Spiel

Clearly she's busy keeping Kevin away from the computer....

I had a 1976, 25 horse Johnson that had similar issues, first time it was power related, changed a coil and I was good to go. A few years later it was jumping in and out of gear, that was the clutch dog. Both are fairly easy fixes.

Well your sort of right Roy, I do have a life, sad as it may be. It's three feet away from the puter desk to the rod building & flytying desk.

Bump this back a day or two ahead of the day Lorne, I'm likely to forget. Not sure I'll fish but I may come down for a visit. The dog loves long walks.

Hmmff!!

Very nice Terry. I've always wanted to try my hand at painting and if I ever do I'd be happy to produce something half as good as your work.

LOL....You're quick Wayne but not quick enough.

Funny looking laker.

So he's got a couple inches on you then.

Yowza, great picture.

While I've never fished the creeks up that way for Brookies and Browns Bill I'm sure you can't go wrong with Stoneflies, Caddis nymphs and Mayfly nymphs. One of my faves for small creeks is actually nothing more than red squirrel hair tied on a small lead head jig hook. It easily probes into log jams and undercut banks far more effectively than tradional flies. It can represent anything from caddis larva, minnow fry and even small crayfish. I've only recently gotten back into fly tying and have a few threads showing some pictures. You can see them here..... http://www.ofncommunity.com/forums/index.p...c=40140&hl= http://www.ofncommunity.com/forums/index.p...c=39716&hl= And yes the flies I've been tying lately are bead heads tied on jig hooks specifically for use with the float rod. But I'm sorry to say at this time I'm not selling any, I'm now busy building rods and truth is they pay better.

But you already have a boat Peter. Honestly I haven't looked at the prize list yet but I agree, who wants a car.

Thanks Michael, very kind. Don't stall to long on fulfilling that bucket list. Fly Fishing is exciting and yet also frustrating at times but don't let that deter you.

I concur !

Awesome trip guys, great, no fanatastic fish and a great report Wayne. I hope that I'll get to be a part of this one year. Sorry to hear of your roadside woes Loyd but as Wayne said "Our hats off to the Manager", that's hell of a manager.

You're very welcome.

Doug, Doug, DOUG, pay attention. I have what you're looking for as seen here. I have all three sizes just let me know which one you want (measure the cork diameter).

Not too many flies lately, I've actually switched back to my other thread work. As in custom rod work you smart ass. Lot's of great looking lures, jigs and flies here guys, keep 'em coming. This was up before but what the hell.....

Tank !

PM me your home address Doug and I'll send you a butt cap.

Toronto’s golden greenbelt opportunity: Fletcher February 22nd, 2010 Paula Fletcher / Toronto Sun When we talk about quality of life in Toronto we don’t necessarily think about our natural surroundings and the importance of their connection to the Greenbelt. In fact, the city’s own river valleys connect to the ecological systems of the Greenbelt and in turn contribute to clean air, water and other environmental benefits. On Monday, Toronto city council will vote on a proposal from the parks and environment committee to begin the process of designating the Don and Humber River valleys as part of Ontario’s Greenbelt. This designation will provide permanent protection to the natural heritage features of these river valleys. It has the potential to make important connections between present and future generations of Torontonians and the ecological systems that help sustain us. The designation of the Don and Humber River valleys is akin to fitting a large piece of the puzzle into place when it comes to our natural heritage infrastructure. Running beside those commuter roadways that intersect our city are natural waterways that have existed for millennia. They are part of the watershed linking the headwaters of the Greenbelt and Oak Ridges Moraine to Lake Ontario right through our own backyard. If you live in Scarborough you are lucky — the Rouge Valley is already part of the Greenbelt’s 1.8 million acres of agricultural, rural and environmentally sensitive lands permanently protected from urban development. From the Bruce Trail to the Niagara Escarpment to the Oak Ridges Moraine, the Greenbelt provides important ecological, economic and social benefits — from locally grown food to recreational areas to natural habitats. While our river valleys are an important part of that green connection, they have not, until now, been formally recognized as part of the Greenbelt. This is a golden opportunity for Torontonians to provide stewardship of these lands for generations to come. While the city’s official plan and other policies already provide a high level of protection for the Don and Humber rivers, under the Greenbelt designation they would be protected by another layer of provincial legislation, ensuring that these lands are never used in ways that harm their ecological integrity. The really good news is there is no cost to pursuing this plan and securing a greener future for Toronto. Through its support, city council will also send an important signal to the province and other GTA municipalities that our ties to the Greenbelt are real and significant. Torontonians have always felt strongly about preserving our natural environments. We’ve cleaned up our rivers, protected ravines and brought in stricter sewer bylaws and other green initiatives. Sunday is the fifth anniversary of the Greenbelt. We could not find a better way to celebrate this anniversary than to help protect the health and ecological features of the Greenbelt by embracing it right in the heart of our city.

Eel faces ill future February 22nd, 2010 Ian Elliot / The Whig-Standard John Casselman says the American eel has been caught in a perfect storm of Extinction. Ian Elliot / The Whig-Standard The lowly American eel may not be the cuddliest of creatures, but it is an important indicator species when it comes to the overall health of the Great Lakes. The bad news is that it has all but disappeared. The American eel — which is entirely different from the lamprey eel, which is an imported parasite and an unwelcome predator — has been evolutionarily unchanged for 125 million years. It was one of the most important and heavily fished species in the Great Lakes this side of Niagara Falls for thousands of years. Starting in the mid-1980s they began to disappear and now barely exist here. John Casselman, an adjunct biology professor at Queen’s University, says the eels have been caught in a perfect storm of extinction, their numbers wiped out by everything from habitat loss to disease to overfishing — even to global warming that is altering oceanic currents where they spend their first years. “If you take Oneida Lake, which is one of the Finger Lakes in New York State, in 1916 they were catching 100 tons of eels out of that one little lake,” he said yesterday at the Marine Museum of the Great Lakes as he kicked off a monthly environmental lecture series that will be held there. “There have been exactly two eels caught there in the last 25 years.” A prized catch of the Iroquois who lived in this part of North America, the eels were abundant, relatively easy to catch in volume and were fatty: they contain six times as much energy, ounce for ounce, as any other freshwater fish. “The eels were every bit as important to the Iroquois as salmon were (to native people) on the West Coast” he said. “They could take just a small piece of eel and that would sustain them when they were hunting in the bush. It was their Powerbar, really.” Historical records talk about the incredible abundance of eels in the Great Lakes and how they were captured first by the native people and then by white commercial fishermen. While prized in sushi — another factor that has led to their overfishing — in the 1950s they were still so abundant that they were worth 10 cents a pound and ground up for chicken feed. Now their numbers are so low that they have become a delicacy when smoked and cost more than good Parmesan cheese — $45 a kilogram or more. Casselman admits that they aren’t a sexy species like a fat salmon, but says they are intricately connected with life in this part of Canada and are now almost lost. “I really hope that we aren’t at the stage where the only place we can learn about our long association with the eel is in museums and archives, but I am afraid we are almost there.” Eels are unusual as they spawn in salt water near Bermuda, then spend five years slowly drifting north in the Atlantic until they come to a fresh-water outlet such as the mouth of the St. Lawrence. They live the rest of their lives in fresh water, where they can spend 20 years or more before heading back to the Atlantic to spawn and die, as their offspring repeat that cycle. Dams along the St. Lawrence have blocked them from going to and returning from spawning grounds, and hydroelectric dams chop as many as 40% of spawning eels to pieces in their turbines. “You hear a lot about green energy,” he observed dryly of the hydroelectric dams. “It’s not green energy as far as the eels are concerned.” They have also fallen victim to the loss of wetlands, the arrival of zebra mussels that clarified the water and made it more difficult for them to hide, pollutants such as dioxins that the fatty eels absorb, and the loss of food species such as the alewife. The commercial harvest of eel ended in the Great Lakes in 2004 and Casselman warns the population continues to drop, to the point that the eels are in danger of disappearing entirely from the lakes. Before it does, he is urging both the U.S. and Canadian governments to draw up a plan to reduce the species’ mortality by adding more eel ladders around dams, increasing eel habitat and monitoring more thoroughly eel mortality and young eel numbers to reverse the dramatic plunge in the eel population. “Eels are on the edge,” he told the crowd at the Marine Museum. “Unfortunately, the problems they face encapsulate all the issues we’re dealing with in fresh water species.”

Randle Reef quagmire Feb 18, 2010 Howard Elliott / The Hamilton Spectator It's not appropriate to curse in a family newspaper, but if it was, we'd hurl a big dose of invective at the government stakeholders in the Randle Reef cleanup project. As recently as 2007, news of provincial and federal contributions totalling $60 million, optimism around environmental assessment work and clear dates for work actually commencing made this one of the good news stories of the decade. Most of that optimism is now squandered, lost to bureaucratic wrangling for position, and to some extent to the apparent inability of Hamilton officials to come up with their share of the cost, estimated at $30 million to $35 million. Two more years are lost, while the toxic mass of industrial chemicals continues to spread and disperse, making the area around the reef literally deadly to any form of life, and having who-knows-what kind of impact on the harbour and even Lake Ontario overall. There is a plan, admittedly imperfect, to build a wall around the most contaminated part of the reef, located near U.S. Steel's plant, formerly Stelco. Then material dredged from other areas would be added, capped, and the resulting structure used to develop two new piers for the Hamilton Port Authority. So (here's where the anti-cussing rule hurts): What is taking so long? Hamilton Mayor Fred Eisenberger says the city has $5 million available towards the local slice of the cleanup cost. The port authority has said it has $6 million. There is, apparently, some private-sector partner who will shoulder some of the remaining local cost. So, it seems that coming up with most or all of the local contribution isn't an insurmountable challenge. Another stumbling block seems to be the question of who's in charge. The port authority has passed on a leadership role, and Hamilton wants the federal public works department to wear that mantle. This makes sense, given Public Works Canada's on-the-ground experience dealing with the Sydney, N.S., tar ponds. Fine. Let's get Public Works at the helm. Let's go all out to find the share of the local part of cost. Most important, let's inject a sense of urgency into the cleanup of Randle Reef. Had work started a couple of years ago, this could have been completed for the Pan Am Games in 2015. That won't happen now. Let's not compound that missed opportunity by further dithering. It seems obvious that this should be an urgent priority, that all levels of government should be eager to sit down at the table to start making measurable progress on dealing with this long-standing environmental hazard and embarrassment. But that's not happening, which is leading other stakeholders, such as the Bay Area Restoration Council, to call for citizens to start applying pressure on government agencies. Fair enough, if that's what it takes. Start phoning and e-mailing local MPs and MPPs, especially those in government. Do the same with city council. Tell them to get off their butts and finally take action to fix the worst environmental hot spot in the Great Lakes. The lack of progress to date has gone beyond being unfortunate to being offensive. Editorials are written by members of the editorial board. They represent the position of the newspaper, not necessarily the individual author.

Project aims to cut sewage dumping Feb. 8, 2010 STEVE NEAVLING / FREE PRESS The more than 20 billion gallons of raw and partially treated sewage dumped annually into metro Detroit waterways would be reduced by up to 20% under an ambitious project under state review. The 25-year, $814-million project by the Detroit Water and Sewerage Department is designed to upgrade the aging system. DWSD is asking the state Department of Natural Resources and Environment to approve the plan, which includes a 5.5-mile tunnel to store excess storm water that often overwhelms the system, forcing billions of gallons of sewage to be dumped into lakes, rivers and streams. "Given the extraordinary economic condition of our region, this clearly outlines the best, most affordable alternative," said George Ellenwood, department spokesman. The updates are being required by the state Department of Natural Resources and Environment after the city scrapped a $1.2-billion project last year to build a 7-mile-long Upper Rouge Tunnel to store excess storm water. The DNRE is to detail the plan at a public meeting Wednesday at the University of Michigan-Dearborn. The Detroit water department plans to finance the project with sewer rates and federal funding. Officials must convince the state that the project will reduce sewer overflows that threaten waterways with a toxic cocktail of bacteria, parasites, viruses and chemicals. Sewage and storm water can make people ill and are a prime cause of beach closures and bans on fishing, swimming and canoeing. Environmentalists expressed cautious optimism. "We have to make sure this project has a firm schedule because all too often these time lines get extended," said Melissa Damaschke, the Great Lakes regional representative for the Sierra Club. "We've got to figure out solutions and stop dragging our feet. One drop of sewage in our water is too much." The project's cornerstone is a $484-million storage tunnel between Warren Avenue and McNichols in Detroit to capture excess storm water. The project also includes $50 million in so-called green alternatives, including replacing vacant structures with grass and trees to absorb storm water. "The more that storm water can be absorbed into the ground, rather than being pushed into the Rouge and Detroit rivers, the better," Ellenwood said. The project is expected to eliminate up to 4 billion gallons of raw and partially treated sewage that is primarily dumped into the Detroit and Rouge rivers. "The fact remains that they are still the single largest sewage polluter in the Great Lakes basin, and they are still polluting the Rouge and Detroit rivers, which flow directly into Lake Erie," Damaschke said. Ellenwood defended the sewer system, saying metro Detroit has spent more than $2.5 billion on sewer upgrades since 1990 that have dramatically decreased sewage overflows.

February 17, 2010 Making Progress On Protecting Lake Simcoe McGuinty Government Seeks Public Input On Reducing Phosphorus Levels NEWS Ontarians are invited to comment on key pieces of the government’s plan to restore the health of Lake Simcoe and its watershed. As part of implementing the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan, the government is seeking public input on: A proposed phosphorus reduction strategy that looks at setting targets and options for reducing loading from all sources around the lake A study on the feasibility of using water quality trading as a tool to reduce phosphorus A discussion paper on regulating shoreline protection. The documents are posted for comment on the Environmental Registry at www.ontario.ca/environmentalregistry. The Ministry of the Environment is holding public information sessions in Newmarket on February 17, Barrie on February 22, Uxbridge on February 25 and Ramara on March 3. QUOTES "Restoring the health of Lake Simcoe is going to take the combined effort of everyone in the watershed over a long period of time. We need your help in shaping the plan and providing input on these strategies in the months ahead." - John Gerretsen, Minister of the Environment "Local input and support for the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan has been a key part of its success. We’re at an important stage in the implementation of the plan and I encourage everyone who lives, works and plays along its shores to get involved in this consultation process." - Aileen Carroll, MPP Barrie QUICK FACTS The Lake Simcoe Protection Plan’s long-term goal is to reduce the phosphorus loading from 72 to 44 tonnes a year to improve water quality. The Lake Simcoe Protection Plan came into effect in June 2009 following the passage of the Lake Simcoe Protection Act, 2008. LEARN MORE About the government's consultation on key pieces of implementing the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan. About the public information sessions. About protecting Lake Simcoe. Contacts: John Karapita, Minister’s Office, 416-314-6736 Kate Jordan, Ministry of the Environment, 416-314-6666 Contact information for the general public: 416-325-4000 or 1-800-565-4923/ www.ontario.ca/environment