Moose hunting Changes

I have been reading with great interest the proposed changes to Ontario's moose hunt and would like to comment on a few things;

1. I read a news release in the Timmins paper from the OFAH by biologist Ryckman. He commented that the proposal of a two week period for calf hunting down from the current nine weeks is going to cause great grief in our forests, hunters fighting for prime locations, or just fighting period. To a non hunter reading his article, you would have the opinion that ONLY calves are hunted during the Ontario moose hunt and that ALL moose hunters in the Province are going to cram themselves into that two week timeframe to hunt calves. Worse yet, to the animal rights organizations it also appears that we only hunt the “babies” during the annual hunt. Therefore the wording in the news release, could have explained more clearly that the moose hunt involves the taking of adults over the total season and a proposed limited hunt of two weeks for calves be included with the hunt for adults.

2. Regarding the proposed changes, first off let me say I have hunted moose for almost fifty years, every year, all over the Province and therefore think I have a credible opinion based on my observations and experience over that timeframe. I am a long-term member of the OFAH and suspect some of my following comments will not sit well with some of my fellow OFAH members.

I have seen the early years where there was moose everywhere you went, and most were road hunted by parking and walking to a secret swamp, ridge etc or by waterways. Those that worked for it, generally were successful. Logging roads were always in place way back then, some passable some not..........hence the walking and stalking aspect of the early years. But along came ATV’S and over the years to current time, the hunting landscape changed. Access was now available to those places that before were impenetrable and moose populations were stable or increasing. Now those areas saw a decrease of animals and it continues today. Yes I have a ATV but do not use it for hunting but for retrieval of game if necessary. I also realize that for some senior hunters they may be the only way to have dad or grandpa continue his hunt with the gang and I applaud that. My point is though, that ATV’s have increased hunter success in the taking of animals. It is a fact.

In the early years, we always saw the odd bear, but now I think you would agree we see a lot more. Statistics by the Ministry state there are more bear in Ontario than Moose. If there are more fox than chicken in the henhouse, what’s the future for the chickens???? The bears are eating new born calves left and right.

3. I have absolutely no faith based on my own knowledge, in the data gleaned from the questionnaire the Ministry sends out every year to moose hunters. Some hunters report lots of moose seen in hopes this data figure will result in more tags being issued for a particular WMU. Some do not report filling a tag thinking that info is used somehow in the lottery allotment success. The ministry cannot manage a population if they do not have accurate numbers on animals harvested. I see no reason that a mandatory reporting of tags filled is not instituted. NOT during the hunt or within 24 hrs. Make it a requirement that a legally tagged moose be reported within two weeks upon the closure of the season. Any ethical and legal hunter I know would not be opposed to such a requirement.

4. I don’t know of any hunting party or individual that before applying in the May draw says, “Well this fall we’re going calf moose hunting this year” They apply for a adult tag and prey they are successful in the draw. Those that are unsuccessful, either go anyway to celebrate the tradition of the gang getting together, hunt some birds, or do some fishing, or do something else. My point is, hunters want to bag a adult moose and they don’t start off in May looking for a calf. SO WHY ARE SO MANY OF US UPSET ABOUT A RESTRICTED CALF SEASON. We didn’t want one to start with. With this in mind, we should support a total ban on calf hunting, say for a three year period AND THEN do a comprehensive survey to look at herd numbers. If numbers are up good for us and the moose. If not, then there are other factors at play which we all know of, which will have to be addressed.

Any plan by the Ministry radical or not has to be supported. The moose population will not increase overnight. it will take time. BUT if it means a return, down the road, to the hunts of years ago, more moose, more tags, happier gangs, I am all for it.

Gentlemen, in closing, if we do not band together and support some radical ideas to increase the moose population it will fast become a tradition that we once did and only talk about in our local Tim Horton's NOT the hunt camp.

TIGERTAIL
Collingwood ON

"Any plan by the Ministry radical or not has to be supported."

So...as hunters we have to swallow whatever the government feeds us? Like sheep. I for one prefer to hold the ministry accountable and ask that they justify any management actions that they propose.

If they ban all calf hunting then they will lose $ which makes it hard for them to do a comprehensive study.

I dont mind not hunting calves tho.

if we licenced hunters support a 3 yr moratorium on calf hunting what will cause others to not harvest them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lazyman

if we licenced hunters support a 3 yr moratorium on calf hunting what will cause others to not harvest them?

---

I agree 100%, but until the entire harvest is controlled, its a lost cause. I don't blame the bears and wolves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sherlockbonez

If they ban all calf hunting then they will lose $ which makes it hard for them to do a comprehensive study.

I dont mind not hunting calves tho.

---

I agree.

Bears and Wolves have always been the "constant" in the equation. There was never an issue until we started to target calves,specifically,as a compensatory for the decrease in adult tag allocation. It was rigged from the get-go solely to keep license sales dollars flowing because,after a season or two of nothing to hunt,why would anyone buy an Ontario license? Rocket science it ain't.

How about a simple point system so that a group 2,3 or 4 guys who didn't draw last year can pretty much get a pick at a few wmu, say 48 or what ever else wmu that they give tags to. 10 bucks for the draw (because I'm sure the gov can't go cold turkey off my money) then the group that draws pay 200 (or how ever much a couple of tags goes for now. But cut out the calf hunting all together.

So it sort of split the hunters number in half but guarantee that everyone gets to go every other year. Which kind of sucks but I can spent my g note going somewhere else to poke holes in other stuff in alternate years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tigertail

He commented that the proposal of a two week period for calf hunting down from the current nine weeks is going to cause great grief in our forests, hunters fighting for prime locations, or just fighting period.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sherlockbonez

If they ban all calf hunting then they will lose $ which makes it hard for them to do a comprehensive study. I dont mind not hunting calves tho.

---

What would result if they shifted the allocations for a calf to a later period...ie..the last 4-6 weeks of the season. Since most hunters hit the bush the first week, a restriction on hunting calfs during that initial 2 week period would cut down the amount of calfs taken in a season overall.

I agree with the comments from Tigertail in regards to the use of ATV's....

X2 tiger. I have hunted same spot since the early 70's. Only accessible by air or water back than, now there are two new bridges, new roads, clear cuts, bush roads, atv trails and no cover with miles of open areas. At night the MNRF could make money from lost licence sales from vehicle traffic by setting up a toll booth or a timmy's. Ban calf hunting to all hunters not just licenced hunters that can now only hunt calfs for two weeks. There are 52 weeks in a year.

Every year there are over 50,000 hunters that arent affiliated with an adult tag. If calf hunting is eliminated, that's 50000 people who aren't allowed to go moose hunting, not to mention the loss of revenue to the mnr (we all complain already about the mnr not having enough funding to properly manage our resources. this would make it way worse)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dude Bro

Every year there are over 50,000 hunters that arent affiliated with an adult tag. If calf hunting is eliminated, that's 50000 people who aren't allowed to go moose hunting, not to mention the loss of revenue to the mnr (we all complain already about the mnr not having enough funding to properly manage our resources. this would make it way worse)

---

I have to disagree with you on this. Here we go again, dancing around about $, how much or how little of it. We need to manage the game populations in a manner in which they should be managed. A true game management plan should be about the animals first. If there are enough for a hunt then a hunt moves forward and licences are sold. The gov't and MNR didn't worry about the loss of $ when they shut down the bear hunt! So why the concern today?

Eliminate the calf/cow hunt - reinstate the spring bear hunt with 2 tags per hunter - and establish a wolf bounty.


DO THIS and you will see the moose herd rebound in record time!

the extra bear opportunities will bring in $.

a $200 wolf bounty - if say 2,000 wolves killed would cost $400,000 - a real deal if you ask me.

about the same price as 4 MNR on-staff biologists with one exception. 2,000 dead wolves would help the moose more then

the 4 biologists seem to be doing!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SK33T3R

I have to disagree with you on this. Here we go again, dancing around about $, how much or how little of it. We need to manage the game populations in a manner in which they should be managed. A true game management plan should be about the animals first. If there are enough for a hunt then a hunt moves forward and licences are sold. The gov't and MNR didn't worry about the loss of $ when they shut down the bear hunt! So why the concern today?

Eliminate the calf/cow hunt - reinstate the spring bear hunt with 2 tags per hunter - and establish a wolf bounty.


DO THIS and you will see the moose herd rebound in record time!

the extra bear opportunities will bring in $.

a $200 wolf bounty - if say 2,000 wolves killed would cost $400,000 - a real deal if you ask me.

about the same price as 4 MNR on-staff biologists with one exception. 2,000 dead wolves would help the moose more then

the 4 biologists seem to be doing!

---

That would work. I don't think you'll hit your 2000 wolf target though - even with the 200 bounty.

Those numbers are totally unrealistic - resident hunters aren't that interested in either bear or wolf hunts, even with a $200 bounty. Absolutely the resource should come first, but we're not at the point yet where we need to close hunting seasons as some people have suggested. Socio-economics of moose hunting can't be ignored and at this point they don't need to be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dude Bro

Those numbers are totally unrealistic - resident hunters aren't that interested in either bear or wolf hunts, even with a $200 bounty. Absolutely the resource should come first, but we're not at the point yet where we need to close hunting seasons as some people have suggested. Socio-economics of moose hunting can't be ignored and at this point they don't need to be.

---

"we're not at the point yet where we need to close hunting seasons"

How bad do we let it get before we do something meaningful?

If you want to generate more resident hunter interest in bear and wolf hunting:
a) require proof of a dead wolf/bear with your adult moose tag
b) allow sale of proof of a dead wolf/bear to a moose applicant lacking that (I got this idea from trading carbon credits - but in this case, it actually makes sense).

Don't get me wrong, we absolutely need to do something to help many populations. I just don't think that closing moose seasons is needed yet. There are plenty of other changes that can be tested before hunting should be prohibited.

I agree that the calf hunt should be eliminated or cut back. Bringing more calves through the winter will help the overall population - there is no mystery on that.

At this rate they will be endangered in my lifetime if they don't do something. Honestly maybe the government doesn't care. Maybe they figure when there are no big game to hunt the public won't need firearms anymore. And that will give them another so called reason to disarm us?!

I agree with you. Resident hunters aren't interested in hunting bears and wolves. If you want those predators hunted you gotta allow non-residents to hunt them for cheap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dude Bro

Those numbers are totally unrealistic - resident hunters aren't that interested in either bear or wolf hunts, even with a $200 bounty. Absolutely the resource should come first, but we're not at the point yet where we need to close hunting seasons as some people have suggested. Socio-economics of moose hunting can't be ignored and at this point they don't need to be.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ysyg

I agree 100%, but until the entire harvest is controlled, its a lost cause. I don't blame the bears and wolves.

---

Many good ideas on this thread but EVERYONE needs to buy into the management of moose. I know the courts don't agree but I'm not sure any management technique will work until all stakeholders agree to cooperate so ........ it's going to get worse before it gets better. IMO.
Dan O.

PS. I like the idea of shifting the hunting pressure to bears and the idea of requiring evidence of a harvested bear to qualify you for the moose hunt sounds interesting.

If they ain't gonna change then why should I?

I don't blame ATV's the same way I wouldn't blame television hunting shows, electronic game calls, this and other hunting forums or internet scouting. All of these are advancements that have made hunters better and as time goes on our skills will continue to get refined. It's part of evolving and making the best use of the tools available.

I don't know what the real issues are per say, just 2 years ago we shot 5 adult moose in a week, last year we shot none. Surely the entire eco system didn't change in 1 year from any of the suggested problems. I can also speculate about bears, wolves and natives however, I don't know how accurate the MNR numbers are and I can't see any reason why such a drastic drop took place in 1 year.

Going forward I'm perfectly happy never being able to hunt calves but we need a concrete agenda moving forward to ensure the future of the moose...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeffBondar

I don't blame ATV's the same way I wouldn't blame television hunting shows, electronic game calls, this and other hunting forums or internet scouting. All of these are advancements that have made hunters better and as time goes on our skills will continue to get refined. It's part of evolving and making the best use of the tools available.

I don't know what the real issues are per say, just 2 years ago we shot 5 adult moose in a week, last year we shot none. Surely the entire eco system didn't change in 1 year from any of the suggested problems. I can also speculate about bears, wolves and natives however, I don't know how accurate the MNR numbers are and I can't see any reason why such a drastic drop took place in 1 year.

Going forward I'm perfectly happy never being able to hunt calves but we need a concrete agenda moving forward to ensure the future of the moose...

---

Awwww - Jeff - you're going to hear a few comments about that... "I don't know what the real issues are per say, just 2 years ago we shot 5 adult moose in a week, last year we shot none. Surely the entire eco system didn't change in 1 year from any of the suggested problems.".

The part of the ecosystem that those moose made up changed a lot.

But if I had 5 tags, I'd have done the same - I just wouldn't be wondering what changed year-over-year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dude Bro

Those numbers are totally unrealistic - resident hunters aren't that interested in either bear or wolf hunts, even with a $200 bounty. Absolutely the resource should come first, but we're not at the point yet where we need to close hunting seasons as some people have suggested. Socio-economics of moose hunting can't be ignored and at this point they don't need to be.

---

resident hunters may not be interested in the 200 buck incentive but I can tell you that a whole lot of Ontario trappers would be and we could be very effective at it , right now trapping wolves is not cost effective at all

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by werner.reiche

That would work. I don't think you'll hit your 2000 wolf target though - even with the 200 bounty.

---

like I said in a previous post ,you find a way to come up with the money and just watch how many wolves some of us could harvest , trappers already take 50 percent of that number many years with no incentive.

I still am of the opinion that the moose air inventory data is flawed. They flew during one of the worst winters for snow depths in memory. I find it odd that guys I know that did hunt for calves in our usual blocks, saw lots if adult moose, cows and bulls.......no calves !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeffBondar

I don't know what the real issues are per say, just 2 years ago we shot 5 adult moose in a week, last year we shot none. Surely the entire eco system didn't change in 1 year from any of the suggested problems. I can also speculate about bears, wolves and natives however, I don't know how accurate the MNR numbers are and I can't see any reason why such a drastic drop took place in 1 year.
.

---

LOL; You shot 5 adult moose and you don't think that changed anything? I dont think the bears and wolves will have a chance at a moose with your group around LOL! It takes more than a year to replace 5 moose, they don't grow like mushrooms.

Seriously, why does anyone need 5 moose in one year, even if they are legally harvested?; yes it gives you the bragging rights but think for the future guys!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ahuntr300

LOL; You shot 5 adult moose and you don't think that changed anything? I dont think the bears and wolves will have a chance at a moose with your group around LOL! It takes more than a year to replace 5 moose, they don't grow like mushrooms.

Seriously, why does anyone need 5 moose in one year, even if they are legally harvested?; yes it gives you the bragging rights but think for the future guys!!

---

1st of all, last year when we shot "ZERO" we were in a totally different wmu because there were no tags available where we usually hunt. 5 years ago we got 1 bull, the year after we got 2 bulls, the year after that we got 2 bulls again, the year after that we got 4 bulls and 1 cow. According to our success the numbers were going up, not down. Obviously there are a lot of moose where we used to hunt.

Secondly, who are you to ask "why does anyone need 5 moose"? You have no idea how big our group is and many mouths that moose goes to feed. If you have a group of 4 you can look in the mirror and ask yourself "why do the 4 of us need a whole adult moose?" Give your head a shake......

On another note, where we used to hunt there is a local guide who routinely takes 50+ bears before we even get there for moose season. In the winter he takes clients out for wolves with good success rates.... We have good moose numbers in that spot because he's putting a dent in the predator population...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trappermatt

resident hunters may not be interested in the 200 buck incentive but I can tell you that a whole lot of Ontario trappers would be and we could be very effective at it , right now trapping wolves is not cost effective at all

---

BINGO! Matt figured out where I was coming from.
A bounty on wolves won't make it profitable for hunters going north but it will sure get local trappers out there catching them. And if it helps out the local economy then it's a bonus. It's a known fact the trappers can make a bigger dent in wolves in one season then a whole lot of seasons of hunters!

And if werner thinks my 2,000 wolves is too high all I can say was that it was only a guess and a starting figure to show how little a bounty will cost in perspective to what the results to the moose herd will be. The impact of a bounty will show immediate returns - not returns 10 or 15 yrs from now like that hair-brained SAVE THE CARIBOU SCHEME!

AND A FULL FLEDGED RETURN OF THE SPRING BEAR SEASON AND A 2 BEAR LIMIT

bear densities and numbers are sky high so let's get a handle on them NOW! We can always readjust when our ungulate problems are behind us.

We need action NOW and action FAST.

What we don't need are more studies and public meetings and blah blah blah!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeffBondar

On another note, where we used to hunt there is a local guide who routinely takes 50+ bears before we even get there for moose season. In the winter he takes clients out for wolves with good success rates.... We have good moose numbers in that spot because he's putting a dent in the predator population...

---

Jeff I hunted years ago south of Chapleau. A bear guy in that area was killing 50+ in the spring and 50+ in the fall..

MNR came in and slapped his wrists. This was when bears were fully unprotected. He was the only bear guide in ONTARIO ever to have restrictions placed upon him .BUT BUT I'll tell you what - He had moose coming out the ying yang! We bow hunted there and would see 20 moose every year. We finally had to leave because there were huge problems in the southern part of the WMU and tags were cut back to just about nil. He was in the northern part of the WMU. DUH? nothing made sense to us. We seen and got tons of moose! Maybe his bear harvest was excessive - maybe. But if the bears were not there then how did he get them? hmmm?
And I seen first hand the results to the moose herd. We then moved out past thunder bay for 3 yrs.


Everyone needs to understand that predators eat every day 24/7. Wolves are the biggest threat to moose because they prey on them all year long. Bears are primarily only preying on calves early in the spring.

Also don't forget that a spring bear hunt has everyone feeding bears at bait stations. These bears are more likely to stay close to the baits and take our handouts as long as we keep feeding them. Fat, full, lazy bears are less likely to be on a constant search for food (which may include a few calves)

a $200 bounty on wolves wouldnt help, the mnr would just make the wolf tags $400 each lol

as ive said before and will continue to say, a calf tag draw similar to 48... still generates income from calf tags, still gives hunters a chance at a moose, but will limit the amount of calves taken... calves are the future...

i agrea that wolves and bears will play a role in predation, but around my place, hunting of wolves is banned, so we have a large wolf population... the BMA area around me is not currently being used, only a few of us hunting the bears, and we have alot of bears... so... lots of bears, lots of wolves, a native harvest... yet still alot of moose... makes you wonder if that calf tag allocation dosent work after all ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SK33T3R

. Bears are primarily only preying on calves early in the spring.

Also don't forget that a spring bear hunt has everyone feeding bears at bait stations. These bears are more likely to stay close to the baits and take our handouts as long as we keep feeding them. Fat, full, lazy bears are less likely to be on a constant search for food (which may include a few calves)

---

i can agrea with you on that though... bears wouldnt need to search for food, if they had a constant food source...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishy steve

a $200 bounty on wolves wouldnt help, the mnr would just make the wolf tags $400 each lol

as ive said before and will continue to say, a calf tag draw similar to 48... still generates income from calf tags, still gives hunters a chance at a moose, but will limit the amount of calves taken... calves are the future...

i agrea that wolves and bears will play a role in predation, but around my place, hunting of wolves is banned, so we have a large wolf population... the BMA area around me is not currently being used, only a few of us hunting the bears, and we have alot of bears... so... lots of bears, lots of wolves, a native harvest... yet still alot of moose... makes you wonder if that calf tag allocation dosent work after all ;)

---

Steve you're lucky to have the moose in your unit and maybe some of the measures I'm calling for might not be necessary but there are LOTS of other WMU's out there were the balance between moose population and predators/hunters/natives is dangerously askew!

We can't control the natives so the MNR needs to figure out how to make it work controlling the other two participants. What puzzles me is the only one facing the chopping block is the hunter!

I wonder how the gov't will be collecting licence fees from the predators when there ain't any hunters left!

In wmu's that have high wolf and bear populations, all the restrictions put against moose hunters, will be futile!! The proof is that lack of moose in western wmu's where there are high numbers of predators.

North of here, trappers are enjoying the sport of trapping wolves and are doing a great job!! Many locals are inviting local trappers on their lands, to lower the wolf population. In trade, land owners give permission to trap the many other fur bearing animals. Also a good way to make trapping affordable.

Trapping is the best way of controlling predator numbers and disease in the N.W.

I will just tell you a personal tale. 11 guys were going up to our camp for moose in Zone 47. ( Commanda) ,in which this camp has been hunting for deer and moose for 80 years. Well 7 bailed when they found out no tags. Only 4 of 11 showed. We have had no worthy tags for 3 years. Those that went ,only saw 3 cows, Why would you spend a week and all that cash for a walk in the woods? First week of deer, 12 guys, ( 9 kills) Second week of deer 11 guys , (7 kills), why the turn out, because you have a chance! That's all people want is a chance. If you really have a chance you will give it a try.

In the words of the OFAH, "start managing moose and not just moose hunters". Trappermatt - you're absolutely right that high trapper participation would be required in order to kill enough wolves to benefit the moose population. I'd be afraid of abuse of the bounty system like what happened in Manitoba or Saskatchewan (forget which). Trappers and hunters were bringing in feet from wolves harvested outside of that jurisdiction in order to collect the bounty. Scamming the government and not doing a g0ddamn thing to help the management program.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dude Bro

In the words of the OFAH, "start managing moose and not just moose hunters". Trappermatt - you're absolutely right that high trapper participation would be required in order to kill enough wolves to benefit the moose population. I'd be afraid of abuse of the bounty system like what happened in Manitoba or Saskatchewan (forget which). Trappers and hunters were bringing in feet from wolves harvested outside of that jurisdiction in order to collect the bounty. Scamming the government and not doing a g0ddamn thing to help the management program.

---

because we have a different system of management with trappers here I don't think you would have any problems with that and wolves and coyotes are different as well ,all you would have to do is tie the incentive money into the mandatory report trappers must do yearly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SK33T3R

BINGO! Matt figured out where I was coming from.
A bounty on wolves won't make it profitable for hunters going north but it will sure get local trappers out there catching them. And if it helps out the local economy then it's a bonus. It's a known fact the trappers can make a bigger dent in wolves in one season then a whole lot of seasons of hunters!

And if werner thinks my 2,000 wolves is too high all I can say was that it was only a guess and a starting figure to show how little a bounty will cost in perspective to what the results to the moose herd will be. The impact of a bounty will show immediate returns - not returns 10 or 15 yrs from now like that hair-brained SAVE THE CARIBOU SCHEME!

AND A FULL FLEDGED RETURN OF THE SPRING BEAR SEASON AND A 2 BEAR LIMIT

bear densities and numbers are sky high so let's get a handle on them NOW! We can always readjust when our ungulate problems are behind us.

We need action NOW and action FAST.

What we don't need are more studies and public meetings and blah blah blah!

---

Not only 2 bear limit, I wanted to be like in 1988 when I start hunting bears as many you can kill spring or fall


http://i247.photobucket.com/albums/g...ps27hwkxkk.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skull

Not only 2 bear limit, I wanted to be like in 1988 when I start hunting bears as many you can kill spring or fall

---

I REMEMBER THOSE YEARS WELL!

every deer tag or moose tag was a combo tag deer/bear or moose/bear

and bear outfitters could hit the client up for extra cash if the client wanted to get a 2nd bear.

I mostly hunted as a resident and our group of 10 bear hunters never abused it! We limited our harvest and gave the $ to the gov't for each tag.

I think what pushed the gov't to institute the 1 bear per year limit was because of the black market for gall bladders. A guy could go crazy and make a lot more money from the galls then what the small licence fee was back then.

I don't think we need a return to unlimited hunting but a 2 bear per year would sure be nice!

They currently issue 2nd tags in a few units and there is hardly any participation for them at all. Why this is not province wide is beyond imagination! Those desk biologists should stick to saving frogs and salamanders and let us - the hunters - and the OFAH handle the big stuff!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dude Bro

In the words of the OFAH, "start managing moose and not just moose hunters". Trappermatt - you're absolutely right that high trapper participation would be required in order to kill enough wolves to benefit the moose population. I'd be afraid of abuse of the bounty system like what happened in Manitoba or Saskatchewan (forget which). Trappers and hunters were bringing in feet from wolves harvested outside of that jurisdiction in order to collect the bounty. Scamming the government and not doing a g0ddamn thing to help the management program.

---

so because there's a possibility of abuse - we sit back and do nothing! All our trappers are registered which will help! Also make it an offence with a super duper fine for the abusers!

or get together with Manitoba / sask / alberta and get everyone on board

if we don't we're just going to sit back and fiddle while Rome burns! There's a reason why we track HISTORY!

To guide us in the future! all I can say is WTF!

Like I have always said, the moose started downhill when they closed the spring bear. The finishing shot was the wolf hunting restrictions brought in by the liberal government in Jan. 2005.

Don't need more than 1 bear tag a year, just bring in the non resident bear hunt (spring) to help fix the bear problem. Will also help the Ontario government to pay some bills!! Maybe we can open our Tourist centre again (the one that cost the Liberal Government a couple of million to build) at the western entry into Ontario.

Or just have trappers trap more bears if a spring hunt is out of the question.

I'm convinced moose started going downhill long before the closure of the spring hunt. More logging roads, less habitat, the introduction of ATV's, more free recreational times, earlier retirements and smarter hunters are all factors that have impacted the moose population.
And I might add ribbon rail has led to an incredible increase in the number of train killed moose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chris lavoie

Don't need more than 1 bear tag a year, just bring in the non resident bear hunt (spring) to help fix the bear problem.

Or just have trappers trap more bears if a spring hunt is out of the question.

---

Chris
why have trappers catch surplus bears?

a 2 tag system would bring in way more $.
outfitters could get $400 or $500 for that extra bear. Butchers will be busier and taxidermists!

And selling a bear hunt now becomes super attractive. Many a hunter - especially with bears - has experienced "ground shrinkage"

your previous statement kinda contradicts itself.

How much is a trapper gonna get -- $100

In central Ontario, automatically allow any hunter with a deer or moose license to take 1 bear during the 2-week rifle deer season or 1-week rifle moose season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SK33T3R

Chris
why have trappers catch surplus bears?

a 2 tag system would bring in way more $.
outfitters could get $400 or $500 for that extra bear. Butchers will be busier and taxidermists!

And selling a bear hunt now becomes super attractive. Many a hunter - especially with bears - has experienced "ground shrinkage"

your previous statement kinda contradicts itself.

How much is a trapper gonna get -- $100

---

open up spring bear hunting, but stick with basically the same system thats in place now... meaning, 1 tag, but in wmu's that have either alot of bears, or not alot of hunting pressure, have a second tag available to purchase...

reduceing bears to vermin status wont do much good, as then we will have no moose to hunt, and no bear to hunt... then all the mnr needs to do is keep giving out 5 extra deer tags per hunter, and within the next 5 years, we will sucessfully have nothing left to hunt in ontario...

Skeeter, I agree it is contradictive comment. But if there is no spring hunt to manage the bears, somebody needs to take the bears. The fall hunt just does not do it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishy steve

open up spring bear hunting, but stick with basically the same system thats in place now... meaning, 1 tag, but in wmu's that have either alot of bears, or not alot of hunting pressure, have a second tag available to purchase...

reduceing bears to vermin status wont do much good, as then we will have no moose to hunt, and no bear to hunt... then all the mnr needs to do is keep giving out 5 extra deer tags per hunter, and within the next 5 years, we will sucessfully have nothing left to hunt in ontario...

---

Steve

The reason why the MNR issued 2nd bear tags in units was because the bear harvest could sustain it! The hunter participation has been dismal. Of course the units they issued were way the heck up in nowheresville. Most guys (residents up that way) just don't give a rats azz about bears. They especially don't care about giving the govt the extra $. SSS is a way of life.


In the units south of where those 2nd tags were issued MNR identified this as another area where bears needed more control - along came the spring trial season. This is an effort to get more bears harvested but a true bear hunter could either fill his tag in the spring or in the fall. The net result was - The actual yearly bear harvest didn't change at all.

allowing a second bear seal would allow the gov't more control over bear numbers then selling combo licences such as deer/bear or moose/bear.

The nice thing about additional seals is the MNR can cancel them at a moments notice if the harvest was too great. B

UT like we're all aware - and it's glaringly apparent

The MNR really has NO IDEA of numbers / densities etc etc. - especially bears.

I've talked to the bear biologist in my areas about a 2nd seal - and it's like talking to a wall.

They won't even issue 5 or 10 tags just on a trial basis to see what - if any hunter interest there might be.

just a closed door and his way or no way!

thats what im saying, issue 2nd seals where it can support it... not everywhere could handle haveing every hunter carrying 2 seals, some places already have a high bear hunting presence, and some have near null...

the reducing bears to vermin status was more towards the "as many as you can kill" comment,,,

What I don't get is that, out of all the units included in the limited spring bear hunt that they brought back last year, i think unit 13 is the only one that gives out second seals. Why the hell wouldn't the mnr make second seals available in all of those units if the problems are so bad?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dude Bro

What I don't get is that, out of all the units included in the limited spring bear hunt that they brought back last year, i think unit 13 is the only one that gives out second seals. Why the hell wouldn't the mnr make second seals available in all of those units if the problems are so bad?

---

Maybe we need to look at this from a different angle. Maybe the reason it was done the way it was - was to ensure limited participation and a very small harvest. Then, when it was all over, the MNR could show the public that the spring hunt is not that much of a threat to the bear population. Then they could reopen the entire thing back to what we had before. It's extremely hard to close or open something once it has a foothold. If this was the MNR plan all along to "hoodwink" the public to get the entire spring bear hunt back - then I applaud them - good idea if that's what it takes.

BUT (always a but) if this wasn't the plan then what they currently have "is a bad plan".

My fear is the exact opposite: what if they use the low number of hunters and harvest to demonstrate that the spring bear hunt is a useless tool for managing bears, and therefore they don't need to look at reopening it?

What they are finding out is that they need, is a spring hunt including non residents. Resident spring bear hunting is fine but proves not to be the answer!!

They mentioned last year that they will expand the spring hunt if the resident only hunt does not work.

The MNR just announced they are going to hire 1700 this coming summer. How will they pay for this??

Side note, they just announced today the closing of our only bank (credit union) in town for good. Loss of 4 jobs. Credit Unions been here since early 60's.

So Skeeter, liberals don't care one bit about potential jobs or benefit to the economy in Northern Ontario.

A spring bear hunt is good, but something has got to be done about the very high wolf populations. I think they take way more moose than bears, and not just the calves. Where I go the roads are littered with wolf scat and prints. A lot of the scat has moose hair in it.

You don't see moose hair in wolf scat here as there are no moose for them to eat!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ahuntr300

A spring bear hunt is good, but something has got to be done about the very high wolf populations. I think they take way more moose than bears, and not just the calves. Where I go the roads are littered with wolf scat and prints. A lot of the scat has moose hair in it.

---

I agree, wolves likely have a greater impact. Wolves hunt year round and hunt in packs which makes them far more effective killers. Bears hibernate during the part of the year that moose are most vulnerable from deep snow to weakened energy due to lack of food. Wolves are carnivores and need meat whereas a bear is an omnivore and will also eat vegetation. Wolves depend on game animals far more than bears.

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