Rice Lake panfishTourist Ass. at it again!

[Jer]

What is the limit for panfish in the rest of Ontario?

Why?

Because the rest of Ontario has a 50 sunfish limit. The Kawarthas are already getting the benefit of the doubt at 300. Why is this not enough?

 

What is the difference between a Bluegill, Pumkinseed and a Sunfish?

http://www.ibnature.com/Redear,Bluegill%20Sunfish.pdf

Pumpkinseed and sunfish are the same fish.

Bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus)

Redear Sunfish (Lepomis microlophus)

What you seem to be missing , Jodi, is that they are all sunfish.

 

A bluegill has more meat and is less bony. If you hold a bluegill and sunfish of the same size you can feel the extra meat along the back bone of the bluegill.

I'll agree that a bluegill tends to be meatier than a pumkinseed, but what's your point?

 

 

Why is Rice Lake not as safe as other lakes?

Does the Trent Severn Waterway only travel through Rice Lake, bypassing all the other lakes between Lake Simcoe and Lake Ontario?

Are you serious?

Is Rice Lake the only lake that is shallow on the TSW?

I don't know. I'm sure you do. My concern is Rice Lake. Others can worry about lakes they understand much better than I.

Could you point out where all these springs are?

I know of two right in the bay in front of our resort. We mark them on the rare times we can skate on the lake. There is also a huge pressure crack that comes up without warning. I know of one truck that got stuck on it this winter. He called 911.

 

I would hazard a guess that Upper Buckhorn is much more dangerous in most areas than Rice. I haven't heard any outcry from our local emergency services. Ice fishing can be inherently dangerous at times. It's no different on Rice than anywhere else in Ontario.

[Sinker]

Anytime your on the water, or ice, can be dangerouse. Rice lake is no more dangerous than any other body of water. I don't get that point at all. Actually, I don't get a lot of this whole thread.

 

I've lost track of RLTA's point, and I'm not going back to read it all again.

 

Lets just all pretend the limit on rice lake for sunfish is 500, we'll tell that to all the americans, and see how many more show up. I really find it hard to believe the RLTA think its the fish limits that are keeping american anglers out of thier resorts. Are you really THAT daft?

 

Also, I can't, for the life of me, figure out why you don't find a new target group for your resorts??? Rice lake is a great fishery. I fish it all year round, many, many days a season. I'm sure there are many, many more anglers who would LOVE the opportunities that I have, fishing rice lake. Put your thinking caps on, and target them! Get them in your resorts, put them on fish, have a great season...........your wasting your time with this one. Get over it and move onto new things.

 

 

S.

[swishmick]

It's extremely doubtful that there's anything to worry about with respect to the state of Rice Lake's sunfish stocks when the OMNR is implementing an all year open season, engaging local government to improve access to the resource, promoting the fishery and harvest opportunities, and actively pursuing angler recruitment and education. You could say that this is OMNR-style plundering of a resource. It's taking something that the RLTA had to themselves for a while and trying to super-size it. Of course, they've stepped on a few toes so far. A temporary bump up to 500 for a couple years to ease the transition of existing businesses would be a kind gesture, especially as their (the OMNR) plan is all about selling the panfish resource on a much bigger scale than the RLTA ever had going, albeit to many more anglers than a few Americans.

 

The RLTA should benefit from these plans, though it appears unlikely as, assuming that their fish limit focused points are made in good faith – and why wouldn't they be, really – most of their businesses seem narrowly catered to those who fish in the summer for part of a food budget. No insulation/winterizing to take advantage of the ice fishing season? – looks like these guys are just scraping by, and the area really needs some economic development. It's too bad the way this thing has panned out with the RLTA's image taking a beating over something that both sides are guilty of: trying to increase the exploitation of sunfish.

Edited April 11, 2010 by swishmick

[chessy]

now that these rules are implemented here are a few questions

the 30 fish over the length limit must be kept whole correct???

 

and how much space would 300 sunfish be when laid out in propor packaging ..

[Rice Lake resident]

The shipping regulations have not changed. The species must be recognizable which means they must have skin on them. 300 filetted and frozen bluegill fit in a small cooler and weigh approx 20lb.

 

The RLTA did have a trophy for largest bluegill for years. We haven't had one for 4 years as we were encouraging people to throw the big ones back. I'm sure we'll be bringing back the trophy. Looks like now we'll be getting rid of the walleye trophy as you can't keep any big ones. Most of them were kept in live wells and successfully released anyway but we're not encouraging anyone to bring a large walleye off the lake for a photo when regulations say you can't keep them.

 

All sunfish, bluegill are bass as well. I'm not sure what the point is anymore either. Happy fishing!

[Guest ThisPlaceSucks]

Most of them were kept in live wells and successfully released anyway but we're not encouraging anyone to bring a large walleye off the lake for a photo when regulations say you can't keep them.

 

Released or not, putting an OOS or out of the legal sized fish in your live well counts as possession, and is thus, also illegal to do so. Any illegal fish must be released immediately.

[bucktail]

I can't believe that a nearly unlimited catch and keep proposal has even entered anyones mind in thhis day and age!

[Guest ThisPlaceSucks]

anglers and hunters have long been the best stewards for their resources. there are bad seeds amongst our ranks as well, but we are some of the most informed conservationists out there.

 

and good thing, or else our resources would be stripped down to being like ATM's if it were up to some people.

[bigfish1965]

The shipping regulations have not changed. The species must be recognizable which means they must have skin on them. 300 filetted and frozen bluegill fit in a small cooler and weigh approx 20lb.

 

The RLTA did have a trophy for largest bluegill for years. We haven't had one for 4 years as we were encouraging people to throw the big ones back. I'm sure we'll be bringing back the trophy. Looks like now we'll be getting rid of the walleye trophy as you can't keep any big ones. Most of them were kept in live wells and successfully released anyway but we're not encouraging anyone to bring a large walleye off the lake for a photo when regulations say you can't keep them.

 

All sunfish, bluegill are bass as well. I'm not sure what the point is anymore either. Happy fishing!

 

300 sunfish when fileted weigh 20 pounds?? What are you using to filet with, a chain saw?? According to TakeMeFishing.org the average pumpkinseed weighs 1 pound. Assume a waste of 75% and you get 4 ounces per fish of filet. 4 ounces X 300 fish=1,200 ounces/16 oz per pound= 75 pounds

 

 

Putting a fish that is out of the slot into your livewell is illegal. I would hope you do more than 'not encourage' this.

[Rice Lake resident]

The average bluegill out of Rice Lake weighs more like 8 or 9 ounces. A one pound sunfish would certainly be longer than 7" and they can only take 30 of those on a sport licence.

50 per day would be a much more fair limit for sunfish than a 300 possession limit. An angler who visits for two weeks could then take home 750 fish.

 

You're right. Rice Lake doesn't have redear sunfish which is yet ANOTHER different breed of the cichlyd family of bass. I had no idea there were so many different kinds. They're even related to the cichlyds you might keep in an aquarium. Rice Lake does have the pumpkinseed which is the native fish and the bluegill which is the invasive species, still two different fish.

[Roy]

I have no idea where this stuff is coming from but here it is....

 

 

 

Rice Lake Tourist Association

 

February 10, 2010

 

County of Peterborough

 

470 Water Street

 

Peterborough, Ontario

 

K9H 3M3

 

 

 

Dear Warden Jones and Members of Council,

 

Although we have concerns, the Rice Lake Tourist Association does conditionally support the decision of the MNR to introduce ice fishing on Rice Lake. The RLTA strongly encourages the MNR and the OPP to maintain constant monitoring on Rice Lake to ensure adherence to the regulations.

 

The RLTA disagrees with the MNR on the introduction of sunfish limits on Rice Lake. At no time during the deliberations by the FMZ 17 Advisory Council was it suggested by MNR or anyone else that the sustainability of the sunfish population on Rice Lake required the imposition of limits. MNR's own data shows that the average size of sunfish on Rice Lake actually improved on the last creel survey. We are very concerned with limits being imposed to satisfy social concerns rather than biology.

 

Creel surveys are typically done every 4 years by the MNR and RLTa has asked them to increase the frequency to an annual survey so that changes in the fishery will be noted sooner, rather than later.

 

The imposition of sunfish limits has negatively impacted businesses on and around Rice Lake with many resorts receiving cancellations for the upcoming season.

 

Please direct your questions or concerns to me.

 

Sincerely

 

 

 

Maureen Brough

 

President, Rice Lake Tourist Association

 

705-939-6761

 

[email protected]

 

www.ricelakecanada.com

[Michael_Brown]

You see this is what we want.

The RLTA has supported ice fishing all along, just a few members who claimed they represented the RLTA, were opposed to ice fishing. As for the panfish limits they have always stated that they oppose them. I have no problem with this. I disagree with them but they are allowed their opinion.

The topic can be debated for a long time but the fact is the new regulation is the 300/30 limit which has been discussed at length.

Everyone understands that sunfish are not endanger of disappeaing from Rice lake, however the size structure of the fish is a concern. RLTA members have had a voluntary program to release larger sunfish, I see no reason for this program to stop. Just because they can harvest 30 over 7.1 inches and 300 total, doesn't mean we need to encourage the behaviour.

Rice Lake is a great multi-species lake, sell it for the experience not the harvest ability.

 

I spoke with a resort owner from northern ontario recently, guess what their business was down 60% last season. 95% of their clients are american. He is hoping the strong canadian dollar, gas prices, border security issues and weak american economy improve because his regular clients want to come back to enjoy canadian fishing, it is just tough to find the extra cash right now for a fishing trip. He expects business to improve this year. They strongly support live release at their resort with only a couple fish being harvested each day for shore lunch.

Edited April 12, 2010 by Michael Brown

[chessy]

Township supports request for new fishing regs

 

RICE LAKE: Tourist association seeks special designation

 

Posted By VALERIE MACDONALD NORTHUMBERLAND TODAY

 

Posted 2 hours ago

Township councillors have unanimously endorsed a request from the Rice Lake Tourist Association to ask the natural resources ministry to specially designate the waterway with detailed regulations related to fishing.

 

The regulations are to be created through a "comprehensive public consultation process" including all of the stakeholders and abutting municipalities in Northumberland and Peterborough, according to the motion adopted at council's meeting last week.

 

 

 

The tourist association made presentations to council and asked that council petition the ministry for a reversal to year-round fishing, and to increase the panfish limited to 500 from 300, but these specifics were not addressed in the motion.

 

Northumberland County councillors, including Hamilton Township Mayor Mark Lovshin, have already endorsed a similar motion.

 

As part of the next step, the township has invited and is expecting a Ministry of Natural Resources delegation to attend the next council meeting on Tuesday, April 13 at which more specifics will be discussed. vmacdonald@northumber landtoday.

 

[Ron]

Township supports request for new fishing regs

 

RICE LAKE: Tourist association seeks special designation

 

Posted By VALERIE MACDONALD NORTHUMBERLAND TODAY

 

Posted 2 hours ago

Township councillors have unanimously endorsed a request from the Rice Lake Tourist Association to ask the natural resources ministry to specially designate the waterway with detailed regulations related to fishing.

 

The regulations are to be created through a "comprehensive public consultation process" including all of the stakeholders and abutting municipalities in Northumberland and Peterborough, according to the motion adopted at council's meeting last week.

Here's an idea, how about we form a council with all possible stake holders. We could invite stake holders from

 

Buckhorn District Tourist Association

City of Kawartha Lakes Tourism

Cold Creek Fly Fishers

Competitive anglers

Crowe Lake Waterways Association

Curve Lake First Nation

Federation of Ontario Cottage Associations

Live bait industry

Muskies Canada

Ontario BASS Federation Nation

Ontario Chinese Anglers Association

Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters

Peterborough Field Naturalists

Recreational anglers

Rice Lake Tourist Association

Trent University

 

Even better, we could then discuss all issues pertaining to all of the Kawartha Lakes and call it zone 17. Once the council have come up with solutions, they could then set up public meetings where the general public is invited for their input. Better yet, they could send out EBR notice to the public to give their input and perhaps a survey where people could fill out and send in electronically or by mail.

 

We could then have discussions pertaining to:

Protect and enhance the biological integrity of the aquatic ecosystem;

Promote the sustainable utilization of fisheries resources;

Develop a greater knowledge of fish populations, fish habitat and aquatic ecosystems;

Describe the existing conditions of the fish community;

Provide a framework for fisheries management;

Rehabilitate degraded fish communities and fish habitat, for self-sustaining, native stocks;

Promote public awareness, appreciation and understanding of fisheries resources and the aquatic habitats on which they depend;

and Involve organized angling associations, environmental interest groups and the general public in fisheries management activities.

 

We could then create Guiding Principles to provide direction for the development of fisheries management goals, objective and actions.

1.

ECOLOGICAL APPROACH: An ecological approach to fisheries management will be followed to ensure conservation and use of the resource in a sustainable manner.

2.

LANDSCAPE LEVEL MANAGEMENT: Fisheries will be managed on a landscape scale. However, in some limited cases, components of the resource within a FMZ may need to be managed differently.

3.

BALANCED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: Strategies and actions will consider the ecological, economic, social and cultural benefits and costs to society, both present and future.

4.

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: The finite capacity of the resource is recognized in planning strategies and management actions within a FMZ. Only natural resources over and above those essential for long-term sustainability requirements are available for use, enjoyment and development.

5.

BIODIVERSITY: Fisheries management will ensure the conservation of biodiversity by committing to healthy ecosystems, protecting our native and naturalized species and sustaining the genetic diversity of fisheries in the FMZ. All species in the FMZ including non-sport fish and Species at Risk must be considered.

6.

NATURAL REPRODUCTION: Priority will be placed on native, naturally reproducing fish populations that provide predictable and sustainable benefits with minimal long-term cost to society. Hatchery-dependent fisheries will also play a role in providing fishing opportunities.

7.

HABITAT PROTECTION: The natural productive capacity of fish habitats will be protected and habitat will be enhanced where possible.

8.

VALUING THE RESOURCE: Stakeholders and other users will be invited to understand and appreciate the value of fisheries resources and to participate in decisions to be made by MNR that may directly or indirectly affect aquatic ecosystem health.

9.

RESPONSIBILITY: Local, regional, provincial and federal cooperation and sharing of knowledge, costs and benefits will be sought to manage fisheries at a FMZ level.

10.

MULTI-PARTY INVOLVEMENT: A wide range of stakeholders, Aboriginal peoples and interested parties will provide fisheries management advice to ensure an open and transparent process that acknowledges their valuable role in the process.

11.

ABORIGINAL INTERESTS: Ontario is committed to building better relationships with Aboriginal peoples and in involving them in decisions that affect them.

12.

DIRECT ACTION: All possible options must be considered and evolve to implementation actions that are feasible.

13.

KNOWLEDGE: The best available information will be used for FMZ-based objective setting and strategy development and implementation.

14.

ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT: FMZs will be managed using an adaptive management approach. Objectives will be set, monitoring will occur, results will be compared against objectives and management regimes adjusted as necessary and where possible to ensure attainment of objectives.

15.

PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE: When an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause-and-effect relationships are not fully established scientifically.

 

 

 

(More sarcasim to add once I find the EBR notice and electronic survey).

 

Enviromental Registry Notice.

Please note: This notice was first published to the Environmental Registry March 17, 2009. It was republished May 15, 2009 to extend the comment period to May 26, 2009.

 

The tourist association made presentations to council and asked that council petition the ministry for a reversal to year-round fishing, and to increase the panfish limited to 500 from 300, but these specifics were not addressed in the motion.

 

Too bad the Tourist Ass. didn't tell them the whole story, could have saved the Township some time to concern themselves on issues that have NOT been discussed.

 

Northumberland County councillors, including Hamilton Township Mayor Mark Lovshin, have already endorsed a similar motion.

 

As part of the next step, the township has invited and is expecting a Ministry of Natural Resources delegation to attend the next council meeting on Tuesday, April 13 at which more specifics will be discussed. vmacdonald@northumber landtoday.

 

Edited April 12, 2010 by Ron

[Terry]

I think the Rice Lake Tourist Association need to get their act together and get one voice one opinion on this issue

they keep on putting out press releases that contradicts the one before

except for the bluegill limit, who knows that their stand it

[irishfield]

Typical "glass house syndrome" Terry. You know the Cottage Ass ociation I'm dealing with... appears they all operate the same way.

[jimmer]

Does this ever end? 300 limit for sunfish (bluegills and pumpkinseeds) is more than enough for anyone. As much as I appreciate the American tourists visiting our great country, I don't believe that natural resource decisions should be made based on whether they will continue to visit "Rice Lake" if there are limits on panfish. Florida implemented salt water licences 2 years ago and I didn't have a say into whether this should happen or not. Did I stop going? No.

Is Rice Lake the centre of the Universe or what?

Maybe the resort owners should sell if they can't make a go of it.

[Ron]

Well, I think we can finally put this thread to rest.

 

I went to the Hamilton Township council meeting tonight. Dan Taillon and Tammy Tellier of the OMNR were there to give a presentation to the council. Apparently, a lot of questions were answered in regards to the new regulations which have taken effect Jan 1. The council were surprised that the RLTA did support the year round fishing season on Panfish. I am quite certain that the council now understands it is not practical to create Rice Lake a Special Designated Waterway, as there is nothing special about Rice Lake. Rice Lake is an average lake within the zone. It is not the deepest lake on the system, it is not the shallowest lake on the system. Rice Lake used to have a great abundance on Bluegill in the 10 inch range back in the early 80's, actually considered non existent now. Rice Lake used to have a great abundance of Bluegill in the 9 inch range back in the late 80's, these are considered a rarity in this day and age. A trophy Bluegill in Rice Lake is now considered to be 8 inches, Can you believe it? It only took 20 yrs to drastically reduce the size of a Bluegill by 2 inches. To say the average Bluegill has increased in size which is supported by the OMNR data, the increase merely an 1/8 of an inch. Hopefully in 20 yrs time we can get the size of the Bluegill back to the 10 inch mark. Highly unlikely though.

 

I am glad Dan went through everything making the deciding factors of the regulations.

This certainly answered many questions for the council.

 

I am more than disappointed in the RLTA with ony 2 members showing up. The vocal ones of the Association, didn't have the gonads to attend this meeting. The council soon discovered that RLTA did vote for icefishing and it was misrepresentation, deception if you will, by the spokesperson representing RLTA.

 

If their key interest was for the concern of Rice Lake, I am certain they would have been there, I know I was.

The council members had many valid questions of which in my opinion, were addressed and professionally answered, even the concerns with the Walleye population and Carp die off!

 

I am looking forward to Valerie MacDonald's, news paper article on this one.

 

Cudos to you Dan Taillon, very well represented for what the advisory council had covered for over 3 years and also the Biological framework to back the new regulations.

 

If people want the rest of the story, send me a PM and I will be glad to write it all up for you.

 

Cheers, Ron Reyns

(Ron Reyns Maintenance 905 372-0512)

Edited April 14, 2010 by Ron

[Twocoda]

way to represent Ron hats of to ya ...

 

The only thing "special" about Rice Lake is its Tourist Association's ability to hinder what they are supposed to represent....

[Terry]

thanks for being there for us all Ron

[Tom McCutcheon]

Sounds promising Ron. I too would like to thank yourself and Mike Brown along with Dan and all the OMNR staff for sticking with this from the start and seeing it through to a conclusion. (I hope)

 

Tom.

[Jer]

Great news, Ron.

 

Good to hear that the township council is willing to hear from both sides. Kudos to the MNR for representing as well.

[Roy]

Standing back and looking at all of this, I can't help but think that the name of the RLTA has been tainted by a few rogue members of the association. I hope that the members in good standing of that association continue to do well in their business endeavours and that people from every area of North America continue to holiday on and around Rice Lake.

 

Let's call this a wrap.