aniceguy

no way... how can anyone compete with the inovator

maybe Im wrong here but as a police officer I always those that they should set examples, and I though a tresspassing charge or any charge would have some career altering effects

ahh the dump let the collection begin

Municipal by laws have teeth, essa's fees are 10 for a day or 40 for the year but they are for access to city owned parks, they are not for the right to fish the Notty, and as such can and are enforced by by law enforcement

Riperian rights are a contencious issue around the entire province. There are two pieces of leglislation that govern them is the Beds of Navigable Waters Act [R.S.O 1990 c. B.4]. The second is the Heritage Hunting and Fishing Act, 2002 [s.O. 2002, c. 10]. the land on both sides of a river but do they indeed own stream bed. Unless it was deeded by the queen prior to the first world war, and the land has been retained in family possession without a transfer of ownership then the potential of them in fact owning stream bed is a distinct possibility. The vast majority of the rest, when transfer of property ownership occured then that right was returned back to the crown The right to hunt and fish More background on this topic With the proclamation of the Heritage Hunting and Fishing Act, 2002, the Government of Ontario recognized that hunting and fishing have played important roles in shaping Ontario's social, cultural and economic heritage and that recreational hunters and anglers have made important contributions to the understanding, conservation, restoration and management of Ontario's fish and wildlife resources. The Act not only provides for the establishment of the Ontario Fish and Wildlife Heritage Commission, but specifically creates, for the fist time, a statutory right to hunt and fish in the Province. Specifically, subsection 1(1) of the Act provides that: “A person has a right to hunt and fish in accordance with the law.” The right to hunt and fish is not an unfettered right. You have to exercise that right, “in accordance with the law”. What this means is that as long as you have a licence (if you are required to have one) and you respect:: a) the various regulations regarding seasonal closures, equipment restrictions, catch and possession limits, and; private property rights, you have a right to fish which is recognized and protected by law in this Province. The regulations regarding licenses, seasonal closures, equipment restrictions, and catch and possession limits can be obtained in printed form from your local bait and tackle dealer or the Ministry of Natural Resources. Water access It is clear that you cannot trespass upon private property while exercising your right to hunt and fish. Private lakes and ponds (bodies of water without deeded public access) are off-limits unless you have permission from the landowner. The question becomes more complex when you consider other bodies of water that are accessible to the public. The Beds of Navigable Waters Act addresses the issue in section 1 of the act, specifically it provides that: “Where land that borders on a navigable body of water or stream, or on which the whole or a part of a navigable body of water or stream is situate, or through which a navigable body of water or stream flows, has been or is granted by the Crown, it shall be deemed, in the absence of an express grant of it, that the bed of such body of water was not intended to pass and did not pass to the grantee” Section 1 of the Beds of Navigable Waters Act creates a statutory presumption that owners of land abutting navigable waters (or streams) do not have ownership of the lake-bed/stream-bed, unless the original Crown land grant specifically states that the lakebed/streambed is included as part of the property. There are some exceptions to this rule, specifically: a) if the land was granted before 1911 (the year that the Act was first proclaimed) and a court determined before 1911 that the landowner also owned the rights to the stream bed, or; the landowner establishes to the satisfaction of a court that a water power enterprise of some sort was established in the waterway before 1911, and the landowner had a reasonable belief that he or she had the right to use the streambed for such purpose, or; c) the waterway is designated as one to which the Act does not apply (at this time there is only one such waterway, located in Merritt Township in the District of Sudbury). Crown land grants which specifically include rights to the streambed are rare, and were/are usually made in relation to places where mills, power dams or hunting/fishing clubs were/are to be established. These places are usually pretty obvious and are usually posted. That being said, the best way to satisfy yourself that your exclusion from a waterway is legitimate is to head off to the Registry Office and look at the original Crown grant to see if such rights were specifically granted. If the streambed was not specifically granted to the abutting landowner, the bed of the waterway is Crown Land and can be used by the public to exercise its right to hunt and fish. As a rule this right again is rarely transfered within a real estate transaction. The question of Navigability The question of whether or not a particular waterway is “navigable” is more problematic. If a waterway is not, “a navigable body of water”, section 1 of the Beds of Navigable Waters Act does not apply and the landowner's rights would be considered to extend into the streambed. Not surprisingly, the issue of what “navigable” means (within the context of the Beds of Navigable Waters Act) has, from time to time, been the subject of litigation in this Province. The first cases concerning the issue of navigability were primarily focused on the question of whether or not a waterway could be used for commercial purposes (i.e. shipping goods or floating logs). The first test of navigability therefore included the consideration of whether or not the waterway was a commercially viable means of transportation. That criteria has recently been deemed not to be conclusive of the issue, but rather evidence that a waterway is navigable (but it is not an essential condition to prove navigability). Essentially, the question of navigability will be looked at by the court from two perspectives - historic use and present use. If any of the following are found by a court considering the issue of navigability of a particular waterway to be fact, the waterway will be considered to be navigable: a) it is used for commercial shipping; it is used by the public as an “aqueaous highway” (i.e. it must have real or practical value to the public as a means of transport from one point of public access to another). The vessels being used do not have to be large - if the waterway is used by small watercraft (i.e. canoes, inflatable rafts, kayaks, paddle boats), or used by the public for transportation in the winter (i.e. snowmobiles, cross-country skies, snowshoes), it will be considered to be navigable; c) it is capable of being used by the public as an “aqueaous highway”. In situations where no actual present use of the waterway can be established, the court will look at historic use of the waterway and expert information regarding the present characteristics of the waterway to determine if it can in fact be used as described above. The issue has been explored further, and a court will now find that a waterway is navigable, even if: a) it is only navigable during certain times of the year (i.e. spring run-off); the waterway is interrupted by dams or other obstructions (natural or man-made) which impede navigation; c) it is navigable in some parts, but not others (in such cases section 1 of the Beds of Navigable Waters Act applies only to those sections that are navigable); d) if the river is navigated for purposes other than transportation (i.e. for fishing or other recreational pursuits) The myth of the “highwater mark” Many people believe that the public has a right to use land up to the highwater mark of a navigable waterway while traversing the course of the waterway. Except for a very brief period in time (between 1940 and 1951, when an earlier version of the Beds of Navigable Waters Act provided that the Crown owned the beds of navigable waterways to the highwater mark of the waterway) the law in Ontario has always been that the boundary between a waterway and the abutting land is the waterline. In other words, if you are out of the water, you could be on private property. Generally, the public has no right to enter on to private property abutting a waterway unless consent of the landowner has been granted. You can be liable to penalties if the land is posted against trespassers (i.e a “No Trespassing Sign” or a red dot painted on objects along the boundary of the property). The public's right to use a navigable waterway (and the bed of the waterway) does not include a right to enter upon private property to portage around a natural obstacle in the waterway, or a legally constructed obstacle in the waterway. Unless there is a recognized right (at law) to portage, you need permission to travel overland. What this means is that although you have a right to use a navigable waterway, your right may not be able to exercise that right in some circumstances. Without permission to use the abutting land as a portage, you run the risk of facing trespass charges. Landowners beware ! Section 18(2) of the Fish and Game Act (Ontario) prohibits unauthorized persons from giving notice prohibiting activity on Crown land. If you own property abutting a navigable waterway and you do not allow people to use the waterway for fishing and/or hunting, you are contravening section 18(2) of the Fish and Game Act (Ontario) and may be liable to have a penalty imposed. Now the $40 bend is a fee to access the land and fish the river( Its not a fee to fish the river) and while you can argue it plain and simple you are tresspassing on Private Property ( in this case township land) and as such can be fined under the tresspass act. Many townships have by laws that in certain cases dont make sense but they exist, a classic local point is the land on Bronte below Rebecca to the Lake, OMNR opened it up to angling by removing the social sanctuary there and the township passed a by law making it illegal to fish from shore, but again cant stop a boat or someone in the river. Bottom line with miles of miles on the Notty to fish ( some very popular some off the radar) if you dont want to fish the bend go elsewhere, but remember there is a stretch of no kill water there also there are 3 distinct properties that do in fact own stream bed and 1 that will have a half baked crazy lady come with a shot gun to you.... If there is a stretch of water you wish to fish research it talk to the land owner and if you cant gain access go to the local registry office verify his land status and if you choose still enter via legal method, and ensure you have a copy 18 ( 2 ) of the act to ensure the police charge the land owner, personally, again I would rather fish a different piece of water as fishing is about relaxing not confrontation, dont we get enough of that all day Hope this helps

god cant we all just get the heck along and grill those backstraps up already....I ll bring 2 cases

needless to say Im out for tomm

dude I wake up to pack the boat to fish the weekendaway and read this......wow

if the canadian realestate market suffers the sort of correction the aAUS did in certain markets its going to get very messy here. I read an economic report last week that if the credit market in the US doesnt restore some liquidity in the next few weeks the US could be facing an additional 4 million out of the work force. From what I understand credit scores of 700 are not getting qualified and lent on... I also think there are some more demons in the closet here and thatthere is more fun and games to watch...in the interim I have seen amlost 70% of my returns dissapear.

Invest....Im trying not to look at the bleeding orfice that is my investment accounts... I came into some money recently from the sale of a property, and it is the time soon to buy but for now and the next few days I know Im sitting on the floor watching and waiting for this entire fiasco to flush its self out Wild are you a broker

While some guys are multi species anglers, I have generally been a 2 species sort of guy....With hot chrome being the first obsession and then bass as a close second to that. Around this time of year in past years I find my longsticks get a lot of use while the shorter stout rods become a part of an ornimental rod rack along the entire wall of a garage( of course with the usual what the heck do you need 30 rods for bass) coming from non angling friends, this year with the new boat and such I found my self thinking greens and browns a lot more. Anyhow as summer turns to fall and the long stick will begin to dominate and while there are several bass trips still in the plan I thought I would post some pictures from the summer..enjoy of course I simply cant toss in all the bass without a few of my fav species out in the lake thanks for reading and here is a small video from the summer http://ca.youtube.com/miloman1001

being in the business for close to 20 years now it comes down to dollars and margins...at 4 grand plus by the time trades are paid, materials are paid, overages and extras are accounted for workers comp, liability insurance and good ole GST not to mention a profit for the owner of the company of say 10% Gerrit is right and in many cases most decent contractors wont even come when they hear a material's only or a project managment fee.. a 12 x 24 PT deck with tubes rail steps etc is going to run 23 to 26 in todays market that deck is worth 7 grand to most larger contractors, less to a small 1-3 man operation but there you run risks with workers compnsation, insurance and so on

Quinte is fine in most boats providing you keep a stong eye on the weather, I dont think I would want to be off the cement factory in big winds in any boat, but last weekend we flew past it in an 18 foot bass boat, so weather is the determining factor, saftey gear should be a given in any boat

if he has a parking tag to park in disabled spots he can fish without a liscence

I can think off the top of my head 6 back lakes or lakes that are off the radar, where a tinnie and in 3 of them a bas boat can drop where in a day of fishing you will be on 4, 5 and 6 all day tossed in with a potential 7 plus One lake comes to mind where its pretty darn close if not on average a 6'er lake.....no point even going further as like someone said they go to the grave as I have seen too many small pothole lakes get destroyed I can also think of 1 lake within an hours drive from here where the average smallie is 3.5 to 4 and its not simcoe They are there but no one in their right nind would even give info that would even lead someone to guess

hope your not a betting man.....as there are some back lakes that provide average 6lb fish

your going to be looking for the navionics classic 901 map its the one that the unit reads the chip is designed for the monocromatic screens the chip is no longer avaliable and the current gold ones cant be read by that unit. Best bet is Ebay sellers

nothing more then a modified Jon boat as a rule....and certainly not a boat i would run in anything more then 2 footers and even then

Does anyone know if there is a local dealer that reps this product http://www.colorrite.com/index.cfm?CFID=16...FTOKEN=59486305

Mike your not ready sorry I reviewed all the threads all of your equiptment and there is a fundemental flaw to your packing and something thats missing.................................................................... and its your sherpa guide none other then moi

Georgian bays chinook fishery collapse was due to a severe decline in its food base alwives, rainbows also saw an immediate decline, but in thier adaptive nature were able to utilize additonal food bases. Cormorants added but didnt do it, the stocking practices added but didnt do it. The nets again added but didnt do it. it was cumulative plain and simple. That being said another food base has emerged as of the last year that should help this out substantially.

is it me or did the way threads read out change here?

last year I had a severe problem with grubs it was actually solo who passed by my place on a non related subject and recomended the nemotodes. I purchased them and applied it as recommended. Conclusion I had no grubs this year as they killed them all last year and it worked like a total charm it took about 10 days and I noticed no more of the dreadful dead grass spread. Get them they work IMO even better then Merit or other products

good points as I am going through 2 foot itis really bad now and am selling my trition at the end of the season all because I would rather reach a spot @75mph rather then 60...... Nitro's are decent boats unless you go into a 20 or more range as they just are not designed and built ro run 4 footers at 60 mph... Generally most that bass fish seriously are running rangers or tritons and for good reason as each hull has its advantages and disadvantages, but again Im generalizing but these advantages far out way other hulls......leaving alone some of the harder to find hulls.

Ohh Mike I have a trip to dunkirk starting to work out mighty fine with smallies on calm erie and steelies when she wakes up