craigdritchie

In theory, yes, you need to be able to tell who belongs to which fish whether you're using a livewell or a fish box or a cooler or whatever. In reality, I've never had a CO ask. I guess it depends whether or not he/she feels party fishing is taking place.

Probably not so much a possession issue as a "party fishing" issue. Forget exactly where it is, but look through the regs and you'll find some commentary on this. Long story short, each individual's limit needs to be kept separate. Combine them all in one pail and you're at risk of being tagged. The intent with this was to stop one or two guys from keeping over their limit, saying the fish are for everyone in their group.

I have a six-foot, three weight GL2 I bought at Grindstone Angling several years ago. It's super-light ... kind of feels like you're holding a pencil with a cork grip. It took some getting used to, and I hooked my hat a couple of times (and my ear, once) while getting accustomed to the shorter length. Awesome rod on smaller waters though, and I've landed some surprisingly big fish on it.

Hiya Louis I'm definitely up for the suds, but that will have to be after the school year finishes (went back to university to complete a marketing degree). I'm sure we can find a nice sunny patio.

Hi Jon, Yes, it’s been a very long time indeed – several years and at least one wife ago! Things are awesome, thank you, and I hope they are for you too. As your figures note, the State of New York stocks one heck of a lot of fish – which explains precisely why fishing on that side of the lake is so much more productive than it is here. I don’t know if you have ever had the pleasure of fishing in New York, but the numbers of fish are absolutely astounding. Compared to Ontario, it’s day and night, and that's why you see so many Ontario guys fishing in New York (and none of our American friends wasting their time up here). My only real beef is that a large proportion of the rainbows they stock come from hatchery brood stock – I would be happier if they were stripped from returning adults, but I appreciate the economics behind that decision. As you note Jon, we stock approximately 250,000 steelhead on our side of Lake Ontario, and this (with help from natural reproduction) supports a sizable sport fishery. Yet in spite of the fact we stock even larger numbers of Atlantic salmon, we see very, very few of them survive. It is clear to anyone that steelhead survival is significantly greater – we all see steelhead and we all catch steelhead, as evidenced by repeated reports of someone going “8 for 12” on a given morning. When was the last time any of us went out and went 8 for 12 on Atlantic salmon? Apart from the CRAA guys working their fish ladder, have any of us even seen 12 Lake Ontario Atlantic salmon in our entire lifetime? Not many people have, I assure you of that. One has to question the value of any stocking program that produces such low returns that not even 50 individuals can be counted at a fishway. Why not put all this effort and money and hatchery capacity into managing steelhead, and provide tax-paying anglers with a fishery instead of a science experiment?

TDunn MNR began stocking Atlantic salmon in the Credit River and Wilmot Creek in the mid-1980s, and the results were absolutely dismal. A handful of adults did show up in the Credit river, far fewer in Wilmot. By the early 1990s MNR knew they had a problem, so they shifted focus and tried to understand why the results were so poor. That research phase started in about 1992 or 1993. They tried stocking Atlantics in a number of locations and from a variety of sources, including both sea-run and landlocked strains. After 10 years of this, they still had no results, and concluded that neither Lake Ontario nor its tributaries are suitable for Atlantic salmon reintroduction. In the lake, the fish suffer from thiamine deficiencies (as MJL noted in an earlier post) which lead to very low survival rates. In the streams, MNR concluded that Atlantics are unlikely to reproduce, as the juveniles simply cannot compete against juvenile rainbow trout, coho salmon or chinook salmon for either food or living space. They can spawn alright, but fry survival is the pits. MNR found that Atlantic salmon cannot adapt to the physical structure of most Lake Ontario tributaries, specifically the sandy/silty bottoms and sunken wood providing the primary form of cover. MNR said Atlantics need open streams with no silt and rocks or boulders as the primary form of cover - which was the way Lake Ontario tributaries might have been 300 years ago, but not today. New York also had an Atlantic salmon program in the late 80s and early 90s. They poured hundreds of thousands of the things into the Salmon River and a few other streams, but the results were so disappointing they discontinued the program altogether after a few years. The current Lake Ontario Atlantic salmon stocking program is a complete sham - it's partially funded by an Australian winery that uses it as a marketing ploy. No joke. And, sadly, still no results. On a more positive note, MNR has stocked lake trout into Lake Ontario since the 1970s, and there are all kinds of them out there. Not sure if they're reproducing on their own or not ... if so, it's not in big numbers.

Hiya TDunn No worries about stomping on any nerves .... just wish we could have something to show for all the time and money that has went into trying to introduce Atlantic salmon to Lake Ontario. It would be interesting to see what would happen if the MNR put that kind of effort into your area, where the habitat allows greater rates of survival. In Lake Ontario, it just makes sense to go with what works. We wouldn't have to strip too many wild steelhead to come up with 400,000 or 500,000 stockers, and it would make all the difference in the world.

I shouldn't take the bait, but as one of those steelhead guys who isn't terribly impressed with the Atlantic salmon program, I'm compelled to respond to this. First up, I've caught Atlantic salmon. In fact, I've been lucky enough to catch Atlantic salmon in Ontario, Michigan, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Quebec. I've caught Great Lakes fish, sea-run fish, and even ouananiche. See, that's the thing. I do know what I'm missing. I don't have any beef with the fighting qualities of Atlantic salmon. They're fun. They pull drag. They jump all over the place. Just like steelhead do. The problem I have with Atlantic salmon comes down to what marketing types call 'return on investment.' We stock one million Atlantics, yet see only a handful of fish return. Last fall the CRAA fished in the Credit River sanctuaries for three months (via special permit) and manned their fish ladder continuously, but didn't even see 50 fish in total. Less than 50 fish, from a stocking of over one million. That's pathetic. Truth is, the Ontario government has been stocking Atlantic salmon in Lake Ontario tributaries continuously since the 1980s, with basically zero results. Even the MNR's own research concludes that this ecosystem is no longer suitable for Atlantic salmon. So why do we continue to beat a dead horse? Imagine what would happen if we refocused our resources and stocked one million steelhead instead? History says we would see enormous results overnight. Those huge runs of steelhead into the Ganaraska River back in the early 80s, when they passed 15,000 to 18,000 fish through the Corbett Dam fish ladder each spring, resulted from stocking 100,000 steelhead every year. Fishing was pretty good back in those days. I wonder why? Back in the heyday of the coho program, Ontario never stocked more than 400,000 fish in a given year. Most years, they stocked approximately 200,000 coho in total. Yet those 200,000 fish spawned an enormous sport fishery that created derbies, sold thousands of boats, and who knows how many millions of dollars worth of downriggers, fish finders, rods, reels, and lures. Most of the time you could go out and catch coho, even if you didn't really know what you were doing. Now, we stock five times as many Atlantics - one million fish, each and every year. And where's the impact? I go fishing for a lot of reasons, but at the end of the day, I want to catch fish. It's very tough to catch a fish that simply isn't there. So that's my beef with the Atlantic salmon program. Rather than continue to pour money, resources, and hatchery space into an Atlantic salmon program that produces zero results, I would be much happier if our government devoted even half of that effort into managing steelhead. If they did, we would once again have a fishery that would be second to none.

Friend of mine works at a ketchup factory on the shoreline of Lake Erie. Every year they have a couple dozen stupid fish run up a drainage pipe, and follow it all the way into the tomato plant. The pipe is one of those corrugated steel things about three feet in diameter. To get into the plant building, they have to swim up this pipe for a couple hundred metres. Kind of undermines the whole concept of fish as "brain food."

Prettly lil' Atlantic salmon, no question about it. By the way, babaganoush, where on earth did you get that animation of the guy with the gun? It's hilarious!

If nothing else, fishermen are passionate. You wouldn't believe some of the mail I got when I worked for Real Fishing and Outdoor Canada.

Pretty much every river, creek, stream, ditch, storm drain and water pipe that flows into Lake Ontario gets a handful of rainbows wander up it each spring. And nope, I'm not kidding about the ditches, drains and pipes. I've come to the conclusion that given the opportunity, steelhead will run up a wet lawn. MJL is right though - check the regs before heading out. Lots of spots don't open till the general trout opener on the last Saturday in April.

ART is pretty remarkable. I suffered a mild hamstring tear a couple of years ago and the ART therapist I saw had me as good as new in a couple of weeks. To find a provider in your area, check out www.activerelease.com/providersearch.asp

I couldn't agree more. Can you imagine the sport fishery we would have on our hands if they stocked 1 million steelhead? Or 1 million coho? I can guarantee the returns would amount to a lot more than 35 skinny fish. The Atlantic salmon program is a complete and utter waste of resources on every level. They're the new splake.

Also look at the Mepps Comet, which is designed for easy hook changes. If you screw the brass weighted part up towards the blade you expose the end of the wire and can just slide the treble off and slip a single on, without having to cut the hook or chip your thumbnail on a split ring. If you use a weedless single hook, you'll find the spinner doesn't get stuck on logs or rocks nearly as much as a treble-hook version will. Seriously - you can crank it right through logjams, which not only saves you a lot of cash over a season, but means a couple of bonus fish you wouldn't have hooked otherwise.

Fish in the first pic is definitely a brownie - look at the tail.

I've never used the reel pictured, but right enough, you see them on eBay all the time. My gut says you'd be better off to keep your $40 and put it towards a reel of proven quality. If you hunt around you can find some pretty good deals on used float reels - usually what happens is someone buys it, tries it out, can't figure out how to cast and gives up before they learn. The reel goes on eBay or Kijiji having only been used two or three times. Be patient and you will see reels from makes like Raven, Okuma, Matrix or Aurora selling in the $150 - $170 range, which would be a pretty fair deal. You sometime see old Stantons and LG Custom Tackle float reels selling in the $100 - $150 range, and they're also a good deal, even if the bearings are shot (they're easily replaced). With centrepin reels, you truly do get what you pay for. The type (i.e. density) of aluminum alloy used in its construction, the type and size of bearings used, and the pin material, design and size all make a huge difference in how easily the reel spins. Moreover, the actual quality of construction matters most -- high-end machining that delivers perfectly balanced spools and super-tight tolerances just costs more, no matter how you slice it. I'd be pretty skeptical of any centrepin reel you can buy new for $40, shipping included.

Yup, I know. Sorry ... meant the SS II 2000 and 2500 are both discontinued. I should have been clearer. I saw an SS II 2000 on eBay a few weeks ago, basically in unused condition with the original box and accessories. I think it sold for about $75. Now, I kick myself for not having bid on it. I'd like another one to go with the one I have.

Count me among the old schoolers - I've landed thousands of steelhead on Daiwa Tournament SS 1300 Whisker reels (along with everything else, from walleye to sharks). I also like the newer SS II 2000 or 2500 Whiskers, which are essentially the same reel but with an internal bail trip. Both are discontinued, but you can find minty examples on eBay all the time. I also have a bunch of Shimano Stradics and Symetre reels I use for bass and walleye fishing. They're nice reels too, but the difference in drag performance between them and the Whiskers is like day and night. Absolutely nothing beats a Whisker.

Magazine writer/editor. Used to work for fishing magazines, but have gone over to the dark side and now focus on custom publishing for corporate clients. Not as much fun, but pays a whole lot better.

I dropped over 30 pounds by taking up running. To be honest, at first I hated it, and only did it because my girlfriend embarrassed me into it. Now, a couple of years and several marathons later, I can't imagine not running. It just makes everything else so much easier. Start slowly, by alternately walking for one minute then running for one minute. Go out three times a week, for maybe 20 minutes at the most. After two weeks of this, try running for two minutes, and walking for one. When that becomes fairly easy, stretch it out to three minutes of running, one minute of walking. Then four minutes of running, then five ... you get the idea. Take it slow and easy, but before you know it you'll be running for kilometres, not minutes. You will NOT trash your knees or ankles by running, provided you have proper shoes. That's the only real investment you will need to make, but it's essential. Go to a proper running store, like Running Room, and they will check out your biomechanics by having you walk and run barefoot in the store while they observe your feet. They can then sell you shoes that will work properly with your particular gait. Good running shoes will cost $100 - $140, and will last about six months. After that, they're still fine for wearing to the mall (or fishing), but you'll be best to replace them for running. Running on a treadmill is good, but running outside is MUCH better. The momentum of the belt makes it far easier to run on a treadmill than to run on the street. For best results, run outside. Stores like Running Room have clinics you can join, which provide instruction, coaching tips, and company - it's hard to blow off a run if you have people expecting to see you. The clinics work, and you'll have more success by joining one than you will have on your own. Trust me on this. Finally, before you start any exercise program, talk to the doctor and make sure you have the green light to proceed. And remember, the trick is to take it slow and gentle, especially if you've been sedentary for a while. Your muscles will adapt to the new routine really quickly, and you'll feel like you want to go farther or faster. But it takes a lot longer for soft tissues like tendons and ligaments to adapt, so you have to give them time to catch up. Good luck!

Nice brownie. Atlantic salmon have forked tails and generally aren't so deep-bodied.

Pretty fishies. Nice coho in that last photo.

If you just bought the boat recently, then it's worth taking it back to the marina and talking to them about it. They may offer to fix it, they might not. It depends on the establishment and what their policies are. I used to have an old 12-footer I used for hunting ducks, and it had a couple of leaky rivets where the keel came into the bow. I fixed them with a metallic paste called Aluminox. It's like grey toothpaste ... you smear it around the rivet then let it dry and sand it smooth. It worked pretty well. The boat never leaked again (well, at least not in that spot) despite being run into a couple of beaver dams and up on shore repeatedly.

mikeymikey is absolutely right on the money. Your ability to check a rod tube depends on the aircraft being used. Twinjets like 737s, 757s, A319s and such can swallow canoes in their cargo holds, never mind rod tubes. The problem comes when you have to fly on a small regional jet or a turboprop, since most of those were designed for business travel and can't handle anything bigger than one overnight bag for each passenger. If you're going to a small town in NW Ontario on a scheduled flight, you will almost certainly be in a small turboprop like a Saab 300 series, a Beechcraft 1900 or maybe a Convair 560, and none of those will take a tube much over four feet in length. You better call the airline ahead of time and confirm what kind of plane you're on, and what size tube it can accommodate. Otherwise, you might have to leave your rods behind. (That happened to me on my first trip to Kesagami. Air Ontario couldn't fit my rod tube on their Beech 1900, so my rods spent a week in storage at Pearson Airport. Of course they only told me this after I arrived in Cochrane and the rods didn't appear. Thankfully, I bumped into Bruce Leeson at the lodge, and he was kind enough to loan me a couple of his outfits for the week. Thanks again, Bruce!). You can fit large rod tubes on small float planes (Cessnas, Beavers) by running them down the floor under the seats, but they won't do that on scheduled commercial flights. Having worked for a couple of TV fishing shows and a few fishing magazines since the early 1980s, I've taken hundreds of flights with rod tubes, and on just about every type of plane imaginable. Trust me, don't leave anything to chance. Call the airline and confirm exactly what they can handle.