The BOQ outline also looks like it may open up 2 rod fishing deeper into the bay....
Sorry, just looked at the existing regs... same boundries as the proposed, with an exception listed for BOQ... so I guess they could still have the exception... they could also impose the same type of exception for St. Clair...
Just because the map is easier, does not mean the exceptions are any easier to read... may now be harder.
New regs coming...opinions?
Wouldn't that be the typical Government way of doing things!Steve G wrote:Just because the map is easier, does not mean the exceptions are any easier to read... may now be harder.
Last edited by Jimmy on Fri Nov 18, 2005 2:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: reg changes
The one rod thing is annoying... Reel Wunderful (Dennis) avoids St. Clair because of it.g unis wrote:boy if we are included with the western basin as zone 19 i would love to see the 2 rod proposal go thru. its in ontario and lake erie, why not st clair
Hey... Kinda looks like the Detroit river will fall into the 19 catagory instead of the 16.. Looks like its a double line on each side...
Sounds like it could be good!
-
Wall-I-Guy
- Diamond Participant
- Posts: 4930
- Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2003 2:06 am
- Location: Kanata,Ontario
regs
the 2 rod issue in zone 19 proposal is far from a done deal. the regs are still in the works. the majority of sportsmen and woman have lobbied for years. funny how commercial netters can lay 10 kilometers of nets but we are limited. there is no commmercial fishery on l.s.c. but our nortern neighbors in michigan have 2 rods for decades and they comprise over 80% of fishernen. another note in the western basin you can use 2 rods angling offshore, BUTif you are a shoreangler you can only use 1 rod. daaa wheres the justice and i truly hope they spend the monies wisely and take a good hard look at regs, limits and possesion limits. heres another one. if you are an american angler in st clair using live bait fishing in can waters you must have a receipt for your bait. it has to be purchased in canada. the clincher is. most bait sold in this area comes from ontario wholesalers. coming by boat that really makes sense daa.
CHANGEmakes sense
CHANGEmakes sense
This thread is entirely relevant to what Gord Pyzer talks about in his article "The Future of Fishing in Canada - Two Paths Converge in the Forest". Almost everyone touched on it no matter what they wrote in this thread.
Bobber and I did enough talking about the delicate balancing act that is required to ensure we are all fishing in 15 years that we now have it all boiled down to a mathematical formula. I am thinking I may try to graphically represent Gord Pyzer's article.
I laugh about it - but it is so true that I think I will get at the Powerpoint as soon as the kids hit the hay.
Bobber and I did enough talking about the delicate balancing act that is required to ensure we are all fishing in 15 years that we now have it all boiled down to a mathematical formula. I am thinking I may try to graphically represent Gord Pyzer's article.
I laugh about it - but it is so true that I think I will get at the Powerpoint as soon as the kids hit the hay.Fishhawk
"gotta run like a madman bye thanks see ya good luck"
"gotta run like a madman bye thanks see ya good luck"
The Dunnville Hunters and anglers Club I dententified the lower Grand as a Problematic area at the meeting. Steve I'm hoping the MNR and the CO's present will pick up on that.fishmaster wrote:Let them change the Regs. all they want it won't make a difference if they don't hire more C.O.'s. I release 99% of the fish I catch only to watch a boat fishing in the same area keep a limit go to shore and come back out and catch another limit. Call the MNR and they say they will look into it, yeah right!
. This is just the government trying to make us think they are doing something pro-active when all they are doing is making more paperwork so they can justify a job
Attended the Meeting
The Southern Region Walleye Review has had it's stakeholders meetings and discussed new catch limits, new sizes, new seasons and new zones. The reason is the walleye population is on the downturn. With our Southern waters being the highest in preferable conditions for walleye, we have the lowest count and the numbers are dropping.
In an attempt to stop the downturn the MNR is making changes but wants to hear your oppinion. The best way to voice your oppinion is to attend meetings at the Game and fish clubs and voice your oppinion when we are asked. Join your local Conservation club or game and fish and have your say!
The MNR stresses that even a 2 fish limit hasn't shown much success in the past to stop a drop in numbers like we are experiencing and they'd like to see a 1 walleye daily limit. For now however we are looking at a 4 fish limit. That being down from the current 6.
They say a female ripens enough to reproduce at around 40-45 cm and that males don't normally grow much bigger than that. So by picking the Max or min options, you may be primarily harvesting one sex. They are also dabling with a one over the slot for the slot options so include that in your reply. Remember that these are proposals and they are asking you for your input.
It is thought that in option 1,19.7"/50cm minimum the females will have already spawned once or twice before being harvested however mostly egg laying females will be taken.
Option 2 15.7"/40cm maximum
they say will protect egg laying females however more males or imature females will be taken
Option 3 slot size of 13.7-21.6" release 35-55cm will see a good cross of both sexes taken while protecting females coming into spawn however smaller fish or larger females will feel the brunt of harvest.
Option 4 slot size of 15.7-25.6" release 40-65cm will see males and young fish taken but protect most spawning females.
So which option do you suggest apply and reply to whether you think one over the slot should allowed. Remember this a 4(sport) or 2(conservation) fish daily limit. Feel free to add what you think about the size and limits, closed seasons (March 15th till the second Sat in May) and zones. Remember this has nothing to do with the great lakes and is inland only and they are considering resident fish not the lake run spawners although there is always a catch22 applied.
At the meeting I expressed my concern that when the Lake was closed to protect the spawners, the spawners were headed into Div 3 where there was an all year round open season. Seems Kinda backward to me. Also the Ministry hinted at a province wide 2 fish limit and stated that only after a 1 fish limit was imposed did any significant recoververy occer. I pointed out that there is no way I'm driving to Quinty from Fort Erie for 2 friggin Walleye. I'm a conservationist first but hell I know a tourist angle applies to keep the indusrty alfloat.
In an attempt to stop the downturn the MNR is making changes but wants to hear your oppinion. The best way to voice your oppinion is to attend meetings at the Game and fish clubs and voice your oppinion when we are asked. Join your local Conservation club or game and fish and have your say!
The MNR stresses that even a 2 fish limit hasn't shown much success in the past to stop a drop in numbers like we are experiencing and they'd like to see a 1 walleye daily limit. For now however we are looking at a 4 fish limit. That being down from the current 6.
They say a female ripens enough to reproduce at around 40-45 cm and that males don't normally grow much bigger than that. So by picking the Max or min options, you may be primarily harvesting one sex. They are also dabling with a one over the slot for the slot options so include that in your reply. Remember that these are proposals and they are asking you for your input.
It is thought that in option 1,19.7"/50cm minimum the females will have already spawned once or twice before being harvested however mostly egg laying females will be taken.
Option 2 15.7"/40cm maximum
they say will protect egg laying females however more males or imature females will be taken
Option 3 slot size of 13.7-21.6" release 35-55cm will see a good cross of both sexes taken while protecting females coming into spawn however smaller fish or larger females will feel the brunt of harvest.
Option 4 slot size of 15.7-25.6" release 40-65cm will see males and young fish taken but protect most spawning females.
So which option do you suggest apply and reply to whether you think one over the slot should allowed. Remember this a 4(sport) or 2(conservation) fish daily limit. Feel free to add what you think about the size and limits, closed seasons (March 15th till the second Sat in May) and zones. Remember this has nothing to do with the great lakes and is inland only and they are considering resident fish not the lake run spawners although there is always a catch22 applied.
At the meeting I expressed my concern that when the Lake was closed to protect the spawners, the spawners were headed into Div 3 where there was an all year round open season. Seems Kinda backward to me. Also the Ministry hinted at a province wide 2 fish limit and stated that only after a 1 fish limit was imposed did any significant recoververy occer. I pointed out that there is no way I'm driving to Quinty from Fort Erie for 2 friggin Walleye. I'm a conservationist first but hell I know a tourist angle applies to keep the indusrty alfloat.
regs
the southern region i live in has been in turmoil. the season for sport fishing walleyes is closed in early spring only to have the commercial gillnetters take the fish. if its to be closed keep it closed for all. tugs this past summer were allowed 45 totes a day on just walleye. many of these small fished have not even spawned yet.i would reserve my judgements to i see what actions are taking but after attending the outreach meetings from the mnr locally you guys better yell pretty loud. most thoughts fall on deaf ears. stand up and be counted or you will be steam rolled by political b. s. from our gov. who are the lawmakers, not the m.n.r.