The proposal (point system),…

The proposal (point system), and very restricted tag transfers, certainly seems like it will be a fairer approach in tag allocation.

I'm not clear what the difference is for those units with a restricted calf allocation (like WMU 37) vs all other units where calf tags are allocated through identified applications in the draw? I would suggest calves are managed like bull and cow tags in all units - where a sustainable number of calf tags are allowed for each WMU individually and hunters apply for those in the draw if they choose. That way there would be no different treatment amongst the units. Each unit calf tag numbers are determined through the science now down by MNRF. In such a case, for example WMU 37 would have very few calf tags and other WMU's may also have few or many calf tags depending on what the science/surveys show it can support.

The cow/calf tag combination is good in that it will result in fewer errors (ie a large calf being shot mistakenly for cow). However - you will need to estimate the number of calves shot with these tags to ensure the calf tag allocation is appropriate (if you decide to restrict calf tags by WMU as suggested above).

It is important to increase the survival rate of calves to rebuild and sustain a reasonable moose population - to do that I believe calf tag numbers need be limited in all WMU's (as noted above)

With regards to predator control, particularly wolves in the case of moose, I don't know why you would limit the harvest to just 2 wolves (except to limit the outcry from animal right groups). Wolves are rarely seen by moose hunters, but their "sign" is certainly obviously and increasing everywhere I have hunted. I don't believe there are many hunters that hunt wolves specifically. As such I would suggest if you limit the wolf harvest number - I would increase that to at least 5, as there are few serious wolf hunters