-
March 9th, 2015, 09:36 AM
#11
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)
-
March 9th, 2015 09:36 AM
# ADS
-
March 9th, 2015, 10:25 AM
#12

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!
If you keep doing what you've always done. You'll keep getting what you've always got!
Since light travels faster than sound, some people appear bright until you hear them speak.
-
March 9th, 2015, 10:31 AM
#13

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.
-
March 9th, 2015, 10:53 AM
#14
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.
-
March 9th, 2015, 11:32 AM
#15

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?
-
March 9th, 2015, 11:34 AM
#16
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).
-
March 9th, 2015, 12:25 PM
#17
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.
-
March 9th, 2015, 12:54 PM
#18
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.
-
March 9th, 2015, 12:57 PM
#19
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?!
-
March 9th, 2015, 03:12 PM
#20
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.

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.