultations are an attempt to fool hunters into thinking they actually get listened to.

They would need:
A) Regular population surveys
B) Balls to tell hunters they are reducing tags/opportunities
C) Integrity to put the moose herd before the general coffers.

FW

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fishy Wishy

They would need:
A) Regular population surveys
B) Balls to tell hunters they are reducing tags/opportunities
C) Integrity to put the moose herd before the general coffers.

FW

---

I would also add a mandatory check in of all moose harvests. This is in place in Quebec. No guessing, actual legislated data collected every year. Plenty of MNR staff on the payroll who could be deployed a few weeks a year to manage that process. Might be a good thing for some of these Wildlife desk jockeys to actually see what a moose looks like in the flesh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by terrym

This policy is already decided. Consultations are an attempt to fool hunters into thinking they actually get listened to.

---

X


Something we can all surely agree on.

Consensus WOW !

There may be hope yet!


CC

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fishy Wishy

They would need:o
A) Regular population surveys
B) Balls to tell hunters they are reducing tags/opportunities
C) Integrity to put the moose herd before the general coffers.

FW

---

X


I think there should be a ( #1.) Which reads

The Balls to tell the Politicians to butt out and let them do their job free of special interest groups influence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by terrym

I would also add a mandatory check in of all moose harvests. This is in place in Quebec. No guessing, actual legislated data collected every year. Plenty of MNR staff on the payroll who could be deployed a few weeks a year to manage that process. Might be a good thing for some of these Wildlife desk jockeys to actually see what a moose looks like in the flesh.

---

SO TRUE!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chameleon

X


I think there should be a ( #1.) Which reads

The Balls to tell the Politicians to butt out and let them do their job free of special interest groups influence.

---

Boy you hit the nail on the head there. Too many cooks in the kitchen with a political interest.

In my 25+ years of moose hunting the only decline in the amount of moose I saw on a hunt began when the MNR and Outfitters got together and dug up the logging roads denying the tax paying public access to public land. I haven't seen anything during my hunting career to make me think there is an issue with the population or the harvest.

Quote:

---

Don't blame the players, blame the game. (government $$)

---

Problem is there are some dirty players out there who won't use common sense. Because the Gov't allows it doesn't mean we have to do it. some of us are blaming the government by mismanaging the herd but justifying our actions by saying that f the gov't says we can do it then by god we're gonna do it until they change it. Time we hunters stepped up and used common sense that some are saying the gov't should be using!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redd foxx

Problem is there are some dirty players out there who won't use common sense. Because the Gov't allows it doesn't mean we have to do it. some of us are blaming the government by mismanaging the herd but justifying our actions by saying that f the gov't says we can do it then by god we're gonna do it until they change it. Time we hunters stepped up and used common sense that some are saying the gov't should be using!!

---

Therein lays the rub,redd. Now,the OMNRF has had a "come to Jesus" moment saying that we can't continue with it,anymore,and we're going to change it. Everyone is PO'd. Something had to give,somewhere.

There in may lay the problem.

Many have lost FAITH in their teachings.

Management tools such as

"In God we trust "

"The devil made me do it" as an excuse when they get caught screwing up.
i.e.. (THE DEVIL = Politicians driven by special Interest group)

Just doesn't cut it anymore

C