Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 37

Thread: Deer wmu 47

  1. #21
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jaycee View Post
    That article is from April 2016 , old.
    I just spoke with a friend that has 800 acres in the area up there, he said that the feeding program was dropped at least 22 years ago by the then M.N.R. and that the hunt camps in the area carried on with it.
    He has been involved as he said he has taken from his farm In the K.W. area, 15 round bales of good hay for the least 18 years, the last 3 years the number of hay bales has dropped considerably as the number of deer has been dwindling drastically.
    They used to feed the deer down the Jack Lake Road area in Apsley,I suppose all that is gone now.

  2. # ADS
    Advertisement
    ADVERTISEMENT
     

  3. #22
    Apprentice

    User Info Menu

    Default

    The MNRF interferred with the Loring deer yards much the same way they interferred with the Walleye enhancment programme run by volunteers in the Loring area. The fish ponds that were made to rear walleye fingerlings for the local lakes worked really well but that programme is gone as well.

  4. #23
    Just starting out

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Hunted the first weekend and saw 1 buck (harvested) other than that I didn't see much sign of anything. Also heard very little shooting in the area.

  5. #24
    Needs a new keyboard

    User Info Menu

    Default

    The most important thing we can do as individuals right now is to remember to complete (by mail, phone or internet) the MNRF deer hunt questionnaires that we all received. This is the data upon which the MNRF makes future management decisions. Please complete and submit your questionnaires.

    On an organizational scale, I've been reaching out on behalf of our hunt camp to OFAH Zone D, OFAH Directors-at-large and to the Ontario Hunt Camps Association to work with them to get our concerns to the MNRF. If you are not a member of any of these organizations, I suggest you put your comments/concerns in writing directly to the MNRF (Peterborough head office) and to Norm Miller MPP.
    What calm deer hunterís heart has not skipped a beat when the silence of a cold November morning afield is broken by the echoes of hounds tonguing yonder?


  6. #25
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ninepointer View Post
    The most important thing we can do as individuals right now is to remember to complete (by mail, phone or internet) the MNRF deer hunt questionnaires that we all received. This is the data upon which the MNRF makes future management decisions. Please complete and submit your questionnaires.

    On an organizational scale, I've been reaching out on behalf of our hunt camp to OFAH Zone D, OFAH Directors-at-large and to the Ontario Hunt Camps Association to work with them to get our concerns to the MNRF. If you are not a member of any of these organizations, I suggest you put your comments/concerns in writing directly to the MNRF (Peterborough head office) and to Norm Miller MPP.
    Don't lie though, tons of guys figure that if they say they saw a pile of deer then they will get more antlerless tags.

    Great conservationists eh.

  7. #26
    Needs a new keyboard

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fox View Post
    Don't lie though, tons of guys figure that if they say they saw a pile of deer then they will get more antlerless tags.

    Great conservationists eh.
    That would truly be sad if hunters lied on their surveys simply to get more antlerless tags in a WMU where the deer are currently not doing well at all.

    This fall between 1-week hunters and 2-week hunters we had 26 hunters in our camp and 15 antlerless tags. That's way more tags than we could ever possibly hope to use. Tags are of no use if there are no deer to hang them on.

    The back-to-back harsh winters of 2013 & 2014 decimated the WMU 47 deer herd and last winter was almost as bad. That's 3 bad winters in 5 years. The herd has not recovered. It can recover; deer have an amazingly resilient reproductive capacity. But the herd needs to be given a chance to recover. If that means antlerless tag restrictions, so be it. I'd also like to see biologically-sound supplemental feeding reinstated in the Loring deer yard to support a recovery, along with a more nimble program for emergency feeding that can be put into action when its actually needed.
    What calm deer hunterís heart has not skipped a beat when the silence of a cold November morning afield is broken by the echoes of hounds tonguing yonder?


  8. #27
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    They need to shut down for doe tags in our area for 3 years. Zones are too big, our area is decimated yet some parts of 49 are ok.
    Last edited by terrym; December 7th, 2018 at 01:36 PM.
    I 'm suspicious of people who don't like dogs, but I trust a dog who doesn't like a person.

  9. #28
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ninepointer View Post
    That would truly be sad if hunters lied on their surveys simply to get more antlerless tags in a WMU where the deer are currently not doing well at all.
    They do it all the time, people say to pad the numbers all the time, make sure we do not lose tags then talk conservationist when natives go out and shoot moose, see the problem here.

    I think they should have mandatory check in stations for the animals like they do in many states, I do not really care how far you are away from a station, it would be a very responsible thing to do, especially in an area where number are hurting.

  10. #29
    Post-a-holic

    User Info Menu

    Default

    I haven't hunted the area in 4 years, but talk to my cousins who live in Loring area and hunt the 2 weeks. 6 of them this year hunted, saw and got 1 small deer. Glad I didn't go this year.

  11. #30
    Elite Member

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ninepointer View Post
    I'd also like to see biologically-sound supplemental feeding reinstated in the Loring deer yard to support a recovery, along with a more nimble program for emergency feeding that can be put into action when its actually needed.
    I agree that if the population in WMU 47 is in bad shape, antlerless tags should be reduced.

    I don't agree with supplemental feeding. My view is that this will just artificially increase the population beyond the natural carrying capacity of the region. Why not just let the population return to a balanced level without supplemental feeding - maybe then there wouldn't be these drastic fluctuations? I don't want to start a war here, and I I think that you are one of the posters on this site that always presents sensible, well thought-out views, so I'd like to hear why you support the reinstatement of supplemental feeding.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •