Welcome to the Q&A Forum

as Bryan said, use canonical only if there are two identical pages with the same content live at the same time. If not (and this is the case) you should return a 404 to have it noindexed in a while or 301 it to the new one if you're still receiving traffic/links there, so the users/bot would understand the page has moved.

The Rel="Canonical" notice has nothing to do with changing your title tags... likely just a coincidence. Its not really an error either. All the SEOMoz crawler is doing is notifying you that the page has a canonical tag on it. Though I don't see a canonical tag on the link you posted above so I don't know why that page would have been listed unless it had one once and has since been removed.

I wouldn't use both 301s and rel=canonicals for the same purpose. It's fine to have 301s to redirect non-www URLs, and then canonicals for other problems, but I wouldn't double them up for the same issue. The 301s are the proper solution here. Your 301s don't seem to be triggering. Did you remove this code? Unfortunately, diagnosing someone's rewrites in .htaccess is incredibly difficult without direct access. How does Google crawl your site? It looks like all of the products are only available by submitting a form (pulldowns). Google can't take that action, which could be causing major problems with your PageRank flow internally. You need paths that Google can use to reach the actual products. Honestly, form selects menus aren't typically a good solution for users, either.

It seems like Google would want unused/unwanted pages removed--less "junk" on the web--less irrelevance to add to their already huge index... A long time problem I think...I will sometimes put NOINDEX, NOFOLLOW in pages I wanted removed from the index--then after a few months, delete them. Thanks for the feedback!