cisco

Hope all the kids have a speedy recovery.

I always did have reservations about who got the card contract with MNR.

Hope your pup comes out of it all fine.

OK the Canadian dollar is up on par with the US dollar. Up 40% or so from only a short time ago. The world crude oil price is in US dollars per barrel. So can anyone here explain why we're still paying the same here in Canada for gasoline and stuff which comes from crude oil? I would think the price per litre here in Canada should drop to like.... $.65 or at least $.75 per litre.

Sorry for the confusion Marc. I just don't want the cost of licences to discourage financially-challenged and young and occasional people from fishing. The more fishers out there the more we build a stewardship ethic, especially with the education program I am calling for. I agree we need more better trained COs out there. I only say that the moneys to manage F and W in Ontario should be largely borne by the public tax system. Everyone benefits so why should just anglers and hunters pay for it? Increased fines is good too, but that should be for all parties screwing with the resource from loggers cutting into calving sites to; chemical polutors at rivers to; granddad with a fish over limit. Some seem concerned that increasing MNR funding will result in wasted dollars. Well I'm not saying to just toss money at it. Again, perhaps the best approach is to form a stakeholder council where funding priorities can be developed. I dunno. This is off the topic a bit. Accountability would be present if a few stakeholder groups were involved with the design of the program of stewardship which I am putting forward. And as I said, if the Premier gives clear instructions and a budget specific to the stewardship program, it could be done. Been there done that so-to-speak. Having helped build/reshape some programs at MNR years ago I am convinced MNR does not presently have the needed professionals in place to create a stewardship program with the Min of Ed.. Present bios aren't what's required so much as bio-teacher-social science types. With the cutbacks there is a skeleton crew in place who's barely able to keep their heads above water just to manage core issues. I even read somewhere recently that the District offices will be closed to public. Call if you need anything.... That is a further step in the wrong direction. How bad is/was MNR at public consultation and surveys? AWFUL. Many examples where they ask limited and leading questions to get the response THEY wanted on issues. For example, in surveys to determine park uses to permit, they'd forget that the park program was supposed to reflect local resident traditions/desires. Surveys would be done at the high-visitor times when the most folks from the city are there to fill in the surveys. Local resident input then gets lost in the shuffle so folks from places far away (citiots some would call them) have total say/control how the park is managed. I'd never let a bio do surveys without the proper training. Their education is based more as introverts staring through microscopes..... with a strong love towards flora and fauna and a distaste for human interventions into nature. Hardly the type of person who cares/worries sufficiently about the people side of wild life management. Oh, and the Reguatory changes have been made for several different reasons, not just due to lobbying. Over the years of questionable success in the courts fighting against violations, MNR has found out the hard way there are many loopholes and stuff which got violators off the hook with their fancy lawyers. Those things were tightened up. Also, due to funding/manpower cutbacks the entire MNR Ontario geographic map has been changed so the slices are bigger and the areas where rules apply are bigger. Hardly an ecosystem approach as they claim it to be. If anything their ""Ecosystem Approach" is anything but! Their approach will streamline and simplify the regs and enforcement so less MNR staff are needed to run the show both in the field and from the office. Lobbying has had a tiny impact to all of this. Negligible in my opinion.

Judging by the computer-claimed hits on this thread (approximatey 200 since yesterday) I would surely believe that someone will know the answer to the following question. I can't remember the name right now... but MNR Wildlife Branch circa 1985 had a school program going with the Min of Education re MNR stuff.. Can anyone name the program which was designed to teach Ontario students some fundamentals of wild life management here in Ontario? I think it had the word 'school' in it... but the name escapes me presently. Anyone know the answer? The program was a major accomplishment since it demonstrated that Ministries can in fact work together instead of acting as blindly robotic independents with no overlapping responsibilities. Anyone? What was the name of the program?

To Chris S. .... Specific funding to address specific problems/issues that has emerged is just the thing required. I'm not saying throw money blindly at MNR (as if that'll ever happen). By developing plans and programs based on ones that work in other jurisdictions we can prioritize what needs to be done and at what cost. Achieving gov't accountability like you suggest is a foggy huge thing that effects all actions of gov't and also will be assessed by everyone in a different way. May as well solve world hunger before trying to fix wild life management issues here in Ontario then..... LOL! Premier should grant $200,000 the first year to get proper staff officed and working on developing a blueprint to get the MNR and the Min of Ed to develop curriculum/lesson plans along the lines they once did (a bit) when there was $ to do such stuff. Once the Premier and MNR/Min of Ed Ministers tell staff to do it and here's the money.... it'll get started. It isn't as grandeous as achieving gov't accountability, but it would focus on a specific issue/problem to help our society develop a better stewardship ethic towards the wild life resource. That should be a stated objective the progress of which can easily be measured by developing goals tracking such things like.... whether/how much reduction of no-licence fines fines and CO experiences with uninformed outdoorspeople occur as percentage of total annual anglers dealt with. It's not that expensive or hard, to achieve meaningful results which reflect improved angler ethics and understanding afield.

Licences are here to stay. One reason is since COs otherwise would be hard-pressed to know who to ask whether a non-resident licence was needed by em. Licences should be set price-wize according to cost recovery of the licence and its beaurocracy plus the cost of manpower $ to check folks in the field along with a tiny bit more to add some profit into the general fund from violators $$$ Licence and fine revenue should not carry the cost of wild life management in Ontario. Licence costs must reflect our society's desire to allow anyone of any age as resident of Ontario to go angling. Angling should be a desired outcome of the actions of our gov't. The budget of MNR should be determined simply by reflecting the funding of an other jurisdiction where it can be seen that it has advanced to a level/quality of resource management that we wish to achieve. By properly studying other jurisdictions we will find out which one(s) to mimic. Don't laugh since we've been trying to mimic Sweden's moose program and moose pop'n accomplishments for years... unsuccessfully. The US Fish and Wildlife Service has proven to be a great federal influence on state-run wildlife programs... but here we have a weak Canadian Wildlife Service which does little to work with all jurisdictions in Canada to help achieve a high standard of quality. The USFWS works hard to ensure high-quality management whereas here the provincial/territorial gov't cut cut cut since they know or/and care little about the resources other than a cash/taxation source. In the US they care more about serving the people rather than... ahem... 'servicing' the people. Gov't here needs to use way more tax dollars to manage our resources to encourage behaviour like angling, hunting and nature viewing. Unless of course gov't is opposed to these behaviours as they seem to be now in certain instances.

Here is the link of the strangers who shape MNR and Min of Ed funding and the destiny of wild life management in Ontario. They control the money!!! http://www.premier.gov.on.ca/team/committee.asp?Team=2

Niceguy, in response, in my opinion the majority of informed Ontario anglers presently feel a bit cheated and abandoned by the ontario government. They probably see the recent extreme MNR funding cuts as a slap in the face re the past MNR promises to earmark fish licence dollars to improve things. I thought there was a SPA set up for that? But regardless of a SPA it doesn't do any good if identical funds are removed from the MNR budget when the SPA dollars roll in. I'm afraid any deal involving an increase in the cost of the regular licence and elimination of the conservation licence will be met with much eye rolling and skepticism. If a deal as you suggest goes through, a lower percentage of anglers will probably buy licences using the excuse of the new higher price cash grab; and that they only fish a little bit so are being unfairly treated because they can't get the cheaper licence anymore. The public doesn't understand or care about Special Purpose Accounts. They care that they can't trust gov't due to all the cutbacks they have seen/experienced or heard about. It's time for MNR to give something to the public to regain trust so the public will want to give something back. Yet I read how the total fisheries budget is now 90% of licence revenues (or something like that) which gives the definite impression to me that the overall goal of gov't is to eventually have anglers cover 100% of the fisheries budget. At present the Ontario government isn't acting like a governing entity trying to shape our society/culture. If it did, then it would research and assign a value to our fisheries resource to determine Cabinet Board funding support which properly reflects the value of it to our culture. To make the needed changes, MNR cannot act alone. Meetings with the Minister will accomplish nothing worthwhile as long as Cabinet Board and the Min of Education rule what people are taught and what money MNR gets to operate. We need to learn who sits on Cabinet Board and where they live to focus local pressure on them so they start acting like we want them to act. Sad that their budget allocations shape the destiny our culture, yet few folks know who these penny-pinchers are! They are the hidden bosses of MNR and the Min of Education. These people shape our culture and society. Get them on side and get MNR and Min of Ed moving in the right direction

Good idea re surveys. However MNR has no real social-science expertise and has been skewing surveys in their design for many years.

High school and grade school pupils need proper education on Ontario flora and fauna along with lessons on relevent rules like the fishing regs. Then as students learn their parents then learn through them. Min of Education must be forced to work as a better teammate with MNR under Premier's edict or something to develop lesson plans accordingly. Presently our kids are taught about environmental issues going on 'over there' someplace... instead of being taught about Ontario, the here and now. Such education is badly needed to curb the ignorance and rule breaking of many people here. MNR must also budget and work harder to get environmental violations out to the news media. For example, local newspapers should periodically list local violators so members of the public through peer pressure can encourage these lawbreakers to mend their ways. Logging companies cutting into a calving site... or a pollution discharge froma local pulp mill should all be cast into the local limelight better to embarass and correct violators. So what needs improvement about the natural resources of Ontario??? Answer....the work of the Ministry of Education. Public education and awareness needs to be enhanced by this Ministry to the level of instilling a strong stewardship ethic that prevents folks from harming the environment in the first place, and which also helps encourage folks to pressure violators whos actions are disrespectful of Ontario's natural environment and the laws in place to protect them.

I been to Powasan. Ain't hardly much difference 'tween it an ole Alabamee!

A book on species at risk should include MNR fisheries branch input on the issue. Years ago I recall the MNR experts opinion that the blue walleye of the kind folks are showing pics of are simply a colour phase of the yellow walleye. The Erie blue pickerel/walleye critter was more slender and had some other things that set it apart I think. I recall reading where a guy/gov't may have a specimen on ice somewhere. Maybe the hope is to get DNA to rekindle the animal somehow someday...?... but maybe the DNA thing has been done now so any suspected blue ones can be ruled out. Some bio told me he had hopes there was still a tiny remnant school in Erie.... but that was years ago and if gov't actually found some it'd be alllll over the news and in fisheries science journals and in masters and PHD thesis papers methinks. I hope the author does a good job on the book. I'd enjoy reading an accurate referenced present-day account of what scientists and gov't experts have to say on various critters which fall into the category of species at risk and such.

Great pictures Lew! That third one with discolouration seems well past the 50 inch mark! Congrats!

Thanks for the helpful info Wayne. I've got a used boat trailer with those buddies on and for the past year been greasing a bit here and there, but really needed your info. Now I will check wheel play and replace pins etc properly.

That photo must have been altered..... probably from a pan fulla tubesteaks!

Coyotes got here from the USA around the late 60's and in around 1980 MNR was noticing with a bit of concern from their winter air fights that southern Ontario coyotes seemed to be learning to hunt deer in packs. That was years ago and I'm not sure if the coyote has adapted this way yet, but they're a pretty smart critter that's for sure!

Good discussion thread! Lotsa issues folks are upset about re the Pickton trial for sure. A few thoughts and suggestions.... boring to some but hopefully of interest to others here. And maybe even a way to help solve the issues. What is ' law ' ? " Law is akin to many layers of fabric used to capitalize from and cloak the truth." - Unknown author The legal system wins every time.... attorney, judge, forensic technician/police salaries and expenses, etc..... The more lawyers, the more details and rights associated with the law.... the more time it takes to carefully weigh all the sides of the equation.... the more the system propogates itself to continuance, which is what it's real purpose is. Like the purpose on any critter is to self-propogate itself, so is the purpose of any system. The legal system resists any change to make it do something different than maintain status quo or to enlarge. Outside force is required to change a system. Budget/staffing cuts/a push from the powers that be (to serve their own system requirements).... is required. We need law. For sure we do. But it's really getting to be a cumbersome system that reeks of money and inefficiencies. Lie detectors need to be better refined/used to serve as evidence. They aren't perfect, but if used judiciously on anyone thought to be involved in a crime, it sure would speed up the process of finding out who the police/justice system should focus on. It would help render verdicts also. I read about Police Chiefs selling illegal guns; police charged with drug trafficing and so forth. I read all the examples of good folks being victimised by police/the Crown in the recent thread by the fellow who was attacked in bed by his ex.. Better use of lie detectors would in my humble opinion, discourage someone...whether politician, cop, criminal, prospective wrong-doer from committing illegal acts. Courts are backlogged now and the process is labour, cost and time intensive to the point where innocent folks are severely punished by the process of $$$ for lawyers, lost time, stress, unsure outcomes although innocent. Lie-dector technology needs to be enhanced and used better, to the maximum, to offset the time and costs of the current legal system. But that ain't gonna happen as long as the system self-propogates itself to remain unchanged.

Cool! Thanks Wayne! I'd buy a boat from you anyday. Lots more money in making plane parts though eh?!

I believe that the major manufacturers of aluminum boats may soon address leak concerns by offering an option to the buyer. Say, for an extra $250. you can have a few strips of kevlar epoxy-resined on top of the weld or rivet seams. I'd spend the extra for sure. I redid an old 18ft Crestliner and although welded, it still had the keels attached via rivets. Leaks were going on there as well as where the bottom met a strong console stringer. With too big a floor section without adequate stringers the hull flexed to the point of a crack developing at the console stringer. By laying some composites down on the area and over the crack, and by also laying a coupla strips underneath all using epoxy resin, the floor has zero flex or leaks now. I honestly think it's stronger than new. Total cost was a few hundred and some time, but having researched composites like spectra, kevlar, carbonfibre it really is a great way to strengthen a hull without alot of additional weight. If I were a manufacturer of crack/leak prone boats I'd sure be considering offering such a composite-upgrade option. I worked on some leaky plane pontoons too years ago and heard from plane repair guys that they do require repairs to stop leaks. Wayne probably has seen his share of em to. Planes don't take the same pounding on their sides like boats do on their bottoms. But as Wayne says the pontoons take a beating. Maybe he has some stats on how frequently they require repair to stop leaks. Remember guys telling me they had to hand pump out the water so the plane would not tip over or not take off from the water leaking into the pontoons. We even discussed installing float-actuated electric bilge pumps to address the issue.

Thanks Wayne. I was typing while you posted. Over the years fishing and with my scant aircraft structure training... which I know pales in comparison to your knowlege, I notice this stuff which may confuse novice boat buyers. Remember when back in the 60s and 70s a 20hp on a 14ft fishing boat was really big! Most guys had 6 to 9.9 Johnsons or Evinrudes. Now those hps are used as kickers LOL!

An expensive thick-hulled aluminum riveted boat is fine since that usually means you're getting what you pay for. An inexpensive rivet tinny indicates it was made on the cheap.... so it'll not withstand the pounding a better model will take before leaking. Welded boats are thicker aluminum since, in my view, this is needed to compensate for the resultant brittleness on each side of the weld. Welded tinny hulls simply need to be thicker to provide the same failure resistance than a thinner well-riveted tinny. Aircraft aren't welded since that also would require thicker aluminum than if riveted... which flies (pun intended) in the face of fuel savings. I see that todays boats seem much wider and have much more HP pushing em through the waves at high speeds. These two aspects add to the chance of leaky rivets. A boat that hits the waves flat with more HP vs cutting through via narrower beam under less HP means comparatively more hull stress/leakage concerns. Now that the big tin boat manufacturers are all coming under one umbrella.... Brunswick, I think they are all priced according to their quality and design strength. So you get what you pay for in a new boat. Go cheap and you get probs if you love hammering waves. If buying used go with brands that have good records. Some old Smokercrafts and Starcrafts I've seen are loaded with rivets and don't leak a drop. On older boats to me I'd look for the plateau on the sides since this bending increases flex resistance whereas I see some straight sided boats that when I press on the sides it flexes considerably. Leak test and press the hull on a prospective purchase, and also reflect on how you're gonna use it. Hammering big waves under high horsepower vs going out on calm days in a small inland lake. Guys like Lew use their high-powered boats alot under really adverse conditions, so welded (also more stable due to increased weight) is a good option. But others puddlejumping under light horsepower will do fine with a low cost smooth-sided riveted tinny. Bottom line, you get what you pay for re new; you need to consider your needs/uses of the boat to determine how strong/expensive a hull you need; HP also determines hull strength since anyone with a high HP motor will open er up in waves; used boats offer excellent value and deals can be had by the discerning buyer looking for a strong hull. After hearing guys complain about leaky riveted tinnys I also wonder whether the strength/diameter of the rivets are best for the applications. For aircraft there are MANY metal types and diameters re rivets. Maybe some hull makers don't use strong-enough rivets... or they use cheap stuff which again reflects what the hull costs the consumer. My $.02 on it. Best of luck finding a perfect boat for your needs!

Careful re the E-test since you cannot put a vehicle on the road when you buy used and the sucker don't pass the E-test. It must pass (Conditional passes won't work for a used car purchase). Careful not to buy a lawn ornament!

Sorry about the sad news Gary. She sure had a full life. Can't ask for anything more. All the best my friend.