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

[LowbanksArcher]

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

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

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

100% agree about your comment regarding calf tags.

[FishFrenzy]

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

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

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

FishFrenzy

[Fishy Wishy]

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

[Fox]

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

100% agree about your comment regarding calf tags.

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

[LowbanksArcher]

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

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

[trimmer21]

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

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

[FishFrenzy]

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

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

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

FishFrenzy

[Fox]

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

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

FishFrenzy

I think it is because they would lose money

[Exo200]

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

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

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

[LowbanksArcher]

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

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