Rice Lake panfishTourist Ass. at it again!

[FishinNanna]

Islander .... you just said it ..... a winter walleye fishery! I think that's what some of these fellas are pushing for, they don't really give a **** about the panfish at all, it's simply a way to open the door. Sneaky ..

 

And you are so right ... there were far from "thousands" out there .. goddness me!!!!! Such exageration, that's what causes the problems. Get real or hush .. if you can't tell the truth then just plain be quiet!

 

Thank you Tightline, hope we can continue to share ideas .. that's when greaet things happen

[tightline]

Just wanted to say that I actually looked into a Rice Lake ice fishing trip before I decided to go to Idle Tymes <---(awesome people had to plug) on Nippising...The only reason I didn't was because of the very limited information I could find...a few more years and a bit of advertising, you'll see results...Just have to get the word on the streets, being reputable and respectable to and for our fisheries is a good way to start...just sayin

[Michael_Brown]

Not sure how to do the fancy quoting that you do .... the 500 was the number that the MNF and OFAH and biologists and fishing clubs and stakeholders came up with in a majority vote. The 300 is a number that was pulled out of nowhere.

 

 

I'm not sure where you are getting your information, the 500 limit with none over 7 inches was proposed by the member from the RLTA on the council. It was not a number brought forward by the MNR or OFAH. In fact the number prefered by the angler stakeholders on the council was more in line with the other panfish limits of 30 or 50. The 300 number of fish under 7 inches was a pure concession to the cottage associations and now they want more. No happy medium? The anglers wanted a limit of 30 and the limit is now 300 and the cottage associations wanted a limit of 500 and the limit is now 300, that would be considered a compromise.

I think we should take the same approach as the RLTA and we will start to lobby the MNR for the limits to be reduced to 30 to represent the opinions of the resident anglers who outnumber the RLTA by tens of thousands to 1 (approx).

 

The unfortunate part of this arguement is that is works against the role of the council. A lot of work was done over three years by the MNR staff, stakeholder representatives and volunteers to bring forth one of the most up-to-date and well researched set of regulations in the province. The MNR shared their information with the skakeholders from 20 different groups that have interests in the local fishery. Hundreds attended public meetings held on these topics, even more completed surveys about the issues, the council recommendations was only one part of the information reviewed for the new regulations. It allowed a venue for groups like the RLTA and recreational anglers to contribute their ideas and concerns about the fishery resources in FMZ 17. The fact the one group is now undermining that work and research because they didn't get exactly what they wanted is discouraging. I believe it is in the interests of all stakeholder groups to support this kind of a public process with any government agency as it is far better than not being involved in decisions that affect the resource.

 

Big brother as they are being referred to is trying to listen and provide regulations that meets the needs of the resource and the best interests of the stakeholders.

 

I am done with this he said she said on this topic, all of the research, minutes of meetings and other information is available from the council process. I fully support the work of the council and all of it's stakeholders.

 

I will be at the meeting tomorrow in Grafton to defend the rights and interests of the anglers of this great area and if needed other future meetings. Please join myself and other anglers who support a healthy fishery in Rice Lake and every other lake in the province.

[solopaddler]

And by the way .. that number of 500 was decided by a bunch of bioligists and scientists and mnr people and ofah ..!!!!!

 

It's perfectly obvious who decided on the number. It certainly doesn't make it right.

 

Who lobbied for the outrageous limits?

[Dara]

And Dara ... if these folks take home a few hundred fish .. it's enough for a fish fry for a family. You'd be surprised how many one person can eat .. probably 3 - 6 fish per sitting per person, at least. Do the math. And are they taking them away from YOU and YOUR family .. hmm .. probably not. If you're Canadian, you probably don't want them anyway ....

 

 

See what I said before?

 

If it doesn't affect me personally i should have nothing to say?

 

Just the people directly affected can have an opinion?

 

Thats how we ended up with no spring bear hunt, and its also how we ended up with a gun registry. People saying, it doesn't affect me so I will let the government walk all over the people it does affect.

 

If a law makes sense then fine, but I want to see how the decision was made.

 

PS adda few fries, a salad and some bread, then you can get away with a few less fish

I know I wouldn't want to clean 500 sunfish...thats way too many wobbly pops

[Dutch]

I decided I would weigh in on this one.

 

If I am reading things above right, It sounds like the major disagreement revolves around the 300 fish limit, with 30 over 7" vs. a 500 fish limit with none over 7" allowed.

 

Is it really the opinion of the RLTA that a difference of 200 fish is to blame for the decreased bookings? That is hard to fathom - sure it is 200 fish, but if one of our friends from the us heard that they would get 500 instead of 300, would that really bring them back?

 

I think it is time to put this thread to bed, I enjoy the back-and-forth, but really, we're getting nowhere.

 

We have a couple of new members out of this, hopefully they stick around and add value to some other threads, but now we are about bordering on insanity. Methinks there are other things at play here, the timing of the sign-ups just don't flow. It's not often that a new member with 12 posts, or 2 or whatever with 90% in the same topic is here for the long term.

 

"Islander .... you just said it ..... a winter walleye fishery! I think that's what some of these fellas are pushing for, they don't really give a damn about the panfish at all, it's simply a way to open the door"

 

There even ganging up...who are these "fellas" pushing for a winter walleye season....dellusional.

 

I smell a troll....

[FishinNanna]

Now that there is a limit .. you call it outragous. Before Jan 1/10, when there was no limit .. you never said a thing about it then, is my bet. Probably never gave what seemed to be a non-issue the time of day.

 

Mr Brown ... do you continue to refer to the RLTA as a cottage association in an effort to further antagonize people? Please .. you know precisely who they are and it would stand you in good stead to show your manners and refer to them as such. "They" are the Rice Lake Tourist Association ... and those of them that I know are very hard working, honest, salt of the earth people. I take it as a personal insult when you attempt to attack them with your low browed, smarmy comments. This child-like behaviour is unnecessary and merely shows the level of intellect.

[FishinNanna]

I probably look like a troll, Dutch .. but I can assure you that there is no troll here. But you are right, this is getting silly .. just wanted to add things I've been "hearing", if that's ok.

 

Goodnight ..God Bless ..

[Ron]

FishinNanna

 

Even though you try to pull yourself off as a little ol lady from way back when... the type of ol gal that walked to school UP HILL both ways is not fooling too many of us. Looking at your recent posts and I guess I should mention.... Welcome to the board, though most people introduce themselves first. Chances are, I will meet you at the council meeting in Grafton. My name is Ron Reyns, I live in Cobourg. I too was on the advisory council. Perhaps as you are well aware, there are some replies to this thread from other people who were also on the advisory council but seem to be too ashamed to enunciate themselves, to each their own I guess. Some like to hide behind a screen name.

 

To echo Mike's responses, they are more accurate to what was discussed and suggested by the MAJORITY of the advisory council. As Mike had mentioned, some suggestions given for sunfish limits were as low as 50 with only 5 over 8 inches.

 

I will go over the many many dicussions on panfish and see if I can't find the actual numbers. It is tough to make replies with "opinions" rather than using facts which can be backed by evidence.

 

Sorry I'm the type of guy who does proper research, much like Mike Brown, before I give a reply.

 

Opinions are like an , everyone's got one. Some people talk through theirs.

 

Cheers, Ron...

[fishhunter]

FishinNanna

 

Even though you try to pull yourself off as a little ol lady from way back when... the type of ol gal that walked to school UP HILL both ways is not fooling too many of us. Looking at your recent posts and I guess I should mention.... Welcome to the board, though most people introduce themselves first. Chances are, I will meet you at the council meeting in Grafton. My name is Ron Reyns, I live in Cobourg. I too was on the advisory council. Perhaps as you are well aware, there are some replies to this thread from other people who were also on the advisory council but seem to be too ashamed to enunciate themselves, to each their own I guess. Some like to hide behind a screen name.

 

To echo Mike's responses, they are more accurate to what was discussed and suggested by the MAJORITY of the advisory council. As Mike had mentioned, some suggestions given for sunfish limits were as low as 50 with only 5 over 8 inches.

 

I will go over the many many dicussions on panfish and see if I can't find the actual numbers. It is tough to make replies with "opinions" rather than using facts which can be backed by evidence.

 

Sorry I'm the type of guy who does proper research, much like Mike Brown, before I give a reply.

 

Opinions are like an , everyone's got one. Some people talk through theirs.

 

Cheers, Ron...

[irishfield]

I've just been waiting for the Mayor to speak up....

[bigfish1965]

I am sorry but I am calling shenanigans on all this. I can see the IP addresses...the members here all smell something fishy.

If you want a scapegoat for your financial woes, don't look at the MNR.

I drive 5 hellish hours to get to the West Arm of Lake Nippissing for three days each year. I get to take home four walleye. I never do it. Going there is about the experience.

I had hoped as anglers we had evolved past the meat-hunter stage, but it looks like some people want to keep us there.

I call absolute and total Bull on the 300 limit being the cause of bookings issues.

How about doing some advertising? How about on the busiest fishing site in Canada??? I can't believe none of the RLTA saw the irony of trying to drag up support on a big site like this and never thought about using it for PROMOTION!!

We have had new members jump on to chime in as the RTLA tries to rally troops and make it look like these peoples were simple passers-by.

The MNR goes through an insane amount of paperwork and research to set limits and seasons. Stop focusing on the negative and start looking at the fact that you can now have guests YEAR ROUND!!

The price is a sane and reasonable limit of fish.

You get input on the limits, but you don't get a vote. Your vote comes at election time.

If a sunfish weighs a pound and you get 6 ounces of fillets, you have over 100 pounds of fish. That is an insane amount of fish.

 

The MNR would not have made another law, another rule to enforce (more money spent) had it not been necessary. MNR is not big brother, they are charged with the implementation and enforcement of regulations designed to ensure a long term resource.

The fish belong to all Ontarians...not just the RTLA.

[Ron]

To the moderators, please do not lock this thread until I have time to go over my many notes and recorded minutes to present the actual numbers which were set as options.

 

I do know of one fact and that fact is the Rice Lake Tourist Ass. wanted Rice Lake to be an exception to the regulations. Even though I know not all of their association was in agreement with that one. You don't think that would leave a bad taste in the mouths of the other Resorts in the Kawarthas now would it? Especially with the state of the economy, just think of what this HST is going to do to these resorts. Another 8% added to everything, including the fishing license, gas, lodging, just to name a few...

 

Cheers, Ron...

[bigfish1965]

If it gets locked Ron, just PM me and we'll see what we can do....

[MuskyGreenHorn]

Rick and Ron, I applaude you both. I smelled those rats right from their first posts. The lake is evolving, its time the RLTA did too.

[Jer]

And Dara ... if these folks take home a few hundred fish .. it's enough for a fish fry for a family. You'd be surprised how many one person can eat .. probably 3 - 6 fish per sitting per person, at least. Do the math. ....

 

 

OK...I did the math...

 

300 fish...3 - 6 fish each...feeds a family of 50 -100 (that's a big family)

 

Family of five (seems more reasonable)...thats 10 - 20 meals.

 

I couldn't imagine going on a fishing trip and bringing home enough fish to feed my family 20 meals, that's just greedy.

 

It's even worse if you figure the whole family of five came along for the trip, then they could take home as many as 1500 fish, or enough for as many as 50 - 100 meals, once or twice a week for the entire year.

 

If your clients are cancelling their trips because that's not enough fish, maybe it's better they stay home.

[swishmick]

Another link with a lot of excellent info on this issue:

 

www.mnr.gov.on.ca/264336.pdf

 

From page 66:

 

“In the late 1990s, concerns regarding the quality of the panfish (particularly bluegill) fishery in Rice Lake were raised. MNR initiated a review of panfish management, and attempted to work with local businesses and anglers to explore regulatory options to address concerns regarding the fishing quality. After research and extensive consultation, it was determined that there was public concern over the decline in both abundance and size of bluegill in Rice Lake, overexploitation and undervaluing of the resource. However, it was also identified that regulations were not required to sustain the stocks, but may be a useful tool to maintain fishing quality and marketability. No regulations were implemented as a result of this review. ”

 

In “the late 90's” this issue came up and nothing was done about it for at least a decade. To go from “no limits” to 300 is a bit arbitrary, and I think that giving the extra 200, even temporarily, to ease the transition for some that are hurting is reasonable – these are sunfish and the MNR thought nothing of putting "no limit" on them for years and years. The MNR creates non-native trout and salmon opportunities for other groups at great cost; this costs nothing and yet they're getting screwed. There must be some who suffered from the cancellation of the spring bear hunt that can sympathize; giving the outfitters an adjustment period would probably have saved them a lot of money. OTOH, maybe that cancellation improved the quality, abundance and size structure of the bear population for the fall hunt.

 

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

 

I had hoped as anglers we had evolved past the meat-hunter stage, but it looks like some people want to keep us there.

 

A fair number of people are of the opinion that those who fish for meat are the most ethical. It could one day end up being the “sport's” savior.

 

I call absolute and total Bull on the 300 limit being the cause of bookings issues.

 

What's the alternative, to believe that they're here to waste everyone's time for the heck of it?

 

How about doing some advertising? How about on the busiest fishing site in Canada??? I can't believe none of the RLTA saw the irony of trying to drag up support on a big site like this and never thought about using it for PROMOTION!!

 

Come here, get your association painted as a bunch of fools, and call it promotion!? RLTA didn't start the thread in the first place; if anything, they're probably grateful to have the chance defend themselves and offer their perspective.

 

If a sunfish weighs a pound and you get 6 ounces of fillets, you have over 100 pounds of fish. That is an insane amount of fish.

 

Kill a bear or deer or moose – what an “insane” amount of meat. Kill a 100 pound wolf – what an “insane” amount of rot. You can kill an unlimited number of Ontario mammals vermin, a veritable zoo of mammals - what an "insane" amount of killing. Why are sunfish so sacrosanct?

 

The fish belong to all Ontarians...not just the RTLA.

 

Yes, and the RLTA isn't trying to curtail anyone's access or claim sole ownership.

 

 

 

 

FWIW to the more cynical on this board, I'm not an RLTA member.

[solopaddler]

FWIW to the more cynical on this board, I'm not an RLTA member.

 

Okay, then what exactly is your interest in this issue?

 

No personal stake whatsover?

[swishmick]

Okay, then what exactly is your interest in this issue?

 

No personal stake whatsover?

 

 

Not an RLTA member, and no personal stake. As a citizen, I certainly care about how the MNR's decisions impact Ontarians and their businesses - doesn't almost everyone on this board?

Edited March 4, 2010 by swishmick

[troutologist]

Ahh frozen fish, nothing like the freezer burn of keeping an unnecessary amount of your catch in the icebox too long.

 

 

Ron and Michael, please pass on the happenings from the upcoming meeting. Keep up the good work.

 

 

To the folks from the Rice Lake Tourist Consortium (and those with no or moderate amounts of stake in this), perhaps look past alot of the bickering and use this as an opportunity to rethink promotion and advertising, most likely these limits are here to stay and your bottom line would be better served working with them than fighting them.

[Guest gbfisher]

I'd think I was at an ARF meeting where they teach people how not to blame everyone else. It's a limit issue ladies( ) and gentlemen. You live in Ontario where limits are the rule. Get used to it.

Money short?.....go figure!!! Have you looked at the economy lately?

 

 

Nobody wants to come to fish at my resort because they can only take home 300 fish. ....... DRY UP!

Edited March 4, 2010 by gbfisher

[hirk]

This is getting very muddled.The readers digest of it all is simple,a special interest group is trying to change public policy concerning a public resource for it's own benefit.The policy was arrived at based a degree of science/study,I have yet to see any such validated science/data put forth by the rlta that supports their postition and justifies the change(s) they desire.I fish there often and have rented cabins and do spend a few $'s while visiting and feel for the hit the resorts have taken as I've seen a few go under and low occupancies etc. but I'm sorry you as a group are still a whisper among the many voices of groups/people that should have a legitimate say in Rice lakes future.

Edited March 4, 2010 by hirk

[Ron]

Well the council meeting went rather well. I will post more on the remarks once I receive the minutes from the Alnwick, Haldimand Township. Rather had a very comical moment though. Talk about someone shooting themselves in the foot!!! Mike Ferguson of Fergs live bait in Gores Landing actually labeled us as anti US people who are dead against tourist fishing Rice Lake, as he put it:"We should be wearing white sheets". This is the same guy who called his American customers at one of the public meetings last year as "Redneck Hillbillies from the Backwoods, who did not have running water".He disagreed that the limit of Perch we had on hand to show the amount of fish did not represent the amount of Bluegills that could fit in one pail.

 

Good show Mike! Hope you speak up at more meetings, you really help your group of "Guardians of Rice Lake". I wonder how many more members you have in this group Mike? Mike is also a member of the RLTA.

 

Cheers, Ron...

Edited March 4, 2010 by Ron

[Dutch]

Talk about someone shooting themselves in the foot!!! Mike Ferguson of Fergs live bait in Gores Landing actually labeled us as anti US people who are dead against tourist fishing Rice Lake, as he put it:"We should be wearing white sheets". This is the same guy who called his American customers at one of the public meetings last year as "Redneck Hillbillies from the Backwoods, who did not have running water"

 

Cheers, Ron...

 

Hey Ron - I remember that guy from the meeting at the Navy Club - good for a few rather uncomfortable laughs. If I remember correctly, it was in the context that US stakeholders wouldn't be able to provide feedback as they didn't have internet - good ól boys that don't even have running water....guess I know where NOT to get my bait from.

 

Anyway, glad the meeting went well. Couldn't make it due to work, but I'm sure you and Michael gave 'em hell.

 

Hope to hear a recap soon.

 

Did you get to Nana?

Edited March 5, 2010 by Dutch

[Roy]

Mr. Ferguson is also a recently registered member of our community..... AKA Mayor of Rice Lake.