I assume that it is…

I assume that it is inevitable that you will proceed with this proposal after a trial period, but I think my comments are relevant either way.

Where is the data collected during the trial period to show the evidence-based decision making? I notice you don't reference any monitoring information in your proposal. If you have none, what was the trial for, exactly?

If I accept this proposal as a foregone conclusion, how will hunters be educated on how to tell the difference between a male and female bear. Is it true that it is almost impossible? What are the statistics on getting it right (or wrong). How often is a cub actually "accompanying" a mother at a bait station? When these questions are asked, upon re-reading your proposal, it does seem apparent that MNRF is only giving lip-service to animal welfare concerns. Without some background research, how is anyone supposed to comment with any authority?

Again accepting this proposal as something you've already decided will happen, please be clear in your ERO decision that you will continue to promote tourism and recreational safety as well as maintain recreational opportunities by stressing that section 110 of O.Reg 665/98 of the FWCA indicates the spring bear hunt does not occur in the majority of provincial parks. Furthermore that, for all trails in protected areas and on other Crown lands, people can be assured that bear baiting / hunting will not endanger them during their hiking, canoeing, or other backcountry recreational endeavours as section 56, O.Reg 665/98 of the FWCA will remain as-is. (nice try stating that the comment period is over for that... I see there is no decision yet.)

Please show that you have concern for individuals and balance-of-interests as well as for industry and commercial enterprise.