MNR , Phase 1 was to effectively turn over 2000 of our prime lakes in Northern Ontario to Remote Tourist Outfitters and their guest to manage, and cut of all access” less walking for miles” into these lakes to the residences and tax payers of Ontario . These Outfitters have keys to many gates, can fly their guests in out, have boat caches where we cannot and in many cases can and do get permission to drive in past posted signs stating no unauthorized access or no motor vehicles beyond this point.
MNR, Phase 2, in FMZ10 , in 2010 implemented new rules in an attempt to protect lake trout from the residences and taxpayers of Northern Ontario. They reduced the catch limit from, 3 trout to 1 trout under 15″ and 1 trout over 15″.
If you want to go home with more than one lake trout on any given day and you have a 18″ trout on the ice or in your boat think of how many you have to throw back before you catch one small enough to keep, and how bad it is hurting the ones you throw back, from bleeding gills to lack of oxygen, Some fishermen have admitted , in the winter months say they have to bury lake trout in the snow or force them back through the ice knowing full well they will not survive.
If any paticular lake has declining numbers of Lake Trout and is continuing to decline close the lake to everyone summer and winter for 1,2,or 3 years. Perhaps that is to complex for our fish management team and MNR to comprehend.
MNR, Phase 3, here we go again, MNR in an attempt to protect the lake trout from the residences and taxpayers of Northern Ontario are going to attempt to destroy the fishing ,once again, for law abiding residences by changing the regulations for small mouth bass based on , as MNR puts it “available science suggests it might be good to protect the larger bass”.
OMG, MNR just effectively killed or restricted lake trout fishing in FMZ10, less than 2 years ago and do they not have anything better to to do than try to remove more sports fishing all together from Northern Ontario.
Yes folks, they want to change the rules, yet they cannot figure out if “Is Bass is a desired Sports Fish or an Invasive Species.” Read the attached link , that is their headline not mine.
The next thing they say in the link is that in FMZ10 bass is the third preferred sports fish in the Zone 10 ahead of brook trout, northern pike, splake, white fish, perch, or anything else we have in our lakes. If this is the case why would we not get some better science “say from the USA ” to find better ways to control what they want to do with the bass rather than GUESS or ASSUME.
Why would the Advisory Council and MNR not consider removing of invasive species or non sport fish species such as bar bot, suckers, rock bass or others rather than making a feeble attempt to further control the third most popular sports fish in FMZ10, a species that was introduced by MNR through their own stocking programs.
Could it be that MNR in attempts ,to cover up their previous blunders and mis-managing of some lake trout lakes, introducing of bass to the very lakes they now claim are hurting the lake trout were based on the best available science they had at the time. Perhaps MNR should consider fixing the specific lakes they perceive the problem are with rather than restrict all the lakes.
MNR made a big mistake with the lake trout and are not willing to correct it or change the rules again, so now they try the same thing with the bass, by restricting the size limits without knowing what the effects will really be.
One of the items they also note is bass is not a native species to most lakes in FMZ 10, yet as stated above, MNR by their own admission had most of these lakes stocked themselves. How many other fish of the 18 sports fish MNR boasts , in our waters are not native to FMZ 10, and what is MNR and their advisory council doing about these fish species?
Speaking of advisory councils, I made an attempt on line to find out who is on these councils , how the members are selected, and how they are controlled. Sorry with my limited computer skills I could not find anything other than who they are. I suspect the advisory council is cherry picked by MNR. So what. I have listed who they are and what MNR list as their role, I have heard of a few of them and assume the are all great people working towards a better fisheries for Northern Ontario, and FMZ10. I also assume they are all avid fishermen who live and fish continuously in FMZ10, otherwise , why would they be interested in being on the advisory council. Do you know anyone who is listed here that does not that does not live in FMZ10 or fish here? Let us know.
FMZ 10 Advisory Council
Ontario Federation of Anglers & Hunters , Rolly Frappie
Northern Ontario Tourist Operators , Marg Watson
Resource Based Tourism , Steve Dale
Laurentian University, Sudbury , George Morgan
Northshore Tribal Council ,Keith Savers
Anishinabek/Ontario Fisheries Resource Centre ,Maureen Peltier
French River Stewardship Council ,Mike Palmer
Fisheries Retail,Brian Ramakko
Baitfish Association of Ontario ,Lisa Pilgrim
) Local Citizen Committee ,Al Prodan
Angler At Large , Brendan, O’Farrell, James Smedley
Federation of Ontario Cottagers’ Association , Ed Pilon
Sault Naturalists, Valerie Walker
Manitoulin Fisheries Advisory Committee , Al Douglas
The councils will:
identify issues that are key to resource sustainability
set objectives for the fisheries
provide advice on how to achieve these objectives.
Very broad guidelines by any standard.
Should you agree or not agree with their recommendations listed in the link above, be sure to let one of them know, better still post your comments at the bottom of this article.
Comments on this entry are closed.