dave524 Posted November 28, 2015 Report Share Posted November 28, 2015 Closing for a year or rotating an open season on a yearly basis would be a hit or miss deal. if walleye production is anything like Lake Erie they get a really good spawn and hatch every 3 or 4 years and it is that one age class that drives the fishery until the next good reproduction season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooner_jr Posted November 28, 2015 Report Share Posted November 28, 2015 I was talking to a CO on the lake last winter, he said their fish shocking surveys showed a number of mature walleyes, but no small ones. That would lead me to believe the problem is not over-fishing, but something else. I've noticed a decline ever since they put all the weevils in the lake to control the weeds. It hasn't affected the hordes of small perch though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moxie Posted November 28, 2015 Report Share Posted November 28, 2015 A friend once mused this thought ona board and received a less than favourable reaction. Take the money slated for any walleye initiative and strengthen the already thriving bass fishery. Just looking at a chart alone, walleye doesn't jump out at me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moxie Posted November 28, 2015 Report Share Posted November 28, 2015 (edited) Good. And provide enforcement. X2 As well as education. Half measures leave gaps. Edited November 28, 2015 by moxie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomcat Posted November 28, 2015 Report Share Posted November 28, 2015 Tomcat you may have misunderstood. Or maybe I did. But I take that statement to mean the impact of no walleye fishing on the business's In the township of scugog nothing to do with your license fees going to business's I clicked on the reference (to the OFAH website page on Lake Scugog Walleye Closure) the original poster provided and inter alia read the following under the heading Let Us Bear in Mind: "There was no assessment of the potential socioeconomic impacts to the local community that would result from a closure of the Walleye fishery. This should have been considered by the MNRF when making this decision." Although an OFAH member since 2001, I personally do not support MNRF wild life management decisions being based in any part on socioeconomic impacts. There never has been nor should there be any guarantees to those who opt to set up businesses close to a resource lake/territory. While perhaps an unpopular opinion, I don't even consider such businesses as stakeholders. For me, the MNRF should involve legitimate stakeholders for a lake such as fishermen, First Nations when appropriate, cottage owners and fish biologists. I may not have articulated my thoughts well enough in my first post in this thread. Supposedly, Ontario spends 100% of hunting and fishing revenue on fish and wildlife management. The funds go into a fish and wildlife special purpose account, which invests more than $65 million a year in fish and wildlife management. I do not support any of these funds in the fish and wildlife special purpose account being spent to study socioeconomic impacts of wildlife management decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dutch01 Posted November 28, 2015 Report Share Posted November 28, 2015 I clicked on the reference (to the OFAH website page on Lake Scugog Walleye Closure) the original poster provided and inter alia read the following under the heading Let Us Bear in Mind: "There was no assessment of the potential socioeconomic impacts to the local community that would result from a closure of the Walleye fishery. This should have been considered by the MNRF when making this decision." Although an OFAH member since 2001, I personally do not support MNRF wild life management decisions being based in any part on socioeconomic impacts. There never has been nor should there be any guarantees to those who opt to set up businesses close to a resource lake/territory. While perhaps an unpopular opinion, I don't even consider such businesses as stakeholders. For me, the MNRF should involve legitimate stakeholders for a lake such as fishermen, First Nations when appropriate, cottage owners and fish biologists. I may not have articulated my thoughts well enough in my first post in this thread. Supposedly, Ontario spends 100% of hunting and fishing revenue on fish and wildlife management. The funds go into a fish and wildlife special purpose account, which invests more than $65 million a year in fish and wildlife management. I do not support any of these funds in the fish and wildlife special purpose account being spent to study socioeconomic impacts of wildlife management decisions. I agree with this, well said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sinker Posted November 28, 2015 Report Share Posted November 28, 2015 I agree with this, well said. Ditto... Stocking is not the answer. Scugog is a VERY productive lake, but if the eyes cant reproduce because of something we are doing, we need to fix it. Water levels at spawning season plays a big part in this. Usually, when the walleye spawn thereis still ice on the lakes, and the spring thaw hasnt fully happened yet. The fish spawn in high water, water rises, the trent guys open the locks, the water lowers, and eggs are left high and dry. Its a big problem in all the kawartha lakes. If the eyes can get good spawning conditions, they will reproduce well, but we need a few consecutive years of this before you really see it. S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captpierre Posted November 28, 2015 Report Share Posted November 28, 2015 Ditto... Stocking is not the answer. Scugog is a VERY productive lake, but if the eyes cant reproduce because of something we are doing, we need to fix it. Water levels at spawning season plays a big part in this. Usually, when the walleye spawn thereis still ice on the lakes, and the spring thaw hasnt fully happened yet. The fish spawn in high water, water rises, the trent guys open the locks, the water lowers, and eggs are left high and dry. Its a big problem in all the kawartha lakes. If the eyes can get good spawning conditions, they will reproduce well, but we need a few consecutive years of this before you really see it. S. Agreed. Last year was good on Pigeon anyway. Low winter levels and steady spring levels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moxie Posted November 28, 2015 Report Share Posted November 28, 2015 Just curious as to why we feel the need to fix everything? Would a different tact be so bad ? I tend agree the causes should be investigated but only with concerns other species could be affected by the same causes whatever they may be. It doesn't take a scientist to conclude that extreme water fluctuations in a shallow body of water as scugog is would negatively impact Walleye populations so why not concentrate and enhance thriving species. With consistent cutbacks a return to the contrary is doubtful. It makes more sense to find a way over or around the wall instead of suffering a bloody forehead from continually banging into it. But then again what do I know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mukluk Posted November 28, 2015 Report Share Posted November 28, 2015 Maybe the Ministry of the Environment should get involved regarding water quality etc. on Lake Scugog. All these beautiful manicured lawns that lead right to the waters edge have been virtually bombarded with fertilizer. Even seagulls have no problem walking on top of the weeds from one side of the lake to the other with all that weed growth in August. Weeds use oxygen in large amounts and give off toxins. Then there's the leaching septic tanks that lead downhill to the lake. Perhaps a (STC) is in order. A septic tank certificate whereby septic tanks would have to be inspected say every 10 years for problems and receive a passing grade. Runoff leads to weed growth and pollution. Water fluctuations as mentioned plus proper spawning areas are a big plus as well. Look how well the herring numbers have excelled in Lake Simcoe since the water quality was improved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big guy Posted November 28, 2015 Report Share Posted November 28, 2015 Something tells me there will still be many walleye caught AND taken home after the new rules go into place. Enforcement is an issue everywhere and without it, closing the fishery will have little effect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dutch01 Posted November 28, 2015 Report Share Posted November 28, 2015 Something tells me there will still be many walleye caught AND taken home after the new rules go into place. Enforcement is an issue everywhere and without it, closing the fishery will have little effect. Much like gun control, the closure only affects the law abiding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big guy Posted November 28, 2015 Report Share Posted November 28, 2015 Much like gun control, the closure only affects the law abiding. A lock only keeps an honest man out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moxie Posted November 28, 2015 Report Share Posted November 28, 2015 (edited) Something tells me there will still be many walleye caught AND taken home after the new rules go into place. Enforcement is an issue everywhere and without it, closing the fishery will have little effect. I can only imagine how many Rice Lake Walleye have fallen victim since they came up with the stupid idea of allowing lines through the ice. Maybe Kate Wynn could answer that question but doubt she even knows what a Walleye is which is odd knowing they always seem to have answers to everything else. Edited November 28, 2015 by moxie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishermccann Posted November 29, 2015 Report Share Posted November 29, 2015 Many anglers wanted and asked for a hard water fishery in the Kawarthas. How do you do what is asked but not provide an avenue for the criminal element to take advantage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Bacon Posted November 29, 2015 Report Share Posted November 29, 2015 Weeds use oxygen in large amounts and give off toxins. Don't weeds produce oxygen via photosynthesis? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris.brock Posted November 29, 2015 Report Share Posted November 29, 2015 Don't weeds produce oxygen via photosynthesis? I was thinking the same thing. He could be referring to when the lake ices over, the weeds die and rot, consuming oxygen. A lake that shallow and weedy is vulnerable to winter kill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moxie Posted November 29, 2015 Report Share Posted November 29, 2015 Many anglers wanted and asked for a hard water fishery in the Kawarthas. How do you do what is asked but not provide an avenue for the criminal element to take advantage? They should know better but look at who we're asking that from. Another failed portfolio by failed governors.look at Bill Mauro mandate letter. Not much there on Scugog Walleye or anything directly related to fisheries except for a passing mention near the bottom of the letter which reinforces my opinion on where it ranks on their list of priorities. More fact less thoughts from a class less, illiterate, fear mongering, horse crap spreading and rage filled MOXIE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Caster Posted November 29, 2015 Report Share Posted November 29, 2015 . Another failed portfolio by failed governors.look at Bill Mauro mandate letter. I knew BillM was up to no good! That son of a ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dutch01 Posted November 29, 2015 Report Share Posted November 29, 2015 More fact less thoughts from a class less, illiterate, fear mongering, horse crap spreading and rage filled MOXIE. Your posts in that thread were all those things in my opinion. Now you're bringing it here to wreck someone else's thread? Way to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GBW Posted November 29, 2015 Report Share Posted November 29, 2015 I knew BillM was up to no good! That son of a ...LoL! Well played Sir, WELL played... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GBW Posted November 29, 2015 Report Share Posted November 29, 2015 It hasn't affected the hordes of small perch though.I forget where I read it but those hordes of dink perch are part of the issues her IMO. In the study done some of this fish that are under 6" long are much older then you would guess based on size. There is a fight for food in the lake so anything at all from the size of a finger and smaller WILL NOT MAKE IT no matter what type of fish it is due to the lack of food for the small to grow. Check how big a perch should be by the age of 6 years from most growth charts available (online). Then look at what you see in the lake. Some in the netting results were 1/2 the size they should be based on age from the data they collected. If I find the like I'll share it but if it's on another forum I can't as to respect the one's who run the site here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookinforwalleye Posted November 29, 2015 Report Share Posted November 29, 2015 A day late and a dollar short as usual, over fishing is not the issue....the Crappie and habitat are the problem Scugog was once a marvelous walleye fishery....the Crappie has killed that for ever! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookinforwalleye Posted November 29, 2015 Report Share Posted November 29, 2015 I was thinking the same thing. He could be referring to when the lake ices over, the weeds die and rot, consuming oxygen. A lake that shallow and weedy is vulnerable to winter kill. The weeds are choking out the spawning habitat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moxie Posted November 30, 2015 Report Share Posted November 30, 2015 Your posts in that thread were all those things in my opinion. Now you're bringing it here to wreck someone else's thread? Way to go. Reputation has a way of following us around. Besides, I'm trying it out and was thinking of making it my signature. Thanks Dutch ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now