To produce additional winter range, it will be necessary 

 to provide new areas with adequate evergreen shelter, 

 since deer will not stay in an area during winter unless this 

 shelter is available. Some new yards might be created by 

 cutting for food near shelter which is not now being used, 

 but it is mostly a matter of new shelter required. The quick- 

 est way to get it is to find areas where small evergreen trees 

 have been suppressed by larger hardwoods and cut some of 

 the latter. Two release cuts of this kind were carried out 

 during the year, one in Parrv Sound Forest District and one 

 in Tweed Forest District. 



Where no such advanced growth is present, we must 

 start with even smaller evergreens. A trial planting of 1,000 

 hemlock seedlings was initiated in Parry Sound District in 

 1969, and so far the results are encouraging. In Pembroke 

 District a new effort at combining deer range management 

 and timber production resulted in a planting of 100,000 

 white spruce seedlings. Some smaller plantings of white 

 pine were tried in North Bay District. Although these 

 species do not provide as good deer shelter as hemlock, 

 they are used to some extent by deer and thus provide the 

 opportunity for dual purpose programs. 



Woodland caribou, a sensitive ecological indicator, with a 

 population estimated at 15,000 in the northern quarter of 

 Ontario. As from prehistoric times, a small proportion are 

 harvested annually for much needed food and fibre by 

 Indians in remote settlements. Photo by D. W. Simkin. 



BROWSE PRODUCTION (acres), 1969-70 



Forest District 



Sault Ste. Marie 



Sudbury 



North Bay 



Parry Sound 



Pembroke 



Lindsay 



Tweed 



Lake Simcoe 



Lake Huron 



TOTAL 



MOOSE HUNTING 

 AND MANAGEMENT 



The purpose of moose management in Ontario is to provide 

 recreational opportunities and economic benefits from this 

 resource. Although many people enjoy looking at moose, 

 especially during summer, our major benefits are derived 

 from the recreation and monetary returns generated by the 

 hunting season. 



The annual mailed survey of moose hunters was again 

 conducted with the assistance of an electronic computer. 

 If the questionnaires were not returned by the hunters, re- 

 minder notices were automatically sent out, and the results 

 of the sur\'ey are in process of being analysed. 



Moose hunting was alternately poor and good during 

 October according to preliminary reports. More hunters 

 were around than in 1968, and there Were plenty of moose 

 available for the hunters, but unfortunately, the weather 

 affected the hunt adversely. Where weather was favourable, 

 hunters had good success, but where rain set in, fewer 

 moose were taken. 



In many areas, the first week was very rainy, discouraging 

 hunters from going afield and making hunting difficult. 

 Then the weather cleared and hunters, flocking to take ad- 

 vantage of the impro\ed weather, were well rewarded with 

 moose. The rain came on again during the third week, and 

 again relatively few moose were taken. Following freeze- 

 up, some better hunting occurred during the remainder 

 of the month. 



In Kenora and Sioux Lookout Forest Districts, hunting 

 conditions were exceptionally bad during the first week 

 due to four weeks of rain before the season. Water was 



