Jason, I certainly appreciate your efforts and dedication to the resource. I was involved for a long time in several conservation organizations. I know the work is often thankless and many times it feels like you're banging your head on a rock.
I have mixed feelings about the Ganny closure. Yes, it was seemingly done in haste and without complete input from all the stakeholders, and it's never a good thing when we lose angling opportunities. However, I think the writing has been on the wall for sometime, and this decision was inevitable from a political perspective. Afterall, the mayor was democratically elected and I'm assuming carrying out the wishes of her constituents. That, and the OMNR simply doesn't have the budget or the manpower to effectively police the situation. The current Conservative gov't has no interest in increasing taxes or taking money from Education or Healthcare to pay for it...that's not what's going to get them elected again.
The "steps" on the Ganny are just too tempting for casual "fishermen" to employ methods that were unlawful. For a lot of the people there, it was the only "fishing" they did all year. A few steps from the parking lot on a paved path...just makes it effortless for folks who couldn't be bothered to fish otherwise. A lot of them were new Canadians and teenagers who weren't fully invested in being ethical anglers.
The Ganny is unique in its topography as the steps are shallow and congregate fish to make it a shooting gallery. Trying to enforce snagging and flossing is next to impossible, especially if the fish is released....and that's what a lot folks were doing...just having fun, and doing it by hook or crook. When you have that many fish in water a few inches deep, people just can't resist. Not a great example for younger folks, and frankly it just became an embarrassment for ethical anglers to have non-fishing people witness these hi-jinks.
One could argue that the closure is in some manner just an extension of the existing reg's. I think most anglers have no argument with the current law where you can't fish within 75 ft of a dam. It might be a bit of a stretch, but you could interpret the steps to be an "obstruction" as defined in the reg's. Afterall, the intent of this reg is to prevent people from fishing where fish are stacked up and vulnerable...and they're certainly stacked up and vulnerable on the lower Ganny during the Salmon run.
I think the additional opening of the river after mid October to the end of the year for fishing is a fair trade off, especially for us who have no interest in river Salmon, but like to chase Steelhead. One door closed, another one opened.