Rice Lake panfishTourist Ass. at it again!

[Whopper]

The tourists will whine about the new limits, but they'll also whine about the small size of fish they catch when they do come up. You can't make everyone happy, all the time. Just wait a few years when rice is full of bull gills again. The fishery isn't the same as it used to be.......even for crappies..........they're just not there like they used to be. The lake gets pounded.......not only by our southern friends.

 

S.

 

Thanks for that comment

 

These US fishermen will pay for their entire week's vacation with what they sell back in the States. When you put a dollar value on a public resource, nothing good can come from it. I can't stand it.

 

Not going to open a can of worms here but I have visited Rice Lake for over thirty-five years let alone a few other places in Ontario, met thousands of people and not one time have I ever heard of a person from the states coming up to harvest fish to sell here, not going to say it has never happened but I never heard of it before.

Now I'll tell ya what I have witnessed, locals to cheap to rent a boat from a resort for the day and will pay a "minimal fee" to park their car and some dock space to catch buckets of panfish, some not more than a couple inches long, I say nothing until they feel free to jump on the deck on my moored boat to do what ever.

 

Again the biggest reasons Rick posted above is what are keeping people from coming up to your fine country.

Edited February 27, 2010 by Whopper

[Michael_Brown]

Don't misunderstand this issue. It is not a non-resident angler problem or a local angler problem. We appreciate people travelling here to enjoy this fishery. There is enough for everyone to enjoy, if we manage it responsibly.

The people that are abusing this fishery need to be stopped. It is not a large group of anglers causing this problem but on a lake that sustains more angling effort than the rest of the kawartha's combined, it is an issue.

 

Quite frankly, if your business cannot adapt to supporting a healthy fishery maybe you should start targeting other groups to fill your cottages.

Edited February 27, 2010 by Michael Brown

[Whopper]

Don't misunderstand this issue. It is not a non-resident angler problem or a local angler problem. We appreciate people travelling here to enjoy this fishery. There is enough for everyone to enjoy, if we manage it responsibly.

The people that are abusing this fishery need to be stopped. It is not a large group of anglers causing this problem but on a lake that sustains more angling effort than the rest of the kawartha's combined, it is an issue.

 

Quite frankly, if your business cannot adapt to supporting a healthy fishery maybe you should start targeting other groups to fill your cottages.

 

Exactly I agree

 

As far as the state of Rice Lake in particular I have a couple friends that have been going there long before I even heard of the place and they made three trips this past year, they are bass anglers and they said except for the smallmouth the catching was as good as it has been in quite a few years, they were happy. One of them even made the comment how many walleyes he caught this year not targeting them.

[jonnybass]

LOL, Were you the fisherman from the COD industry in the 70's

 

LOL, you want to compare the international commercial cod fish industry to sunfish?

Edited February 27, 2010 by jonnybass

[Ron]

Ron and Mike; I figure if I show up also, that will equal two voices to the RLCA members one voice...

I will be there....

 

Tom.

 

 

I willgive you a call laer on in the week Tom.

 

For anyone else interested, please post here or send me a PM.

 

Cheers, Ron...

[troutologist]

Here is my rant on the issue. The RLCA group are a very short sighted, misinformed (unintentionally or by choice) group. To try to lobby for something like this is laughable. For lack of a better term, the fish are "property" of the crown, hence are to be enjoyed (legally and responsibly) by all licensed residents, non residents etc. Fisheries should not be managed for the benefit of one vocal group.

 

What if another party opened a diving business on the lake who's attraction was underwater sunfish viewing. Could they not then lobby for limits to be reduced to 200 or dare I suggest 50??

 

I sincerely hope MNR and concerned individuals do not give in to this. A lobby group that gets vocal for NIMBY reasons with nothing but personal interest should not drive this issue.

 

Cheers to you folks that are attending and giving your time and resources to stand up to this group.

[crappieperchhunter]

Granted, I'm not an MNR scientist, but come on, sunfish for all intents and purposes are a limitless resource in Ontario. If there was a nuclear war, everything would be wiped out except cockroaches and sunfish.

 

I am not a MNR scientist either. But I fish the Kawarth'a for pannies April through September. Bluegills are actually the only fish I harvest from there during the summer months because to me they taste the best.

 

I'm assuming you either don't fish gills in the Kawartha's at all or at least very limited, because if you did you would surely notice the changes Sinker has eluded to...cause I most certainly have.

 

It really ruffles my feather's when someone who really doesn't have a clue sides with someone ELSE who really doesn't have a clue either.

 

I can't say whether these new fishing opportunities will be good/bad or have no affect at all. But I would think that a lot of sweat and hard work has taken place to bring these opportunities to all of us. Seems to me any conservation minded fisherman would understand and support that.

[MuskyGreenHorn]

Count my name Ron.

 

Like some have already said, no one is being blamed for anything really. But some of us are upset that a few resorts (a small minority group) want to change the new regs. the MNR has put these in place for a reason, they don't take random numbers out of the air. The resorts in question want a zero limit policy so they can cater to people (be they Canadian or American) who want to take large amouts of fish home, when the MNR has decided that is detrimental. Seriously 300 sunfish + 50 perch, plus some crappie, add 4 walleye to that and even bass if you really must. I really don't see the need to increase anything.

 

Further I guide in northern Ontario and I cook a shore lunch on every outing for my guests. I practice what I preach and only enough fish if kept to feed a group. Some resorts on LOTW have even started offering cheaper rates to guests who practice catch and release. They can eat some fish everyday, but don't take any home. My guests feel good at the end of the trip that they did their part to help sustain a fishery for furure generations. I encourage my guests to release trophies and the smiles in their photos shows how proud they are that they did.

 

As for cheap locals... I pay taxes here and I have my whole life. I buy gas here, i go out to eat here, i shop at local bait shops, do i need to go on? I respect my home lake and I insist VISITORS do as well.

[jonnybass]

I'm assuming you either don't fish gills in the Kawartha's at all or at least very limited, because if you did you would surely notice the changes Sinker has eluded to...cause I most certainly have.

 

It's funny that you posted this.

 

I have a family member who told me last night regarding Rice Lake [EDIT to make long story short] "The sunfish are smaller. They used to be massive"

 

The average size of sunfish in Rice Lake have gotten smaller. Point conceded.

Edited February 28, 2010 by jonnybass

[Tom McCutcheon]

If only we can get the American Hockey team to concede as easily Jonny.......

 

I will talk to you later Ron. Call me at night OK.

Edited February 28, 2010 by Tom McCutcheon

[Rice Laker]

As a small cottage resort owner on Rice Lake, I would like to add a few comments to some of the posters:

Michael Brown wrote

“It is time for the anglers of the area to step up and let our local politicians know how important our sport is to the tourism of the area.” Agreed, but how much do local and GTA area anglers contribute to tourism on Rice Lake? Most drive up in the morning and drive home in the evening? Have any of you ever rented a Rice Lake cottage?

“In fact it was shown that Rice Lake in particular was showing signs of stress due to over-harvest of the larger fish.”

“There is no question the lake has a good population of sunfish but the need to protect the fishery from overharvest of the larger members of the population is important.”Strongly agree, that is why 5 years ago the RLTA, with the MNR’s assistance, started a voluntary “throw back the big ones” campaign. It has started to work. There IS a shortage of large bluegills, so why do the new Regs allow 30 of any size. For sure, these will be big ones, the exact opposite of what the lake needs. The Reg implies that bluegills are a less important fish. There is a new size limit on walleye, why not on bluegills? The FMZ 17 council recommended a quantity limit of 500 and ZERO over 7". This would have been a much better solution to the problem and the majority of the US guests would still keep coming.

 

“Quite frankly, if your business cannot adapt to supporting a healthy fishery maybe you should start targeting other groups to fill your cottages.” A very good point! What would you suggest, I am open to suggestions. BTW, don’t suggest carp anglers from Europe, this has been tried before with negligble results. I am considering promoting walleye; rent a cottage for a week, catch 4 and eat them, catch 4 and eat them, catch 4 and eat them............. What do you think?

 

Roy wrote:

“I can think of a hundred ways to make their business opportunities more palatable for them and their guests” Great, I’ll keep checking back for the 100 suggestions.

 

MuskyGreenHorn wrote:

“he fishes rice a ton and he lives nearby in elizabethville. She then tried to ask him to come stay and enjoy the resorts and talk about how great the area is. He had to laugh, he said "lady, i am 10 mins from rice lake, why would i stay at a resort." I guess she knows the area really well eh.....” Exactly, locals contribute nothing to tourism on the lake.

 

“How can something they most likely don't even know about stop them from coming, unless the resorts are informing them (which we know the aren't) then how could he vast majority even know about this?” This is not correct, of course any responsible resort will have advised the 2010 guests of the new regulations. This is how we know that there are many cancellations for 2010.

 

Cram wrote

“Maybe its me, but i wouldn't drive 3 mins away to catch a sunfish. And some people come in from the US to do it?” A good example of how little locals know about the bluegill fishery on Rice Lake. BTW, 45 years ago it was the MNR strongly encouraging the Rice Lake resorts to attract US bluegill anglers to prevent overpopulation. I have owned my resort for 12 years and in that time I have had TWO Ontario residents stay and catch bluegills. Other resorts would report similar low numbers. Canadians do NOT target bluegills.

 

Rick O’Banion wrote:

“The US is in a recession, their dollar has plummeted and most do not have passports.” Strongly agree and you should add the cost of gas to get here as well. These are things that cannot be controlled and are why there are 50% FEWER US anglers coming to Rice Lake over the last 5 years. MNR figures show that the number of bluegills caught between 2004 and 2008 dropped by 340,000 (I guess that this means there are at least 340,000 MORE bluegills in the lake than there would have been if the number of anglers remained constant). Also, the 2008 catch number was the LOWEST in 25 years. As has been said earlier, the quantity is not the problem, there are millions in Rice Lake.

 

CrappiePerchhunter

“It really ruffles my feather's when someone who really doesn't have a clue sides with someone ELSE who really doesn't have a clue either”. I know exactly how you feel.................

 

2 final comments, please don’t make us out to be money grabbing people with no consideration for the health of the lake. I would think it would be obvious that no one has MORE interest in healthy fisheries than those of us with businesses on the lake. ZERO FISH =ZERO BUSINESS.

In 2004 Rice Lake issuers sold $307,766 of licences to US anglers, in 2008 this had dropped to $161,726. This $146,040 difference would probably cover the cost of one more Conservation Officer for the area, so we are ALL losing........

 

My apologies for making this response so long.

Edited March 1, 2010 by Rice Laker

[bare foot wader]

nm, stayin out of it.....

Edited March 1, 2010 by bare foot wader

[Michael_Brown]

I would like to respond. I will use the same format.

 

"Exactly, locals contribute nothing to tourism on the lake."

Really? So the tens of thousands of local anglers who fish Rice Lake every year contribute nothing to the economy? I think what you mean is they don't book a cottage therefore you don't care. In fact I would confidently say they contribute far more than the non-resident anglers but I do appreciate the contributions of both groups. Here is a quote from a recent STATS Canada article; "In terms of direct expenditures, resident anglers spent over $1.6 billion on recreational fishing in 2005 (Table 2). Three quarters of these expenditures were spent on food, lodging and transportation costs. Less than 10% of the direct expenditures were for actual fishing supplies." Still think we contribute nothing?

 

 

"Strongly agree, that is why 5 years ago the RLTA, with the MNR's assistance, started a voluntary "throw back the big ones" campaign. It has started to work. There IS a shortage of large bluegills, so why do the new Regs allow 30 of any size. For sure, these will be big ones, the exact opposite of what the lake needs. The Reg implies that bluegills are a less important fish. There is a new size limit on walleye, why not on bluegills? The FMZ 17 council recommended a quantity limit of 500 and ZERO over 7.

This would have been a much better solution to the problem and the majority of the US guests would still keep coming."

The voluntary program is exactly that voluntary. I also have been looking into the non-resident angler responses and the majority are upset with the 7 inch size limit. The 300 number is a concession to the tourist operators and now you are complaining because it is not more. Only 10% percent of the non-residents coming to Rice lake are taking more than 300 home and some of those are taking several thousand. Your clients are leaving to go to other area lakes where they can find larger sunfish. Regardless of what lake they are on the cottage rental owners that have been allowing that kind of abuse to take place in there resorts should be ashamed of themselves.

 

What would you suggest, I am open to suggestions. BTW, don’t suggest carp anglers from Europe, this has been tried before with negligble results. I am considering promoting walleye; rent a cottage for a week, catch 4 and eat them, catch 4 and eat them, catch 4 and eat them............. What do you think?

Nice attitude but as long as the 4 walleye are inside the slot limit, it is legal. How about embracing the new winter angling oppourtunities. Those thousands of local anglers out there enjoying themselves this winter on Rice Lake, besides adding lots of dollars into the local economy during a slow period, are potential clients or at least a glimpse of the potential. How about a advertising campaign inviting your US guest to come and enjoy the best panfish lake in Ontario during the winter. Lake Simcoe operators are doing well with US clients during the winter months. Unless the RLTA is against ice fishing? Depending on what article you read some like yourself are in favour of it others have been doing a lot of complaining about it.

 

A good example of how little locals know about the bluegill fishery on Rice Lake. BTW, 45 years ago it was the MNR strongly encouraging the Rice Lake resorts to attract US bluegill anglers to prevent overpopulation. I have owned my resort for 12 years and in that time I have had TWO Ontario residents stay and catch bluegills. Other resorts would report similar low numbers. Canadians do NOT target bluegills.

This is interesting. So you would like to use 45 year old data suggesting keeping as many as possible. If you wipe them out, you will have no business. The practices that have been allowed to take place has damaged the resource. Instead of fear mongering and complaining that the about the MNR....maybe you should look in the mirror and ask yourself just who is responsible for this abuse of the lake resources. Like you said, Canadians do NOT target bluegills and the glutanous persons causing this problem are not staying at my house!

 

Also a quote from the recent article:

 

"During the Zone 17 advisory council meetings before the Jan. 1 change, no information ever suggested that "sustain-ability of the sunfish population" required limits, Brough wrote.

 

I disagree with this statement. We sat through hours and hours of meetings and read numerous reports and heard presentations from sunfish experts from all over North America. To ensure a quality fishery and a healthly population of sunfish, limits were absolutely suggested as an option. The RLTA represents it's own interests only. If you don't want to look like money grabbing people with no consideration for the health of the lake, then start acting like responsible resort owners who understand that a healthly well-managed fishery benefits everyone now and in the future. The non-resident anglers will come to enjoy the experience and the quality of a great fishery, harvest is secondary.

 

This arguing will do nothing to enhance our tourism but if the RLTA wants to continue to present false information to municipal councils and local media, I and other like me, will be there defending the rights of local anglers and our fishery resource. Anyone who wants to join me....I take two milk in my coffee.

 

 

Rice Lake is a fanastic fishery, there is enough for everyone to enjoy if we manage it properly.

Edited March 2, 2010 by Michael Brown

[bigfish1965]

Rick O'Banion wrote:

"The US is in a recession, their dollar has plummeted and most do not have passports." Strongly agree and you should add the cost of gas to get here as well. These are things that cannot be controlled and are why there are 50% FEWER US anglers coming to Rice Lake over the last 5 years. MNR figures show that the number of bluegills caught between 2004 and 2008 dropped by 340,000 (I guess that this means there are at least 340,000 MORE bluegills in the lake than there would have been if the number of anglers remained constant). Also, the 2008 catch number was the LOWEST in 25 years. As has been said earlier, the quantity is not the problem, there are millions in Rice Lake.

There are 50% fewer Americans going to EVERY resort. Its not just yours. I have worked in tourism for 30 years. We changed our marketing tactics to match the new reality and are still doing quite well, all things considered. We worked hard on a new client base. Our American customers were once 80% of our business, they are now 20%.

You say the 2008 catch numbers are way down. 2008 was prior to the drop in the dollar and change in passport laws, so perhaps the bluegill population is stressed.

In either event, you have not offered anything other than empirical evidence and hearsay. All the Northern Ontario resorts have learned to sell the EXPERIENCE not the number of walleye filets you can take home (once the walleye limits were cut).

There are significant flaws in your marketing strategy and very few, if any, in the MNR's conservation plan.

35,000 people come to this site daily to talk about fishing in Ontario. I can tell you the number of American viewers have dropped from about 60% to about 40 %, yet our numbers overall are way up.

Your new reality is that Rice Lake cannot sustain year round fishing pressure with no checks in place. Adapt to it.

I know one resort whose business is way up in the last five years and their lake has lower limits and slot limits even on pike. I will let you put two and two together yourself.

Allowing the Kawarthas to become a meat farm is not the answer. Our obligation to the next generation usurps all other considerations. Opening the lakes to ice fishing was meant as a way to reduce panfish numbers, not eradicate them. Limits (which very few anglers have found unreasonable) are meant to ensure that an unexpected massive ice fishing push doesn't harm the lakes.

You will likely find that the MNR does not bow to monetary arguments. Perhaps you would be better off looking at the science behind the decisions made and refuting them, if you can, with some type of independant study.

[crappieperchhunter]

Your new reality is that Rice Lake cannot sustain year round fishing pressure with no checks in place. Adapt to it.

 

Short, sweet and straight to the point. The best line in this whole thread. Some people adapt, some people do not. 5 years from now we will all see who does and who does not.

[Dara]

Here is my rant on the issue. The RLCA group are a very short sighted, misinformed (unintentionally or by choice) group. To try to lobby for something like this is laughable. For lack of a better term, the fish are "property" of the crown, hence are to be enjoyed (legally and responsibly) by all licensed residents, non residents etc. Fisheries should not be managed for the benefit of one vocal group.

 

What if another party opened a diving business on the lake who's attraction was underwater sunfish viewing. Could they not then lobby for limits to be reduced to 200 or dare I suggest 50??

 

I sincerely hope MNR and concerned individuals do not give in to this. A lobby group that gets vocal for NIMBY reasons with nothing but personal interest should not drive this issue.

 

Cheers to you folks that are attending and giving your time and resources to stand up to this group.

 

 

Sounds a lot like the elimination of the spring bear hunt. And the only people that try to do anything about it are the ones directly affected. It tics me off that people shrug off so many crappy laws if they are not directly affected but expect support from everybody when something comes along that they finally personally care about.

[swishmick]

The best information on Rice Lake and panfish regulations is at this link:

 

http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/264321.pdf

 

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

The irony is that the MNR's new sunfish regs were created partially to help tourism:

 

"CHALLENGE #2: Maintain/Enhance quality of the sunfish fishery

 

OBJECTIVE: To increase proportion of larger sunfish 180mm (~ 7”) or greater in

existing bass and sunfish dominated communities to provide associated

socioeconomic benefits including:

• Tourism

• Recreational

• Aboriginal

 

Male sunfish gain a reproductive advantage by growing large and out-competing

smaller sunfish for nesting areas and breeding females. Larger males are also

considered more effective nest defenders. The presence of large parental males

results in increased prematuration body size of sunfish and maintains the quality

size structure of the population. When large parental males are removed, smaller

males become more successful spawners and as a result mature earlier. The

end result is a shift in the population structure and a decreased abundance of

large parental males. Sunfish in these populations may be abundant, but offer a

low-quality fishery. "

[solopaddler]

CrappiePerchhunter

“It really ruffles my feather's when someone who really doesn't have a clue sides with someone ELSE who really doesn't have a clue either”. I know exactly how you feel.................

 

 

And it bugs me that someone with such an obviously vested interest in the issue can't see beyond his own personal needs.

[GregF2]

I am from the States and could care less about the bluegill limit. I still wonder if people do keep bluegill and take them to the States, how they know that 30 are over 7 inches compared to the other smaller ones that people would bring back.

 

I still disagree opening ice fishing on Rice Lake. The perch fishery has to come back a lot more than it is now, before ice fishing should even be allowed. I know that I am in the minority on this topic though.

[diggyj]

Agreed, but how much do local and GTA area anglers contribute to tourism on Rice Lake? Most drive up in the morning and drive home in the evening?

 

It is quite sad for you to say something like that. Im not sure what resort you own but by your comments it is obvious that you probably don't cater to other needs then cottage rentals.

 

I have a cottage on the lake and I can honestly say that I support many of the resorts in a huge way. I purchase gas for my boat and jetski from there, I go over and buy burgers, fries, drinks, candy, ice cream, worms etc when I am out on the lake and I go to another one of the finer resorts for dinner by boat. I participate in some of the local tournaments they put on, I go over and support them by paying for fish fry dinners they put on.

 

I probably contribute a hell of a lot more then most of your tourists put together. Maybe you should vamp up your resort or branch out and offer other amenities.

 

It is clear you just want to line your pocket. There is no guarentee that reverting the limits back will mean full occupancy for you!

 

Dirk

Edited March 2, 2010 by diggyj

[Rice Laker]

My response to Michael’s response follows:

 

"Exactly, locals contribute nothing to tourism on the lake."

Really? So the tens of thousands of local anglers who fish Rice Lake every year contribute nothing to the economy? I think what you mean is they don't book a cottage therefore you don't care. In fact I would confidently say they contribute far more than the non-resident anglers but I do appreciate the contributions of both groups. Here is a quote from a recent STATS Canada article; "In terms of direct expenditures, resident anglers spent over $1.6 billion on recreational fishing in 2005 (Table 2). Three quarters of these expenditures were spent on food, lodging and transportation costs. Less than 10% of the direct expenditures were for actual fishing supplies." Still think we contribute nothing?

Please read my comment exactly. Yes, I said locals contribute nothing to tourism on the lake. To quote Stats Canada is completely irrelevant; spending in any other province, even the rest of Ontario is irrelevant, this whole topic is about Rice Lake. “Locals” drive up in the morning and leave in the evening. You live in Peterborough and I am sure buy all your supplies and equipment there, not anywhere around Rice. I will concede that the handful of restaurants around the lake benefit from “locals” but that is about it.

 

"Strongly agree, that is why 5 years ago the RLTA, with the MNR's assistance, started a voluntary "throw back the big ones" campaign. It has started to work. There IS a shortage of large bluegills, so why do the new Regs allow 30 of any size. For sure, these will be big ones, the exact opposite of what the lake needs. The Reg implies that bluegills are a less important fish. There is a new size limit on walleye, why not on bluegills? The FMZ 17 council recommended a quantity limit of 500 and ZERO over 7.

This would have been a much better solution to the problem and the majority of the US guests would still keep coming."

The voluntary program is exactly that voluntary. I also have been looking into the non-resident angler responses and the majority are upset with the 7 inch size limit. The 300 number is a concession to the tourist operators and now you are complaining because it is not more. Only 10% percent of the non-residents coming to Rice lake are taking more than 300 home and some of those are taking several thousand. Your clients are leaving to go to other area lakes where they can find larger sunfish. Regardless of what lake they are on the cottage rental owners that have been allowing that kind of abuse to take place in there resorts should be ashamed of themselves.

The US anglers who used to go home with “thousands” of fish are the ones who are no longer coming to the lake (50% reduction in the last 5 years). I agree some are cancelling because of the 7" size limit, but as I wrote before, we are as interested in improving the average size as anyone else (and it was the RLTA representative on the FMZ 17 Council that proposed the ZERO over 7") If that doesn’t show our concern, I don’t know what else would convince you.

 

A good example of how little locals know about the bluegill fishery on Rice Lake. BTW, 45 years ago it was the MNR strongly encouraging the Rice Lake resorts to attract US bluegill anglers to prevent overpopulation. I have owned my resort for 12 years and in that time I have had TWO Ontario residents stay and catch bluegills. Other resorts would report similar low numbers. Canadians do NOT target bluegills.

This is interesting. So you would like to use 45 year old data suggesting keeping as many as possible. If you wipe them out, you will have no business. The practices that have been allowed to take place has damaged the resource. Instead of fear mongering and complaining that the about the MNR....maybe you should look in the mirror and ask yourself just who is responsible for this abuse of the lake resources. Like you said, Canadians do NOT target bluegills and the glutanous persons causing this problem are not staying at my house!

I used the 45 year number as a starting, reference point. Before 1965 there were no bluegills in Rice. To say “If you wipe them out, you will have no business” is pretty nonsensical. What did I write at the end of my earlier posting? ZERO FISH=ZERO BUSINESS. We need a sustainable fishery as much as anyone else, maybe more. Please don’t make us out to be raping and pillaging the lake.

 

Also a quote from the recent article:

"During the Zone 17 advisory council meetings before the Jan. 1 change, no information ever suggested that "sustain-ability of the sunfish population" required limits, Brough wrote.

I disagree with this statement. We sat through hours and hours of meetings and read numerous reports and heard presentations from sunfish experts from all over North America. To ensure a quality fishery and a healthly population of sunfish, limits were absolutely suggested as an option. The RLTA represents it's own interests only. If you don't want to look like money grabbing people with no consideration for the health of the lake, then start acting like responsible resort owners who understand that a healthly well-managed fishery benefits everyone now and in the future. The non-resident anglers will come to enjoy the experience and the quality of a great fishery, harvest is secondary.

Sorry Michael, I disagree with your disagree. SWISHMICK suggested for the best information look at: http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/264321.pdf

Check page 19, it says “Black crappie and bluegill are not native to lakes within FMZ 17, but have become well established. These populations are now considered naturalized and it is unrealistic to expect a significant reduction in these populations at current levels of angler harvest”. So, if there are far fewer anglers out there, won’t the population increase ?

 

Rice Lake is a fantastic fishery, there is enough for everyone to enjoy if we manage it properly.

Completely agree, it has been for many years even when many more bluegills were being caught than there are today. As the MNR has reported many times, Rice Lake is the most productive lake in Ontario.

 

One comment to DIGGYJ, if you have a cottage on Rice, you are not a tourist, you are a resident just like the rest of us who live on the lake, pay property taxes and support local businesses.

[Dara]

Why should I have to contribute to the bussinesses parked around a lake to fish it.

They are just there to make a buck, and I am just there to fish.

I am a resident and I pay taxes, what more contribution should I have to make to play on public property.

And why should anybody living on a lake have special preference as to what goes on there as opposed to any other resident of Ontario. They don't own the lake.

[Michael_Brown]

"Check page 19, it says Black crappie and bluegill are not native to lakes within FMZ 17, but have become well established. These populations are now considered naturalized and it is unrealistic to expect a significant reduction in these populations at current levels of angler harvest." So, if there are far fewer anglers out there, won't the population increase ?

 

 

 

You must think if we stopped all fishing for bluegill in Rice Lake that they would start overflowing the banks. If we did not harvest a single fish from Rice, guess what the populations will find a sustainable level and balance. Harvest is only one factor in the fish population health in the lake. To think that you are doing the lake a favour by taking as many as you can catch is wrong.

 

Also "it was the RLTA representative on the FMZ 17 Council that proposed the ZERO over 7". I agree with this but the problem is that any child fishing off their dock who caught a sunfish larger than 7 inches would be breaking the law. These fish are responsible for helping to recruite new anglers that the entire industry/sport needs. This would have been unacceptable.

Edited March 3, 2010 by Michael Brown

[FishinNanna]

I don't usually get on these things but after reading .. alot .. I have to point out that some of you seem to have broken some of your own rules on here. Thought you weren't supposed to be baiting and "boorish" and that there was to be no use of creative spelling. Hmmm .. correct me if I am wrong, but .....

 

Also, seems to be like there is alot of antagonizing going on. Is that necessary? Perhaps there is no real right or wrong .. and perhaps some of you wouldnt know the difference. Surely, there is a happy medium somewhere.

 

I love to fish, have done all my life. And I look forward to introducing my grandchildren to the joys of angling. But I don't think everything is simply black or white. I think the children who are stomping their feet and throwing stones need to calm down and be somewhat more civil and thoughtful. We do still live in a democracy where we are allowed varying opinions .. but a little more manners would be nice to see.

 

Now let's all enjoy this wonderful province and all it has to offer and let's share it !

 

Nanna

[BillM]

I wonder if Rice Laker has a comment on my reply?

 

ie the 300 fish limit only affects the amount of fish they can take home. Has zero to do with possession/consumption during their stay...