| Welcome to Ontario Trophy Bucks forum. Enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Public Meetings; MNR improvement | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jan 7 2014, 04:50 PM (635 Views) | |
| camohunter73 | Jan 7 2014, 04:50 PM Post #1 |
|
Rookie
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Hello everyone, I am just trying to get a feel for everyones opinion and interest into public meetings regarding the MNR and the lack there of. A group of people are trying to put some public meetings together to push our government into reviewing how fish and wildlife funds are used as well as our current deer/moose herd health and ideas on what can be done to improve things. I think we all need to take interest in the way things are being managed and come up with positive solutions to improve outcomes. The only thing we can do to make things worse are to sit back and let things continue without trying to at least put forth an effort to help find solutions. What is everyones thought on our current deer herd and moose herd? Also what are ideas that people may have to help improve things? Would any of you be interested in coming out to public meetings and giving input? Thanks for all of your replies and interest in advance. |
![]() |
|
| Renegade | Jan 7 2014, 05:12 PM Post #2 |
![]()
Atikokan, Ontario
|
I would be interested in any public meetings held anywhere in the NW. Deer and Moose would both benefit from a reduction of wolf and coyote populations. That is my number issue right now. Wolf and coyote populations do not need to be as high as they are in the NW. The move to a tag system for predators with a limit of 2 in an entire year was a bad. Also, non-resident predator tags are too expensive. I would like to see an end to party hunting for deer. Moose hunting and party hunting makes sense, party hunting deer does not. IMO I would like to see a preference point system in place for moose. The fairest system you can have. I would like to see all areas of the NW get the spring bear hunt back. I would like to see non-residents able to hunt more areas in Ontario for deer, moose and bear but limit this number in each unit to a certain percentage of tags. Like 10%. Also Preference Point system, I would like to see some elk moved from Bancroft herd to NW Ontario. I would like to see landowner tags or nuisance tags for landowners owning a certain amount of land in the province. I would like to see more clarity on trespassing laws. I would like to see the books of the MNR. Where is our money going? |
| |
![]() |
|
| camohunter73 | Jan 7 2014, 05:30 PM Post #3 |
|
Rookie
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Great Responses Renegade. These are the things that we need to address as hunters across this province. I am un aware of the issues with the wolves and tags as i am in southwestern Ontario and have limited exposure to the issues you have addressed in your area. I could not agree more with the allocation of our funds from fish and wildlife. Where is the money being spent? The moose draw system in my opinion would benefit from a preference point system or even a single system for applying. No party applications. Once a tag is issued then the owner of that tag may have members or individuals added to the tag as a party. Then only the people actually going hunting would be on that tag. No transfers like goes on now. To many non hunters buying licenses and being put into groups to bump up numbers for a tag. Thanks for the inputs Renegade !! Together we can make change a positive one. |
![]() |
|
larrymcbuck
|
Jan 7 2014, 11:07 PM Post #4 |
|
Advanced Hunter
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
remove the calf moose hunt to restore the heards |
![]() |
|
Bocephus_86
|
Jan 8 2014, 08:56 AM Post #5 |
![]() ![]()
|
Good thread. I want to see some kind of quality management be put in place for the deer herd, whether it be antler restrictions or what not, but a lot of the bucks in our area never make it past 1.5 years old and it is impacting the herd and population (I know i have shot a few spikers over the years, but I am changing my ways )I am not form the NW but I agree with a lot of the points that Rene has made as well, except for the nuisance tags and maybe that is b/c I have a bad taste in my mouth from locals in my area abusing the system and decimating deer populations. Landowner tags would be a good thing though, provided there is sound management to back it up, and not just hand them out b/c people are whining. If you owned like over 100 acres in a highly populated deer area I would support those landowners getting a tag for the land. And remove the calf hunt like larry said, it never has and never will make sense to me.
|
| |
![]() |
|
| Shane | Jan 8 2014, 10:05 AM Post #6 |
|
Team Ontario Trophy Bucks
|
Tough question. The loss of any licence sales on any species will not be up for debate at all I don't think . And what's best for the wild life isn't a goal anymore it's all about the money . We are a province that protects predators now for some reason ? |
![]() |
|
callaway dan
|
Jan 8 2014, 02:03 PM Post #7 |
![]()
|
If they remove hunting calf they would have to increase the adult tag.in my area its a average of 8 to 10 year before getting a adult tag.if you cant hunt calf and dont have a adult tag then you can not hunt.there would be too much lost in revenu to the goverment.i would simply quit moose hunting. |
![]() |
|
bigr
|
Jan 8 2014, 02:19 PM Post #8 |
![]() ![]()
|
Call me up. Im all in but too many ideas to mention. First idea. Keep the OFHA out of it. No need for politics to get in the way of management. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Renegade | Jan 8 2014, 05:03 PM Post #9 |
![]()
Atikokan, Ontario
|
With good management you would probably have more adult tags. A lot more. Also, why not give the northern residents a 25% boost in tags up from the 10% they currently have. That might make it better. I also do not believe in harvesting calves. Many grow tired of paying for a tag they will not use every year for a chance at an adult tag. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Renegade | Jan 8 2014, 05:08 PM Post #10 |
![]()
Atikokan, Ontario
|
Yes, I think allocating some tags based on land ownership would make land ownership more desirable and puts some value into land ownership and stewardship. Probably using a quantifiable and significant amount like a 1/4 section of 1/2 section would work best. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Renegade | Jan 8 2014, 05:11 PM Post #11 |
![]()
Atikokan, Ontario
|
What about other outdoor organizations like NOSA? They have often advocated for MNR changes that are beneficial to outdoorsmen. OFAH would probably try and take things over claiming they are the voice for Ontario's Outdoorsman. |
| |
![]() |
|
Sam Menard
|
Jan 8 2014, 08:14 PM Post #12 |
![]()
|
Re. Rene's post, some good stuff, the tough part is to get hunters and anglers to agree with each other - everyone has different wants. Deer and Moose would both benefit from a reduction of wolf and coyote populations. That is my number one issue right now. Wolf and coyote populations do not need to be as high as they are in the NW. The move to a tag system for predators with a limit of 2 in an entire year was a bad. Also, non-resident predator tags are too expensive. I would also like to see predator numbers reduced, but even if we went back to the old system. IMO there isn't enough hunting pressure to make a difference. I agree that the NR licence fee is too high and is an impediment to a potentially good tourism opportunity. I would like to see an end to party hunting for deer. Moose hunting and party hunting makes sense, party hunting deer does not. This would be a tough sell to the hunting fraternity. Party hunting has a deeeep history in Ontario; especially in the dog camps from Pembroke to Parry Sound. Or group party hunts, but only after you've filled your own tag and you have to shoot a bigger buck than what you tagged. I would like to see a preference point system in place for moose. The fairest system you can have. It's definitely the fairest, but in some Units, a hunter may have to wait 15 years+ between tags. I would like to see all areas of the NW get the spring bear hunt back. Agreed I would like to see non-residents able to hunt more areas in Ontario for deer, moose and bear but limit this number in each unit to a certain percentage of tags. Like 10%. Also Preference Point system. This system is pretty common in the US. The selfish side of me shudders at the thought of more Non-residents in the woods though. I would like to see some elk moved from Bancroft herd to NW Ontario. I agree 100%. IMO, this should have been done before sanctioning a hunt. I would like to see landowner tags or nuisance tags for landowners owning a certain amount of land in the province. Although I could gain under this proposal, it's a bit elitist as many hunters who can't afford to buy land would be shut out. Furthermore, these tags would be at the expense of the regular pool of tags, so Joe Lunchbucket would have less access to a tag. I would like to see more clarity on trespassing laws. Yes, landowners need more protection and fines need to be increased. I would like to see the books of the MNR. Where is our money going? This information is available, but you have to ask for it. |
![]() |
|
| Renegade | Jan 8 2014, 08:22 PM Post #13 |
![]()
Atikokan, Ontario
|
I figured there might be some knee jerk reaction to this. In the areas you hunt deer Sam, if tags for non-residents were limited to 10% under a preference point system you would see less non-resident hunters. This system would spread them out. This is especially true around Dryden, Kenora and LOW. Why not a non-resident hunt in unit 13? The border is right next to it and deer populations are quite good there. I would limit it however to a defined percentage and controllable amount. That would probably allow a few outfitters some extra earning potential and create some more demand for land from non-residents in the long term. I can hunt deer everywhere in the US, we should extent the same courtesy. It brings in a lot of money to the MNR and local economy. |
| |
![]() |
|
dobber
|
Jan 8 2014, 08:44 PM Post #14 |
![]()
Team Ontario Trophy Bucks
![]()
|
most people have a good idea what we would like, but here is one thing I would like to know, how many moose tags go to outfitters? The outfitter numbers aren't included in the numbers in the hunting regs, be curious as to how many they get and for what areas. I can understand outfitter tags for fly in areas since no one else is really going there, but drive to areas shouldn't be included |
|
condescending twat Someone who looks down on other people and is beyond arrogant | |
![]() |
|
Sam Menard
|
Jan 8 2014, 08:53 PM Post #15 |
![]()
|
Like I said, the selfish side of me... I do have another side that is more moderate and it agrees with you. One of the flaws of the current NR deer hunt system is that it is bucks only which puts them in direct competition with hunters like me who like big bucks (little bucks grow into big bucks). But, as you suggest, a draw and quota might remedy that problem, but the outfitters would scream rape as theiy would be limited to how may hunters that they could cater to. SAm |
![]() |
|
Sam Menard
|
Jan 8 2014, 09:03 PM Post #16 |
![]()
|
It used to be that they got 10% of the projected unharvest. but I'm not sure how that projects out to tags. I'm not sure if that still applies. In some units, many outfitters have been cut back to archery tags only. Sam |
![]() |
|
dobber
|
Jan 8 2014, 09:24 PM Post #17 |
![]()
Team Ontario Trophy Bucks
![]()
|
talking to one outfitter, he gets gun tags, but trades in 1 gun tag for 2 archery tags |
|
condescending twat Someone who looks down on other people and is beyond arrogant | |
![]() |
|
| whitetailweasel | Jan 11 2014, 09:24 AM Post #18 |
|
Regular
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Lets start with tha wolf and coyote hunting first, this tag shit has done nothing but hurt our moose and deer populations,then bring back the spring bear hunt,again this will help out our moose and deer populations,and bring back some much needed revenue to our north. |
![]() |
|
forkhorn
|
Jan 11 2014, 11:17 AM Post #19 |
![]()
|
Real Bad idea...Number 1 reason I live here. Number 2 reason is that the populations aren't spread out through whole WMU. I would say only half to a 1/3 the unit has huntable numbers of deer. Every year the amount of people from out of town has gone up and locals are hunting deer more. Some areas are like opening weekend of moose hunting now So lets leave that one out. That's my two selfish reasons
|
| |
![]() |
|
| camohunter73 | Jan 11 2014, 09:04 PM Post #20 |
|
Rookie
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Hey everyone! I love the in put and thoughts of everyone!! To me it is obvious that there is a need for change out there. Public meetings would be beneficial to all of us regardless of thoughts! It would let the MNR know that we are serious about change and the way things are being run. My personal opinion is that we need to put our short term agenda behind us and focus on the future. If we all focused on a 5yr program to change things it would be noticeable in 3yrs. Leaving the next 2yrs to really make the advancements that we all would benefit from. Lets not think of what we take but what we leave behind? I would love for my children to not only enjoy what i have enjoyed but also a whole lot more and better!! As for coyote populations ( i can not comment on wolf as i do not know) Alberta has a very healthy population and still enjoys the privileges of harvesting mature deer and an abundance of moose as well. At the end of the day we really are the ultimate predator and need to monitor not only the coyotes and wolves but also ourselves!!! thats the privilege of being the top of the food chain. Just my opinion on this stuff. No disrespect to anyone. |
![]() |
|
| Renegade | Jan 11 2014, 09:33 PM Post #21 |
![]()
Atikokan, Ontario
|
There are more deer in 13 than in some of the units that they can hunt to the west. I doubt you have to worry about any changes just thinking it would be nice to spread non-residents out and limit their numbers to a defined amount. Why should Dryden and Kenora be the only places for non-resident deer hunters? In recent years they are overwhelmed with non-resident hunters. |
| |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Hunters Campfire · Next Topic » |





![]](http://z4.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)








)



So lets leave that one out. That's my two selfish reasons

2:16 PM Jul 11