MNR replies to Charly Murray on access issues……………..24 March 2014

 Well Charly, a totally unexpected reply from MNR, now I hope you are not to old, disabled, or out of shape as you will have to carry your canoe quite a few miles to reach your destination. And as stated below MNR is restricting this access to protect public safety, or perhaps to give you a touchy , feely sense of remoteness. Doesn’t that make you feel good?

Please feel free to enjoy your new found WILDERNESS EXPERIENCE

What a pile of c__p

 

March 24, 2014

 Charly Murray

cdmuray@shaw.ca

 Dear Charly Murray:

 Thank you for your e-mail dated March 15, 2014 addressed to Minister David Orazietti sharing your concerns with Crown land access and adult moose validation tags.  I am pleased to respond on his behalf.

 Within Ontario, there are no access restrictions to the vast majority of Ontario’s Crown land for recreational pursuits.  When we restrict access, it is primarily aimed at limiting motorized traffic to either protect public safety, protect sensitive fisheries and wildlife populations, or to maintain a sense of remoteness.  Where there may be motorized access restrictions, people can still hike or canoe to access these areas and fishing and hunting are still permitted.  Maintaining remoteness as part of the “wilderness experience” is essential for some users such as canoeists, hikers and other wilderness area enthusiasts and for the growth of a healthy resource-based tourism industry.

 A majority of forest access roads in place are there to haul lumber out of the remote areas where forestry operations take place and existing infrastructure is not present.  Forestry companies do not maintain roads when harvesting activities cease and public funding for these roads is focused on creating access to timber and maintaining forestry sector jobs.  While others may benefit from the road’s existence, the primary purpose of the road is for forestry operations as opposed to recreation uses.

 When roads are not being maintained by a forestry company, our first priority is public safety.  Signs are posted notifying users that the road is to be used at their own risk and in some cases bridges or culverts may be removed if they could become a safety risk or liability risk.  Government work on roads may be limited to eliminating or reducing safety hazards and reducing environmental impact.

 As no doubt you are aware, moose adult validation tags are awarded on a lottery basis and quotas for individual wildlife management units (WMU’s) are set annually based on present population estimates to ensure a sustainable moose harvest.

 In most units around Sault Ste. Marie, heavy hunter demand for adult validation tags and limited availability of those tags based on sustainability estimates result in lower opportunities for hunters to be successful in obtaining adult validation tags.  It is unfortunate that you have not been successful locally for an adult validation tag, however, there are units in Ontario where opportunity for success for those tags is greater, and I encourage you to review your options in other units across the province.  Also, opportunities for successfully obtaining a validation seat can be enhanced by applying in a larger group size.  Details and more information can be found at http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/en/Business/OC/2ColumnSubPage/STDU_131066.html.

 Once again, thank you for your e-mail.

 Sincerely,

Bill May

A/District Manager

Sault Ste. Marie District

 

c:   Tom Mispel-Beyer, Resources Management Supervisor, Sault Ste. Marie

{ 2 comments… add one }
  • Gord Pedersen March 30, 2014, 11:26 am

    In response to Bill May representing MNR , where would be the evidence of studies into population dynamics where these so called access restrictions have been established. You say that vast majoritie of Ontario’s crown lands are open for public recreational use, Mr May I would encourage you to view the large geographical area in the Wawa area that is predominantly off limits to the primary stakeholder the public to pursue our recreational activities. Mr May to use this argument of restricting access to protect fish and wildlife populations is nothing but a smokescreen because our government, our trustee of our natural resources, our MNR realize to use the phrase TO RESTRICT FOR REMOTE TOURISM is not politically correct or conducive to a crown lands model that promotes recreational activities for all users. Your ministry has placed upon us (the public) the primary stakeholder a model that runs contrary to one of the greatest doctrine of wildlife management THE NORTH AMERICAN MODEL OF WILDLIFE CONSERVATION your management model is a shameful one and one that is conducive to a monarchist approach where status gives you access to the top producing lakes and best hunting areas while depriving the common man of angling and hunting in those same areas.

  • Charly Murray April 13, 2014, 8:17 am

    I’ve read the response to my e-mail to the MNR and received exactly the reply I figured I would. I’m sorry I wasted Mr. May’s time as he had to put another spin on the MNR’s money machine that is “Remote Outfitters”. Nice that they can use the backs of us taxpayers and license buyers to achieve their “Monarchy Style” ultimate plan for our crown lands. I will send the appropriate apology to Mr. May.

Leave a Comment