Please find Ofah Zone C…

Please find Ofah Zone C comment on Bait Review

Bait fish review

The concept of protecting our northern waters from invasive species, micro organisms and disease is good, we agree with the bait harvest zones and the proposed transfer of bait fish within those zones. We cannot agree with the southern boundary of BHZ A in the North East. The southern boundary should be moved further south so that it does not split municipalities and disturb the operations of tourist operators. Many operators have boat caches north and south of highway 560. The only bait shop is south of the highway in another BHZ. By moving the boundary to the 47.30 Parallel you will still split the water shed with most waters flowing north through the Montreal River watershed. An alternative to movement of the boundary to the 47.30 would be to have a buffer zone between BHZ and to include Lake Temiskaming in BHZ A. Movement of the boundary will allow the harvest of emerald shiners from Lake Temiskaming to be utilized in BHZ A and the movement south from there. Lake Temiskaming is a safe source of this valuable bait. We agree with the protection of natural brook trout lakes, however, the brook trout fishery in the north east is primarily a winter fishery, many of our brook trout lakes allow the use of dead bait fishes and this has worked fine for years (example Esker lakes provincial park and other provincial parks in the area) with the new zones and the proposed rules of transporting fish between those zones, dead bait fishes should be allowed in natural brook trout lakes. We understand that creeks, put grow and take lakes (stocked lakes) and lakes with naturalized populations are not included. Lakes that were once stocked over natural brook trout populations should be treated the same as naturalized populations. Examples of this are abundant in the north east. We want to be able to trap our own bait. We feel it is unnecessary to take a course to do this and there should not be a fee associated with trapping our own bait. Just as it is socially unacceptable to charge seniors for a fishing licence. It is unacceptable to charge someone who wants to trap their own bait. The current bait species is accepted and we see no need to change this. Certainly many people use stickleback minnows and harvesters sell them. It is unacceptable to dispose of bait after two weeks. This is a terrible waste and is unacceptable to us. Frankly the receipt should be thrown out after two weeks and in reality, once that bait leaves the dealers hands he is no longer responsible for what is in the fisherman’s bait bucket. The receipt concept should be discarded. We object to the use of bait in Parks being included in this bait review. Many of our waterway parks and other parks went through a lengthy planning process that included many stakeholders. We feel that Parks has jumped on this bait review to circumvent parks planning. There are many examples in the north east that currently allow live bait in Parks. The Lady Evelyn Wilderness Park has a snowmobile corridor with access to lakes that allow live bait. This Park plan took over 20 years to finalize and included many stakeholders. It is a winter fishery. Live bait is required in the winter. Cancellation of this fishing opportunity and others will place undue angling pressure on adjacent lakes. Many waterway parks exist in the north east. Their boundaries in most cases are unclear and not defined anywhere. It makes no sense to ban baitfish in the park when you can use live bait upstream and downstream of the park or in the case of Lady Evelyn Lake you can use live bait in one side of the lake and not in the other. Again, waterway park plans were bargained in good faith and now you propose to change the use displacing anglers and putting pressure on other lakes. Many of our water way parks have summer homes, tourist operators and municipalities on the rivers. It is unfair to restrict angling opportunities in this manner. Natural environment parks are scattered throughout the north east. The boundaries, in most cases are not defined. In the case of the islands of Lake Abitibi they are defined. Anglers utilize these islands. In the morning they boat to an island and in the evening they return home. It is a shallow and very dangerous lake, this is why people fish in this manner, and it is safe. In the case of Lake Abitibi this must be allowed to continue. It is estimated that on any given weekend there are over 1000 anglers on this lake and at times more. The lake is over 1000 square miles in size. We understand that Bait in this proposal is “live or dead baitfish including leaches” and bait fish are the 33 species presented. We understand that frozen bait, smelts, silver sides and sardines are not included in this proposal. We see no reason why leaches should be included. Most of the leaches come from the northeast and move south. Leaches caught in the northeast should be safe to use here. If the MNRF see this as an enforcement issue, then more enforcement is required.

[Original Comment ID: 209911]