solopaddler

Let's see some big spec's! (Nice fish though )

I don't think anyone was promoting the use of bass sized spinning equipment, I know I wasn't. What do the more hardcore musky guys use when a lighter more finesse presentation is required?

It's funny you mention steelheading Lew. The tackle used by most is really specialized. It helps you catch more fish quickly and efficiently. However I can honestly say it's not necessary to catch fish. Myself, I could catch just just as many on a run of the mill 7' spinning rod and reel. To say no to using a spinning reel for musky, sorry I don't buy it. It's obviously not the tool most musky guys will choose for a lot of good reasons already mentioned. But a suitably heavy enough spinning combo will handily suffice for a novice who fishes for them very occasionally. (In my opinion for whatever that's worth, )

So...only those with vast amounts of experience need reply? Everyone's opinion is valuable and appreciated as far as I'm concerned.

Because I am ecstatic to see even a small percentage of the lakes remain unspoiled for future generations.

Excuse me? ....shakes head..... wow. I'm with you on being against these types of restrictions. I've said it several times now. A public free for all on the fly in lakes would decimate the fishery and the industry, that's the bottom line. I don't think that can be argued. Don't you see the need to protect the resource? For what it's worth there is no such thing as any public lake on crown land, including fly in lakes, that aren't open free and clear for every citizen to use. The MNR is restricting the use of mostly new roads that come close to the outfitters lakes. No one is stopping anyone from using alternate means to access these lakes. If they're not difficult or expensive to get to, do you really believe the quality of the fishery will remain the same? Not likely. Some restrictions are a good thing. It preserves something precious for future generations. Can't you see that? It was said in that article and quoted by me that 10% of the lakes in the region are being used by fly in operators. 10%. Don't you see the benefit of protecting such a small percentage of the resource for our kids and grand kids? Why don't you ask your neighbours the MacLachlan's how they feel about the situation?

Sultan isn't closed to all the lakes. Obviously Biscotasing and Ramsey are accessable as well as scores of other smaller lakes. The fly in lakes have restricted access which has been noted is a good thing. Never mind access to the lakes anyway, what if they simply closed the road to anyone using it? I saved a lot of time using the Sultan road last week enroute to Chapleau. Anyone who currently uses that road is doing so out of E.B. Eddy's generosity. We obviously have two completely different outlooks here because I see most (not all, but most) of these restrictions as a good. They're protecting a resource, one which I enjoy using. They'll make me more inclined to head up north on vacation, not less inclined.

What gets me, you're located in NWO. If anyone has no need to use restricted roads it's you. There's practically more water than land up there and finding great waters to fish is pretty easy wouldn't you agree? NWO is a far cry from the Chapleau, Folyet, Wawa, Timmins area. Which is more or less the area being discussed in the linked article.

I'm certainly not missing any point here. Your reason for flaunting the law seems reactionary and pointless. As I've already stated I'm with you 100% when it comes to restriction bans on traditional access points. Even if northerners don't use the services of a fly in operator (and by and large they don't and never will) I can't fathom why anyone would be glad to see the death of an entire industry and way of life all in the name of "I'm a taxpayer, it's my right". An industry that brings precious tourism dollars to the region year after year. Another point, many of these roads are private roads with public access built by the logging companies. Not a dime of anyone's precious taxes went into their construction. Living in Chelmsford, how would you feel if for whatever reason E.B. Eddy decided for liability reasons the Sultan road was now closed to the public? How would the outfitters in Bisco fare and feel about the situation? As far as the impact that locals have, including people with private planes on newly opened lakes, I highly recommend you find a copy of George Therriault's "Trespassing In Gods Country". I'm sure you'll find it a fascinating read considering it's written mostly about your region by one of it's longest standing fly in operators. Well, that's not exactly true. There's plenty of access roads that are fully open to the public with signage indicating specific lakes cannot be accessed using the road. Lots of misinformation on both sides it seems.

That is beyond riduculous. It's no wonder people are up in arms. So I take it you're one of the people who feel they can't catch fish in the other 90% of lakes that can be legally accessed? I'm a lifetime resident of Ontario too. I've spent my entire adult life tripping through the north. Mostly by canoe, but many times flying into outpost camps. I have never had any problems accessing great waters without breaking any laws. Again, I have to wonder why so many of you guys who live up there feel the need to fish the 10% of lakes that have access restrictions? Is it, could it be, that the fishing is better? I just can't fathom why anyone would want to decimate an entire industry and form of recreation. One that's been an intrinsic part of shaping the north and enjoyed by many. Certainly not solely by, as you put it, "elite sportsmen from another country". Really Dara? Have you read some of the other comments in this thread? Did you read the link the original poster provided? It was ALL about the outfitters, hence my reply which you quoted. I'm with you 150% if you're talking new restrictions on traditional access roads. Those types of restrictions were never meant to protect lakes. They were put in place to enhance tourism and boost the local economy which is precisely what the MNR is attempting to do here. Hate to say it, but if anyone is putting pressure on the lakes up there, dollars to doughnuts it's meat hunting locals.

I have a custom spinning rod Spiel built for me rated 10-17lb's. VERY fast action as well as light and sensitive. I run a 4000 Sustain on it with 30lb braid for large pike and have never had an issue. I'll run baits as heavy as 11/2oz with this rod, nothing heavier. In my opinion, in all but the most specific type of musky fishing, fishing where stout rods and larger baits are an essential ingredient, a lighter setup is more than adequate. I'm certainly not in the same class of musky angler as many on this board, but I used to be into it pretty hardcore and have caught a few goliaths. In my experience the bigger muskies all came in pretty easily LOL! Set the hook, a couple runs here, another run there, and bam they're boatside in the cradle. Without offending the sensibilities of the hardcore musky guys, the power of these fish is way overblown. The super heavy tackle comes in play when the presentation requires it, not because of the strength of the fish. In most waters a 11/2oz black/orange bucktail and a well built med/hvy spinning combo with 30lb braid will serve you well.

As mentioned the land use permits the outfitters are using are old. These camps have been in existence for eons. There is no way for them to adapt. It's either a public free for all and the death of the fly in industry in that region or restricted public access. Plain and simple. Well these two examples are completely different issues then aren't they? I can personally understand and fully endorse MNR access restrictions on existing fly in lakes. But to arbitrarily restrict access to sportsmen to otherwise unused crown land is a joke. By all means attack the MNR with full guns blazing. Unfortunately this issue is not at the forefront. It seems for whatever misguided reasons access to the fly in lakes is what people are up in arms about.

Before things get out of hand? The existing outpost camps in the area being discussed have been there for generations. The outfitters operate on these remote lakes using age old land use permits issued by the MNR. The MNR hasn't issued any new land use permits in a very very long time. The only "new" development is the ever increasing encroachment of roads making these once inaccessable lakes quite accessable. Every time a new road opens up, locals and otherwise rush in and sooner rather than later the lakes are a shadow of there former selves. If the MNR didn't restrict public access to these once remote fly in lakes the entire industry would be dead. It's already a given that the MNR will not be issuing any new commercial land use permits. For those against this exactly how would you go about protecting the outfitters business? Businesses whose outpost camps have been there long before you were born. Not really just the outfitters business, but an industry and pastime that has seen hundreds of thousands of people enjoy over the last 50 odd years. A way of life that was a big part of how the entire north was shaped. Would you really just idly squash it all because the idea of "restricted access" rubs you the wrong way? As mentioned in the linked article the lakes in this region whose access is restricted comprise 10% of the total lakes. Are you telling me that it's impossible to find any good fishing in the other 90%? Because if you are that's a very compelling statement. You're more or less saying that all of the non restricted lakes suck in comparison. Is that the case? I know for a fact it's not, there are tons of great lakes available to be enjoyed and used by everyone. Personally I want my kids and grandkids to be able to enjoy a quality fly in experience without having to drive 15-18 hours to jump off points further north. Why can't the people upset with these laws be content with the other 90% of the lakes in the region? Articles like this are nothing but inflamatory imo. Read at face value by the easily riled masses of course people will be against restricted access. This is no doubt an inflammatory issue. I have no desire to get into a internet debate on this topic once again. I just wanted to express another viewpoint.

Was enroute to work at about 1:55 and pulled over 'cause my entire car was shaking violently back and forth. Thought I blew a tire. Freaky for sure.

If the French is their choice as mentioned it's a boat-in, paddle in scenario. Perhaps a bit more money and a bit more involved. Definitely worth the effort and bit of expense though imo. French River Provincial park more or less encompasses the lower French and Pickeral rivers from hwy 69 downstream to the bay. It's a boat in park only. Reservations aren't necessary and the camping fees are cheap. Without a doubt some of the finest scenery and nicest campsites in Ontario imo. Hartley Bay marina used to rent boats/motors but havn't for a while now. They do however rent canoes and gear for people accessing the lower French as well as sell camping permits. http://www.hartleybaymarina.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5&Itemid=5 Pickeral River marina right on hwy 69 still does rent small boats/motors as well as camping permits. From the hwy you have access to the entire lower French with their rental boats (except the Bad River for liability reasons). As mentioned TONS of fantastic campsites. http://www.cvprm.ca/marina.shtml Fishing in that entire lower delta is great! If this type of trip is something they may consider I can help with choosing campsites and general areas to fish. Cheers

You're an inspiration Ron. Thank you.

It's a pleasure reading a fishing report from you Lew. Those are some incredible muskies, well done!

What a great trip! Looks like you boys had a fantastic time.

This is what you said in your first reply: "you can try and maintain a facade of "remote" wilderness all you like.. but i wouldn't be expecting those of us who live up here to accept it any time soon, we know better. " That smacks of entitlement by a local to me, but whatever. There's plenty of public crown land that's free and clear for every citizen to use as they wish. There never has and never will be any need to fish a "fly in" lake by using restricted roads. The tourism industry is huge in northern Ontario. Protecting the outfitters interests makes perfect sense to me.

This particular outpost camp is no different from hundreds of others than can be accessed quite easily by canoe. The misconception that this camp is any different from scores of others is false. Why are people who live up there any more entitled than anyone else in the province? I've done literally countless canoe trips over my lifetime as well as a large number of fly in trips. If I go on a canoe trip I've never had any trouble choosing a route or a lake that isn't breaking any laws. Why should it be so hard for anyone else? Why does the notion of protecting an outfitters interests rub you so wrong? Can't you see the need? There's a million lakes up there that are loaded with fish that can be accessed legally by road. Find one and fish it.

Great recap Will, thanks for taking the time. Really glad you boys had a good trip.

Drew that was incredible, just incredible. Fantastic story and truly stunning photographs. Thank you.

It's incredibly bizarre how the MNR confronted Terry no doubt. But the point is the fact that they paddled and portaged in doesn't detract from the "fly in" experience in any way. As mentioned the public at large is not allowed to use the same access road the MNR did. Second there's almost no such thing as an outpost camp I can't access via paddle and portage. I've accessed zillions of so called fly in lakes with my canoe. Unless you're incredibly far north it's entirely possible that the lake you're flying into is accessed regularly by canoeists. Heck, many of the premier outpost camps in Ontario north of Armstrong in Wabakimi park see scores of canoeists paddle by them enroute. I know I did....many many times. It's entirely commonplace. The fact that the public isn't allowed to use the same access road the MNR does actually makes it more remote than the norm in this case. And no this thread is not going south at all. I just think there's a few misconceptions that need to be cleared up.

I'm finding many of these comments incredibly ironic. First off, you cannot drive to this lake. What these MNR guys went through to access this lake was quite a lot. Second, it is a fly in lake, and no the general public at large is not allowed to use the access road to gain access to the lake. (The access road to the south is a good 1km from the lake) You can legally paddle and portage in from a great distance, that's perfectly fine. There is no earthly reason to have any sort of beef with the outfitter. Whether one agrees with the public at large being allowed to use the road or not is a moot point. The most ironic thing is I just got back from spending a week at this very same camp with my family. We had an incredible time, caught hundreds of walleye and enjoyed perfect weather. Couldn't have had a better time. The outfitter in question are a young couple from Thunder Bay and are 2 of the nicest and most accomodating people I've ever dealt with. Their prices are super cheap compared to pretty much anyone's in the industry and I'll happily fish with them again. (And for future guests the shower, the running water at the sink and the fridge now work perfectly )

What you've accomplished out there and the life you're living is truly inspiring. Some beautiful fish as well. You're definitely living in the right place to learn fly fishing. Good luck in the future!