The Word of Gord (I couldn't resist the play on words)

[eye-tracker]

Don't be sorry RR - I'm not surprised at all by the lack of comments.

If people read it that is good too.

Hello fellow hawk-talkers,

I still feel in my opinion it is all about the image of the "walleye".

Well this is a topic very close to my very existence as a walleye angler. I would not be a walleye fishing fanatic if it was not for Quinte.

I agree with Dr. Pyzer and still preach (when I get a chance) everyone has to work together to preserve, promote and educate the walleye fishery in Ontario.

I hope with the increase and potential growth of walleye tournaments in Ontario we will start to form a passionate group of anglers and ambassadors like the Bass and Musky organizations of today. I still feel that walleye are looked upon as table food, until this image can be deconstructed through education and live release we will not see any change in the number of walleye taken from our lakes.

As an observation or example of a fish species image, lets picture a large group of bass anglers on a fishing trip...how many bass would they bring in for a feed? They know if they do keep bass, the backlash from the bass community is going to be massive and they will also have many anglers within their ranks that will not agree with the idea. As a walleye angler I wish I could say the same about a group of anglers fishing walleye, but I can not.

Hopefully over time we can all change the image of the walleye.

All the best chasing eyes...

-Sheldon Hatch

[Fishboy]

I’ve read this thread with a great deal of interest and here’s my 2 cents.

Fish-Hawk, wrote, “I want to keep fishing until I die, not until there is nothing to fish for.” Current possession limits kind of make the second part of that thought a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Fish-Hawk wrote further, “And I can only come to the same conclusion - that Government is the only entity in the equation with a chance of pulling it all together. And how do you get Government to step up to the plate? I mean really step up to the plate!”

I have one question to ask with regard to that last thought – How many of us have actually met our respective provincial politicians to express our views? You want to make them stand up? Speak to your local politicians and go armed with facts, don’t just whine about how unfair life is. (And for God’s sake, don’t wear camo clothes to meet a politician.) Better yet, join a political party and get your views heard that way. You could also join a conservation group and get involved at the grassroots level. (They can be a lot of fun.)

BTW Fish-Hawk, my 2 cents are not directed against you personally or anyone else. I generally agree with you sentiments and used your thoughts to support my arguments.

“It saddens me to some extent to see how a group of self-enlightened liberals can cast dispersions on any group considered an intruder into their domain.” Uh, Legend, the word you wanted is “aspersions” and I am fairly confident you’d feel the same way were large numbers of anglers showing up in your home waters on a regular basis. I am curious to know how you determined that these people were liberals.

As for the low numbers of respondents to this thread, it appears that awarding a homophobic name to an ice-hut is far more important…….

[SkeeterJohn]

418 views as of right now i think many have read this thread and have similar views and agree with it's content. This isn't something we haven't heard before in various forms.

When you look at the ice hut thread many of the same people are returning to see what's new... this topic will not generate that same traffic and comparing the two is pointless.

[Kpin]

In my humble opinion this thread has had limited comments for many reasons. Its obvious that the majority of anglers are concerned about fishstocks, regulations to keep them in place, etc. To comment about another thread getting more attention doesn't solve a thing. Its easy to see why it happens. This is a serious issue, with no easy answer that I, politicians, biologists and no individual hawk talker has the answer to.

Its easier to have a bit of levity and share a smile and crack a joke. That by no means, implies that we as a group, do not take it seriously. It simply means there is no definative answer. I personally, wouldn't take too much credence in the thought that talking to politicians would make a change, as in my experience their only concern is where the next vote is coming from, not what the public actually wants. Then again, who knows? If enough pressure (votes) is demonstrated, there could perhaps be a change.

In the end, I beleive Mike is right, if its read, its a good thing. Food for thought and undoubtedly something we have all thought about at one time or another.

Its really pointless to sling arrows at one another verbally, when in the end, we all want the same thing.

[Moosebunk]

Kpin. Good point

And not everyone may want to come home from work, step online, and walk into some sort of big decision.

It's a great thread. 500 have checked it out. In the time it took Mike to consider posting it, and having talked with Gord about it, it's certainly no waste having been brought to the table to be pondered upon.

I have no answers on how to tackle what is in actuality a National issue. BOQ locos may have been wrong to paint Fish-Hawkers in a bad light, but as much as it sucks, that might have been all certain people had the capacity or time to do. I sometimes pee pee a little on the fire hydrants around my home waters too. And whether I'm right or wrong the intent is usually for the good of a fishery, or otherwise for my own need and greed to ensure more fish are there for sport and future peace of mind.

Sucks folks. As if the parties interested in fisheries isn't segregated enough, you have people within a same party often separated and non-supportive of one another. Some BOQ locos should have considered what was done right by the F-H sportfishers that enjoyed their outing. Might have made the big publicized event on waters closer to home a little easier for them to swallow.

[M.T. Livewell]

I still feel that walleye are looked upon as table food, until this image can be deconstructed through education and live release we will not see any change in the number of walleye taken from our lakes.

But they are so yummy.

I have one question to ask with regard to that last thought – How many of us have actually met our respective provincial politicians to express our views?

Personally, I do not meet with politicians as I hold them in little regard. Frankly, of late, learning how they have squandered my hard earned tax dollars, I'd just as soon "meet" them with the bumper of my chevy astro.

This is a great thread and extremely educational. You cannot argue with comments made in here concerning conservation.
I just wonder when it became non-politically correct to eat fish.

M.T. Livewell

[Markus]

ET and MT are correct. The real challange is to make one of ontarios favorite table fish into a beloved sport fish. That's a tall order considering their yummy flavor and lack of excitment on the end of the line.

I think there has been few responses to this thread mostly because Gord is so well respected. Who wants to disagree with Gord and a his conservation message? Not many. And I believe most agree with it for the most part.

I think the message is a great one. Who wouldn't? I also think the message often gets lost in the delivery. Not everyone is as graceful with the pen as Gord, nor do they have the credibility to preach it.

I hope conservation will be the way of the future for many more people. I also hope a day comes we can sit around the table together and discuss all the positive results of walleye conservation while enjoying a tasty feed of walleye.

[M.T. Livewell]

BTW, if you would like to learn more about the politicians that are going to save the Quinte fishery, have a look at Paul Martin's record concerning Canada Steamship Lines. These are the barges you see making deliveries to the cement plant, and nearly running over Bacon and Jazman last year.
http://www.canadafreepress.com/2005/cover010505.htm

BTW, they will be bringing tires to the cement plant soon to fuel the operation.
http://perc.ca/PEN/1990-07-08/jack2.html

Now, anyone want to talk about the commercial fishery?!:roll:

All of this to say ... don't count on the government to do the "right thing".

Now, back to the mousing thread.

M.T. Livewell

[Legend]

Truth be told folks, as Bacon say's, each of our opinions has validity. However, none of us alone has the means to affect the change needed.

No one here on this site wants to see depleted fish stocks from any species. I too want to be able to fish til' I die, and I'd like my kids and their kids to be able to do the same.

The million dollar question is where is the leadership on the issue?

Guys like the Gord Pyzers of the world are knowledgeable and well intentioned but that will only go so far. From my perspective the government is the only reasonable authority that could resolve the issue. The trouble is, they've not only dropped the ball, they're playing both sides of the fence. Advocating restraint through the regs while at the same time collecting fees for personal and commercial licences, collecting tax dollars from the burgeoning tourism/recreational industries, etc. This duplicity is self-serving at best and at it's worst is deplorably unethical.

Positive leadership will have to reconcile all the interests to see a positive outcome on this issue. I can see this issue will likely be similar to the old let's put a traffic light at this intersection because someone got killed in an accident scenario. It's the only way government seems to work.

An interim solution would be to change our perception with respect to some of the other species available such as Carp, Sheepies, Catfish etc.
It could take some of the pressure off vulnerable species such as Quinte Walleye.

Legend

[Cancatchbass]

Mr. Pyzer's article made for an interesting read. Although written 5-6 years ago, it is as relevant today (more so?) than it was in '99.

We are fortunate, in Ontario, to have some world-class scientists that are dedicating (or have dedicated) their lives to preserving and enhancing our fisheries. They deserve our attention and our respect. If their recommendations fall on the deaf ears of our politicians, it is not their fault- it is ours. As a whole, anglers are lazy when it comes to getting off our, uh, you know whats, and letting our politicians know how we feel on issues that directly affect us.

The Quinte slot-limit fiasco is a prime example. Although the system was working, a few nudges by some relatively minor businesses in the area were all it took for local politicians to have the biologists' work thrown out the window and the regs were changed.

Were there anglers screaming to have the limits maintained? Maybe, but I didn't hear about it.

I better get back to work before this turns into a book .

CCB - fire at will...

[Canadian Bacon]

It's unbelieveable.
You don't know what anyones background is! You don't know what level of knowledge any one individual has on a specific subject! So if you want to disregard an opinion from another. Go ahead. I prefer to hear the opinion. I may not agree with it but that is my right. It does not mean thier opinion is not valid. If you have one...IT IS!

[Markus]

Hey Tom, I'm sure I'm not alone here when I thank you for taking the time to write a lengthy response to a thought we are all thinking. I'm sure 99.9% of us agree with you.

As for you porr dear friend Micheal....it is a shame we lost a guy that has such a volume of knowledge to share. But no matter how good, important, valuable or educational a message is, it can quickly be lost if the delivery of that message is poor.

[M.T. Livewell]

All opinions expressed are those of my wife.

MT

[Cancatchbass]

Bacon:

Webster's definition of VALID:

Sufficiently supported by actual fact; well grounded; sound; just; good; not weak or defective; having sufficient legal strength and so on...

Obviously, then, an opinion cannot be valid unless it meets the above criteria. Unless you're of the opinion Webster's definitions are just somebody's opinion?

Markus- Michael is barely an acquaintance, let alone a friend- although I wish I could tap into his knowledge and resources more than I have been able to. If his delivery was poor, I would guess that frustration may have contributed to it. I believe he was attacked on one of his first posts- accused of being a student with some sort of agenda? These guys (our biologists) are passionate about their chosen field, and like Gord, most are passionate about fishing as well as about producing studies and trying to protect our resources.

CCB

[Canadian Bacon]

CCB:

Opinion:

a view, judgment, or appraisal formed in the mind about a particular matter
belief stronger than impression and less strong than positive knowledge.


Valid:

well-grounded or justifiable : being at once relevant and meaningful, appropriate to the end in view

These both came directly from Websters on-line.

Like I said, you do not know the background of anyone giving an opinion so what ,makes thiers less valid?

And just to be clear here. I never once argued against G.P. and his views!!