How can reducing the number of tags available, to help the population rebound, be considered bad news? Seems to me like it's good news that the MNR is doing their job and lowering the number of tags available when the population has taken a hit.
I reviewed all 3 links and this is all I found for their reasoning behind lowering the number of tags:
"Factors such as harvest, predation (bears?), parasites, habitat condition and low calf numbers (many hunters shoot calves, no?) can all contribute to shifts in moose population.
"Ontario’s moose population has remained relatively stable over the past decade. However, most areas of northeastern Ontario — and the more accessible parts of northwestern Ontario — have recently been showing signs of decline."
More accessible area's showing declines in moose populations suggests people are more to blame than bears in those area's...
The problems are many. First, they do an aerial survey to count numbers of moose in herds during the winter time. This method of counting can be inaccurate in the extreme if done (as it normally is) by fixed wing aircraft. It is also normally done in a very small area of a WMU and a formula is then used to guess the actual number of moose in the area.
Second, predation. Cancellation of the spring bear hunt and the increase in predators that came with it certainly hurts the moose herds. Also, the laws making it so anywhere north of the French and mattawa rivers in Ontario you can only kill 2 wolves/coyotes every year has increased the number of predators in the wild. This also has an affect.
Third, parasites. One would think that having more predators praying on the moose, thus killing off the weak ones first so they couldn't spread disease to the healthy ones would be a good thing over all. This one has me stumped and I'm slightly sceptical about it having never seen it before in the wild. So I can't really say much about this one.
Fourth, low calf numbers. While I don't participate in the harvesting of calves, some hunters choose to. The wildlife biologists the MNR had working for them in the 80's when they brought in the system that we have now (that was going to double the size of ontario's moose herd, or so they promised) promoted bad science and we're still stuck under this ridiculous system today. How in the #### do you increase the size of the heard if 90% of the hunters out there are going after the babies? Not to mention the predator effect of the calves. It doesn't even come close to making sense. I should mention that the number of hunters that actually harvest calves is pretty low though. Most people are smart enough to see how messed up it is.
In the end, it should be noted that the MNR actually has no ####ing clue how many moose are in Ontario. They make a poorly educated guess at it, sure. But they have no honest idea about how many moose are in Ontario or the # harvested in the province every year. Indians don't report to them and tell them how many moose they kill. Nor do bears or wolves or coyotes.
About the only way to fix the problem is to reinstate the spring bear hunt (for good, not some feel good 2 year pilot project), open season with no bag limits for wolves/coyote north of the French and mattawa again. (I feel I should point out here that below the French and mattawa rivers the season is open year round and there are no bag limits. The deer population is flourishing. Imagine that?) And close the moose season down for 2 or 3 years to let the moose numbers rise while the predator population falls. It wouldn't be popular, but it would be effective.
If blame is to be laid at anyones door for the system and the moose population of Ontario, then it surely must rest at the foot of the MNR office door in Peterborough. It's hard to imagine a worse system to have to deal with, but rest assured, if anyone could find a more ####ed up system of management for moose, it would be the Ontario MNR.
