Hunting regulations are made specific to particular areas of land called Wildlife Management Units (WMUs). The province is divided up into 95 different WMUs. In order to determine the hunting regulations that impact wildlife around Basket Lake, we found that Basket Lake falls within the WMU 15a (see below).

A publicly available report of the moose population in the WMU 15a details the catastrophe that we are fighting to avoid. Hunter interest in WMU 15a is moderate-to-high relative to other WMUs, which is likely due to the excellent road access in this area. As only one element of what is needed for a sustainable moose population, the minimum # of calves per 100 cows /100km2 is 30. As evidence in the report, the # of calves per 100 cows /100km2 has been at or below 30 since the late 1990s! The report is a quick read and full of key information needed to support our request for a a resource stewardship agreement. Follow this link for the full report.

​

During a sitting of the provincial legislative assembly in March 2015, disagreement in how to solve the clear decline in moose populations was evident. Tourist operators that rely on moose hunting do not want the hunting season shortened because of the possible impact on their businesses. While this argument is valid, it is also short-sighted as moose habitation destruction and moose tag allocations put an unsustainable pressure on Ontario's moose populations. If we continue this way, we stand to lose a bigger part of our heritage than hunting...the moose itself! To read the transcription, see page 8 and 9 of the document here.

Emma has diligently put together a list of pertinent research drawing on resources available through the University of Toronto as well as open access on the internet. Here is a link to an annotated bibliography documenting our search thus far.

Date: May 5, 2015
​​
Present:
Anita North, BLC
Emma Lehmberg, BLC
Dave Pearce, Wildlands League/CPAWS
Neve X, Wildlands League/Cpaws
with some attendance by Janet Sumner, Wildlands League/CPAWS

CPAWS offices (401 Richmond, Toronto)
Discussion of RSA and moose population decline

Forestry Stewardship Council

• participation in FSC is voluntary on the part of the logging companies
• If BLC is identified as a stakeholder, they’ll have to come by and consult during an audit
• FSC audit is voluntary and occurs each year
• it’s a PR tool for logging companies; gives them ‘green credibility’
• Wabigoon (Domtar) is FSC; English River (Resolute) is most definitely not

• a government audit of SF licensees occurs every five years (all of them at the same time? or rolling, as their Sf licenses come up?)
• as a part of this consortium, participating logging companies have to identify and set aside area to protect and promote conservation (partnership with MNR)

Gathering evidence

• be very specific if making a complaint → must be evidence-based
  • take photos, keep a journal of activity
• always ask for everything in writing
• as a member of FSC, can ask to be present during an audit as an observer (does this also extend to MNR audits?)

Exemptions from the ESA (Ontario)

• logging companies have negotiated an exemption from the Endangered Species Act, citing that the CFSA is enough to protect species at risk
• are required to have a mitigation plan in place for endangered; nothing for threatened or at risk (check)

What Dave has said he’ll look into for us

• whether an independent audit has taken place this year
• when the MNR audit it
• connect Anita with auditors
• any correspondence between Domtar and Anita
• DP to talk to auditors as well