Slap in the face from the mnrf

This lastest move by the MNRF shows a lack of respect for hunters and no sence of their obligation to the hunters of Ontario. I had a snowshoe hare hunt planned with my son and grandaughter. I can't believe that the mnrf would close the season so abruptly, with 10 weeks left in the legal traditional season. The snowshoe hare population in wmu's 1 thru 60 are not in any immediate danger of going extinct and as a matter fact they doing just fine with traditional seasons and limits that have been in place for many years.
Not a rabbit hunter, don't worry the mnrf will be streamlining you next.

I thank you very much Kathryn McGarry

She likely has never seen a rabbit !!

I'm expecting there're is going to be a lot more this kind of thing.

Somebody has to make sure there's lots of rabbits to feed all the Algonquin Wolf hybrids the MNRF is trying to "protect",right?

Is there a site where they post these mid-season reg changes? I know the planning and excitement that goes into planning a hunt, this would totally suck!

Bep

I've always been concerned about MNR hiring biologists who are clearly anti-hunters. I can name a couple around here who should have absolutely no say in determining seasons, quotas, etc.

The MNR has made an utter hash of this change.

Since there is no pressing conservation concern, it would have made sense to put the new regulations in place after the closing date of the last affected season (June), or (because that might conflict with the new ban on turtle harvest), to phase the implementation so rabbit hunters wouldn't be affected.

Instead, they made the whole thing effective April 1. They posted the changes on the EBR on March 31. OFAH, trying to keep its members informed, posts warnings on social media April 1, which some people take as an April Fools' joke. This morning, based on what I read elsewhere on the forum (see thread in Small Game), it seems some COs are not even aware that the regulations have changed, and still think this is in the recommendation stage.

Completely disorganized, sowing confusion everywhere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rick_iles

She likely has never seen a rabbit !!

---

Not true knows Easter bunny !

it seems to me that that every MNR action taken in the past few years has been aimed at reducing hunting opportunities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moe

Its like sawbill says, lots of antis working at MNRF. But it also starts at the top.....

---

Have not read the reg change as don't keep abreast of social media postings by mnr but let me get this straight. I decide to spend the winter at the remote cottage with no cell reception. I abide by the printed regs and harvest snowshoe hares all winter ( I wish). Enforcement corals me with a season change of which I am unaware. I'm busted? Think I would be attennding court on that one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hollywood

it seems to me that that every MNR action taken in the past few years has been aimed at reducing hunting opportunities.

---

Such as the spring bear hunt? The mourning dove hunt?

I felt for the beagles in those areas when I read that. Going to be a lot of very bored dogs now and looking to get into mischief instead. Being an owner of two that is the first thing I thought of. CHEERS!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

Such as the spring bear hunt? The mourning dove hunt?

---

touche.
Not giving the MNR any credit on this show on the rabbit hunt, but as pointed out, there has been some good stuff as well. Just don't understand how they can mess something up so much as a simple reg change. The right way would have been to leave this year alone and implement the changes in next season's regs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

Somebody has to make sure there's lots of rabbits to feed all the Algonquin Wolf hybrids the MNRF is trying to "protect",right?

---

They are not done eating all the moose and deer yet. Rabbits are too much work for too little reward till the deer are gone. Of course there are still lots of slow moving things bigger then rabbits just across the city limits. Wish they would start in TO. Everyone there loves their little local coyote, just wait till the hybreds move in and take over. Cats, Raccoons, dogs are all going on the menu.

This is a government that is very anti gun anti hunting. What do you expect they will do in the dieing days of its mandate?

If there hadn't been constant pressure from police agencies and municipalities to bring in a spring hunt because of nuisance bears there still wouldn't be one. The decision to re-instate it had absolutely nothing to do with conservation principles or hunting opportunities.
Like so many of their recent decisions, it was all politics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

They are not done eating all the moose and deer yet. Rabbits are too much work for too little reward till the deer are gone. Of course there are still lots of slow moving things bigger then rabbits just across the city limits. Wish they would start in TO. Everyone there loves their little local coyote, just wait till the hybreds move in and take over. Cats, Raccoons, dogs are all going on the menu.

---

I'm pretty sure they are already here in the southwest. We've shot a few that look exactly like the video.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rick_iles

I'm pretty sure they are already here in the southwest. We've shot a few that look exactly like the video.

---

The ones in Splaker's video thread are identical to the ones we've been shooting as "brush wolves" around here for decades. That whole "algonquin wolf preserve the species" thing is just a crock. Sorry,didn't mean to derail this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sawbill

If there hadn't been constant pressure from police agencies and municipalities to bring in a spring hunt because of nuisance bears there still wouldn't be one.

---

True.

And the nuisance mourning doves? The cops around here were certainly frustrated with the volume of dove calls. ;)

Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk

I might suggest Sawbill, that the constant pressure to deal with the ever growing problem up North was only 40-50% of it. The other 50% was that they had finally ranged far enough South that they were a nuisance in cottage country to (or becoming one) and they were starting show up with some regularity in bed room communities. It was now "politically safe".

Even today, the same thinking is what has Ms Wynne shooting down Mayor Tory's screams for tolls on the Gardner and DVP.
The 416 is still solidly liberal, the 905 is turning against and they will probably lose a lot of seats there. Its politically safe, to disappoint Tory and the 416, in order to gain favour with the 905.

It has jack squat to do with whats right, wrong, fair, whatever......and everything to do with political expediency.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

The ones in Splaker's video thread are identical to the ones we've been shooting as "brush wolves" around here for decades. That whole "algonquin wolf preserve the species" thing is just a crock. Sorry,didn't mean to derail this thread.

---

I don't know that its "derailing it", it's a natural thing that occurs with any discussion. Be it a discussion on a forum, be it a discussion at a table. Its starts with the main trunk ( the topic) then the sapling grows ( politics vs sound game management) and then branches start shooting off the main trunk ( Bears, coyotes, etc).

All related.

The primary reason for extending protection to Coyotes? And I do recall many heated debates about the state of other prey, be it Whitetails or dwindling small game ( and gee what a surprise here we are months later, changes to small game hunting). ok fine, if Rabbits seem to be a cause of concern, make changes. No big deal.

Flies in the face protecting their predators.

"We are afraid hunters will mistake hybrid mutts for wolves"
Really? not sure how anyone can mistake this, and actual remnant of an "Algonquin wolf"
http://jbenphotography.ca/img/s11/v3/p2220848357-5.jpg
http://jbenphotography.ca/img/s6/v145/p2220848352-5.jpg

With "those"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rick_iles

I'm pretty sure they are already here in the southwest. We've shot a few that look exactly like the video.

---

I would believe you more then an MNRF Biologist. Just saying if you know what I mean.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

True.

And the nuisance mourning doves? The cops around here were certainly frustrated with the volume of dove calls. ;)

Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk

---

You forget the doves like to sit on power and telephone lines.......Right ABOVE the cop cars.:scream:

And lastly.
Is there anything out there that supports Sawbills assertion that there are biologist that are against hunting?


Keith Munro, a PhD candidate at Trent University, said the goal of the work is to find a way to live alongside deer.
"Is there a way that we can manage deer by influencing their behaviour as opposed to just controlling their population numbers as we do now?" asked Munro, referring to deer hunts used to cull herds.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa...tudy-1.1290464

Why would anyone be surprised that someone who is against hunting might or would be drawn to a career in game management?
What percentage of the biologist are against hunting? Who knows, but its not a stretch at all to assume some are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

True.

And the nuisance mourning doves? The cops around here were certainly frustrated with the volume of dove calls. ;)

Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk

---

welsh,

I am surprised at you. You are usually better on the ball with your fact checking. Mourning doves are a migratory bird and fall under the federal jurisdiction; not provincial. So the MNRF had nothing to do with bringing in the hunt for mourning doves. The conservatives are the ones who okayed the dove hunt.

Dyth

Federal jurisdiction, but with provincial cooperation.

Only Ontario, Quebec, and BC have mourning dove seasons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

Federal jurisdiction, but with provincial cooperation.

Only Ontario, Quebec, and BC have mourning dove seasons.

---

But that provincial co-operation is tied to all migratory bird species. The federal government sets the limits and seasons and the province simply enforces them. To my knowledge, the province does not have any power to refuse a migratory bird hunting season (I don't see anything in the Migratory Bird Act or Regulations which give the provinces a power to over-rule the federal government).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JBen

And lastly.
Is there anything out there that supports Sawbills assertion that there are biologist that are against hunting?.

---

my professors at University who taught me biology (mostly population dynamics) were all in support of hunting as a conservation management tool, and they are primarily the reason I started getting into hunting myself. I hope most biologists are aware (at least here in Guelph they are) that hunters play a key role in conserving wild game species.

Nothing in the law gives the province a veto, but that doesn't mean the feds can force a season on a province where the province doesn't want it. There are agreements between the feds and the provinces outside the law itself. If the feds wanted to force some migratory birds issue against the wishes of a provincial F&G dept, the F&G dept's first answer can be, "Enforce your own regulations," which the feds don't have the resources to do. Somewhere in the byzantine depths of the federal budget, money is transferred to Ontario to enforce the regs for the feds, and this is why the province has a say.

Key point being here, there is really no reason to believe that the MNR is full of antis and is steadily taking away hunting opportunities for that reason. That idea doesn't survive an encounter with the facts.

We had a bio in Sudbury who was a known anti (not sure where she is now) and one CO who was very vocal about his distaste about hunting and trapping.
Regardless of the dove comment MNR has done very little in providing actual increased hunting opportunities. Lengthening a bear hunt into moose season when the focus is now on the moose hunt or lengthening the moose hunt to a period when most everyone finished with their hunt is nothing more than a chance for MNR to pat their collective backs and say we're giving you what you want.

I'm sure they do Efouge, but as noted above theres at least one, who would rather look for ways "to live with them" (aka hands off) and alter their behavioural patterns (which in itself is somewhat concerning, should we really be trying to alter any animals natural behaviours and instincts) versus solely using time tested and true techniques. That does not mean said person is an "anti", but rather would prefer more hands off, versus traditional means of controlling their numbers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JBen

I might suggest Sawbill, that the constant pressure to deal with the ever growing problem up North was only 40-50% of it. The other 50% was that they had finally ranged far enough South that they were a nuisance in cottage country to (or becoming one) and they were starting show up with some regularity in bed room communities. It was now "politically safe".

Even today, the same thinking is what has Ms Wynne shooting down Mayor Tory's screams for tolls on the Gardner and DVP.
The 416 is still solidly liberal, the 905 is turning against and they will probably lose a lot of seats there. Its politically safe, to disappoint Tory and the 416, in order to gain favour with the 905.

It has jack squat to do with whats right, wrong, fair, whatever......and everything to do with political expediency.

---

JBen, you seem to have some insight on how the mnrf and their biologists operate. Maybe you can explain their rationale and reasoning for reducing snowshoe hare harvesting and season cuts in wmu's 1 thru 60 ?

Lol I would look for Sawbill's thought on that. Being from the north he'd have some kind of idea in their numbers and having some familiarity with the MNR hoe they work as well.

Me, I follow politics and I am very cynical of politicians. If policticians decide to do A, and give a reason that sounds plausible, I will question everything, from all angles and it's only when I cant see a political angle/reason will I begin to think there isnt one.

Don't know enough about Snowshoes up there to really guess at why the MNR would make a fairly large change like that, nor are they some kind of issue that would suggest politics.

tell me about it .... def a time that hunters should unite as one

I'm an enthusiastic, small game hunter from the Thunder Bay / WMU 13 area.

I had buzzed the local MNR office (and left a message) as soon as I had heard about this ...on social media. (Which isn't how one expects to hear about hunting regulation changes.) I had my doubts, as it seemed like a foolish and ridiculously abrupt way to implement new regs. ...Especially ones having an immensely questionable rationale in an area with no apparent shortage of snowshoe hares.

He (the C.O.) got back to me promptly on Monday morning, assured me that (paraphrased) - it was clearly a misrepresentation of a recommendation, not an actual enacted regulation change. ...to change the regs so quickly and abruptly would be utterly ridiculous. He assured me that I was good to hunt snowshoes until June 15th, as noted in the printed regulations.
He also asked if I could spread the word on that (on whichever forms of social media I used) –using his name, as he wouldn't want people to be misled by such BS.

So I did. Of course!
Immediately and cheerfully.

Well, (damn) ...he calls back 30 minutes later to take it all back– the recommended changes were in fact enacted across the board, effective April 1st.
He was a little shocked, *quite* apologetic, and obviously pissed off... —I don't think he could believe the irrational stupidity of the situation.

I asked him what he would do if he came across hare hunters (with harvested hares) within the next few weeks, and he replied with a snort- (again/paraphrased):

"There's no way I'd charge them, even if I wanted to...it'd be laughed out of the courtroom-- no doubt in my mind. They'd have a hardcopy of the up-to-date regs against word of mouth and electronic media postings. ...I'd just inform them of the new season and limits, tell them to stop their hunt, and to enjoy the bunnies they had."

I could sense him shaking his head throughout the conversation. He was baffled. And I felt bad for him, –being unprepared & clearly uninformed by his "superiors", while on the frontline of contact, representing regulations that he knew from his own literal observational experience that were total nonsense from a practical perspective.

Anyway- Concerning the hares, I haven't heard any official rationale/reason for the change other than "streamlining".

Unfortunately, "streamlining" isn't a "science-based" reason. It is however, a method of making things simpler for people who ride desks and rubberstamp things for a living.

(As others have mentioned- ...It *may* be part of a larger plan to reduce the number/keep firearms out of the bush for a longer period of time during the warmer months.) (?)

In all sincerity- If there's a scientific rationale behind the changes in my WMU, I haven't heard it from any official sources yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jayardia

(As others have mentioned- ...It may also be part of a larger plan to reduce the number/keep firearms out of the bush for a longer period of time during the warmer months.)

---

This one is just silly. Everything somehow comes back to guns.

There was IIRC some rationale included in the Dec. 14 EBR posting, but this seems to be gone now that the regs are enacted. The obvious way to get the rationale is to contact MNR. OFAH also may be able to help.

Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk

Agreed... but I'm left grasping at straws.

I'll certainly keep asking around.

It seems as if the mnr is starting to operate kind of like food companies,where animal welfare activist are becoming management in these corporations right under our noses and it's starting to have an effect...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

Nothing in the law gives the province a veto, but that doesn't mean the feds can force a season on a province where the province doesn't want it. There are agreements between the feds and the provinces outside the law itself. If the feds wanted to force some migratory birds issue against the wishes of a provincial F&G dept, the F&G dept's first answer can be, "Enforce your own regulations," which the feds don't have the resources to do. Somewhere in the byzantine depths of the federal budget, money is transferred to Ontario to enforce the regs for the feds, and this is why the province has a say.

Key point being here, there is really no reason to believe that the MNR is full of antis and is steadily taking away hunting opportunities for that reason. That idea doesn't survive an encounter with the facts.

---

Obviously there is a working relationship there but I don't think the provinces have as much say to what the federal government enacts. Police and CO's are to enforce the laws and regulations of the land, both federal,provincial and municipal whether one level of government agrees with a certain law or not.

With that said, I agree, there isn't a reason to think the MNRF is stacking the ministry with anti hunters. However, bungling this roll-out doesn't exactly help their reputation.

Honestly, I imagine the actual "enemy" is over generalization and *bureaucratic disconnect*... to which- (GAH!) -I'm quite accustomed to in my field.

Metaphorically speaking- using a broad brush, when a fine one is required, ...and misunderstanding "the map" for "the territory".

Hopefully there'll be more to come this. ---Either a good and solid explanation...and/or an appropriate fine tuning of the regs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jayardia

Honestly, I imagine the actual "enemy" is over generalization and *bureaucratic disconnect*... to which- (GAH!) -I'm quite accustomed to in my field.

Metaphorically speaking- using a broad brush, when a fine one is required, ...and misunderstanding "the map" for "the territory".

Hopefully there'll be more to come this. ---Either a good and solid explanation...and/or an appropriate fine tuning of the regs.

---

Further on your over-generalization and disconnect point, it could also be the "Bambi effect". The minister brings down an initiative to curb hunting in the "spring" only to not understand the majority of the province still has snow. Perhaps whomever thought this up doesn't understand how little bunnies are hunted up north.

Im figuring once marijuana is legal we should see some of these regulations becoming more relaxed...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jayardia

Honestly, I imagine the actual "enemy" is over generalization and *bureaucratic disconnect*...

---

Over-generalization is certainly a big part of this. The original proposal would have imposed the same grouse limits across southern Ontario regardless of the state of local populations and habitat. The MNR is applying a very broad brush here.

But the broad brush may be justifiable ... it's the reasons for this season change that are a bit of a puzzler.

The snowshoe hare population where I live is on the upswing in recent years after a low. I am seeing them in my yard and my neighbours yards as well, at all times of the day.

There is no reason they couldnt have made this change effective for 2018. They did the same to the moose hunters a few years ago when the restricted the calf hunt at the last minute and oretty much cancelled the hunt for those that did not get adult tags and could not reschedule vacation time.

I have no problem streamlining the regs because let's face it way to many WMUs with different regs. We are a huge province so the rules can't be uniform but surely there is room for streamlining. I wouldn't read anything sinister into this just same old when dealing with gov regulations, what sounds good in a meeting room in Ottawa or Toronto doesn't play in the real world. Like most things government does: good intentions, total cluster F in execution. A similar situation happened a few years back on the fishing side when the government made some changes to the regs for panfish. Panfish, Like small game are an often over looked resource but one that still needs to be managed, problem is that pan fishing is a big draw for US customers, resort owners had already booked trade shows in the US and had some customers booked as well when the changes were sprung on them. Not quite abruptly as this but still too quickly. Once again not a bad idea but poor implementation.

i had a hare at my front door this week.
sad, because i had planned a hunt early april... where else am i to find my chocolate eggs?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by punkrockerpj

i had a hare at my front door this week.
sad, because i had planned a hunt early april... where else am i to find my chocolate eggs?

---

It's back on- (for this year) -until June 15th. ...At least it is in the northwest--

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/t...sion-1.4067071

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by punkrockerpj

i had a hare at my front door this week.
sad, because i had planned a hunt early april... where else am i to find my chocolate eggs?

---

I'd think twice about any chocolate eggs you find.

Glad I missed the whole hullabaloo, the hunt was off and back on again before I've had a chance to go out!

Also, I see that there is no open season for Snapping Turtle hunting in Ontario anymore.