wallacio

It's about time! I'd also love to see a change in the pervasive attitude of many Lake O trollers that you might as well keep them because they won't release anyway. Contrary to popular belief, they'll swim away just fine (even on the hottest summer days) if you pop them off the hook right away without bringing them into the boat, taking pictures etc.

Mud with debris coming down yesterday...impossible to say what it'll look like in a week from now though.

Feel free to use that one Wayne

Perhaps it's you that needs to re-read my post carefully. I'll attempt to clarify further: Smelt are certainly established in the Great Lakes however as I stated previously, they are a non-native invasive species which the MNR does not want to be spread into non-affected lakes elsewhere in the province which could happen if they were used as live bait and dumped. Thus, their use as LIVE bait in Ontario is not permitted. You could argue that they should be allowed as live bait in the Great Lakes ie FMZ's 19, 20 etc as an "exception" since they are already established there however I can only assume the MNR wishes to keep the list of acceptable live bait fish species streamlined for the entire province so as a result, they are not permitted to be used.

While Smelt are established in many local lakes, they are non-native invasive species (which can displace native species by eating their young) and the MNR does not permit them to be used live in order to stop further spread into non-affected lakes.

Thanks for looking into it...I hope to use some to tempt Niagara Steel very soon!

Who would go fishing without their license right Bill???

While I have no idea which MNR representative you spoke to at the booth, it's not unheard of that an individual MNR representative provided inaccurate information (who was misinformed themselves). I have no individual source per se rather am interpreting the regulations as they are written. The list of acceptable baitfish pertains to LIVE fish only, dead bait is permitted unless there is a specific exception for a given species. FMZ 1-4 list (in the exceptions) that Smelt may not possessed at bait. The same exception does not apply in other zones, including the Niagara. Further, I have a copy of the 2005 regs in front of me. Although now outdated it states: "Live Smelt may not be used as bait in Ontario. There are restrictions on the use of dead Smelt (see Exceptions to the General Regulations)"...ie my point in the above paragraph. If dead Smelt are not actually permitted, I'm missing something in the regulations as they are written or the regs need to be corrected.

This is not correct. The list of permitted baitfish in the regs you refer to is for live bait. With the exception of a few zones in Northern Ontario, it is legal to use dead Smelt as bait.

Still is from the looks of things... http://coastwatch.glerl.noaa.gov/modis/modis.cgi/modis?region=o&page=1&template=sub&image=t1.11074.1646.LakeOntario.143.250m.jpg

Yep, I was up recently but it was the beginning of the the week before the thaw. At the time there was lots of ice (18" or so) and close to a foot of snow on top. At this point, I imagine it's pretty sloppy...ie a fair amount of water and slush.

Nice going Mike! Here's hoping that round 2 isn't necessary and you'll be able to put that new reel into action with some spring Steel!

Nice Steve...I got into a bunch myself on Sunday. Did you find all of your Lakers near bottom or did you get any cruising for bait up high?

"My best advice to new sales folks is always the same... God gave you two ears and one mouth for a reason... think about it!" I'm a sales rep as well, with 11 years of experience. IMO this single line is the best piece of advice in this thread. Regardless of the product you are bringing to the table, whether you "believe in it" or not etc is irrelavent. A successful sales person (through a series of strategic questions) will understand (by listening, not telling) what a potential customer truly needs and will help them arrive at the solution ie the sale. This is an excellent book which explains the process: http://www.amazon.com/Getting-into-Your-Customers-Head/dp/0812926285

Nice haul. Any issues with crossing pressure cracks with the vehicle?

Stag and Doe parties are somewhat of a local phenomenon...especially in SW Ontario. I grew up in KW and they are the norm there, especially in the rural farming communities to the west. As stated previously, their primary function is to raise money for the bride and groom for when they start their new life together and they are often aggressively promoted...I've even heard them being advertised on local radio stations.

Really? It would now seem that CRAA's position (based on opinons expressed by two of your executive members) that they no longer even support a barrier and believe that there should be unlimited Steelhead access to the Cataract. If this is not the case, please clarify. I agree with you HOWEVER you and the rest of CRAA make such statements on the huge assumption that opening up access to the entire system to migratories is actually going to be good for the UC Brown Trout population...I (and others) am not convinced it will until I see evidence to the contrary (which I have requested from CRAA and to date have not seen any). If unrestricted access turns out to be a bad thing for the long established UC fishery then it really won't have been best for the FISH will it? It will have only benefitted one group's agenda which CRAA is quick to critize other stateholder groups of doing. With that said, if data exists that shows the the UC Brown population would benefit from unrestricted access by Steelhead and others let me publically state that I'll be the first person to say throw open the gates! Will there be any upcoming public meetings as things move forward (as I'd certainly like to attend) in order to continue to stay informed?

At first I thought it was appendicitis...thankfully it's "just" a virus. Let's get out before March dude!

Sweet (ride and fish) bud. I'm jealous...I started my day kneeling in front of the porcelain and not because I had too much fun last night!

No worries Louis...civil debate on this issue is a good thing!

The new Temple Fork Outfitters BVK rods are supposed to be dynamite without the huge price tag. They use similar nano-resin technology found in the pricey Loomis NRX rods for a fraction of the cost.

Poor choice of words on my part, again not my intent to single anyone out. As for it being "sad" that the push for unlimited access is generally not supported by those who enjoy the fishery on a regular basis, it GENERALLY comes from a place of genuine concern (though I will admit there are closed-minded individuals in the mix) for what they are passionate about and if that's your definition of "sad" well... Personally I've not seen any conclusive studies that would suggest that the Brown Trout fishery will not be negatively affected (density or fishing quality) any more than I've seen evidence that it will. I would more than pleased to read actual scientific data (not just opinions) that would indicate the Browns would not be affected (or even better, increase in number, size etc) if migratory fish were allowed unrestricted access. How could I not, it would be an amazing win-win scenario. To that end, I've asked John if he'd be so kind as to provide such data. Until that time those of us who feel passionately about the UC choose to err on the side of caution. I can only hope that the actual decision makers as the process moves forward are as equally objective.

My comment was not directed at any one person, rather a general observation...it's no surprise that those who support unlimited access are USUALLY only Steelheaders who do not fish the UC as well. Take it from someone who fishes there on a regular basis in the recent past, you'd be hard pressed to strike up a conversation with anyone who is knee-deep in the water there on any given day who actually supports unlimited migratory fish access there.

The UC stakeholders have definitely gone overboard with their tactics however they are attempting to protect a fishery that is unique to Southern Ontario. Protecting this interest is no different or "narrow minded" than the unlimited access Credit Steelhead lobby. There are far more healthy and accessible Steelhead rivers in Ontario than there are good resident Brown fisheries...why POTENTIALLY lower the fishing quality on the UC by allowing migratories up that far? As I've stated previously an electrobarrier well above Norval but below the UC would benefit both groups. It's no surprise that those who support unlimited steelhead access are ones who do not fish the UC on a regular basis...it's easy to brush-off the fishery as trival when one does not utilize it. I can assure you that these feelings are not shared on message boards that actually represent the stakeholders that do use it. I should qualify my statements that I fly fish and I'm also an avid (float-fishing) Steelheader, who actually spends far more time chasing Steel than I do resident Trout. I simply appreciate both equally.