Fisheries Management plan Nipissing

I just wanted to share some data that was not released in the papers. Read it well and form your own opinions. I found a lot of information that has been sheilded from the public. I was going to write an article to the paper based of fact's but decided not.

this is from 2007-2010 but is the IFM base.


it's a pdf file just copy and pastt the link.


http://www.ontla.on.ca/library/repository/...5000/268328.pdf

Thanks Michelle.

I went through all of this and in essence there is no fishery mangement plan in effect for Nipissing.

Only 3 basic things have been done since 1997.

1 impose slot sizes

2 reduce limits from 4-2

Endless meetings/consultation with NFN resulting in a commercial harvest from 30 k to now 50 K

sadly MNR has zero juristiction on the latter unless agreements are put into place and the Feds are not about to interfere.

This is all about Politics as I stated much earlier

"there is a storm coming"

I doubt there is a storm coming, the commercial fishing right was given to the natives by the Supreme Court. No political power will take on much less over turn a Supreme court ruling , the fight is essentially over. The sportfishing will be a memory long before the commercial fishery stops.The good thing is that both sides are finally putting years of petty arguments aside and are beginning to work together. Shank you failed to mention a moritorium on harvest during the spawn, the hiring of biologists by the natives to fully understand the populations and set quotas and also set up policing by the band to ensure practices and policy are followed.

dude, I hope you are wrong. I was just on Nippissing last week from Thursday afternoon until Sunday afternoon with 9 other sportfishing buddies. In total we caught 12 walleye in the time we were up there that we were allowed to keep vs netting 50K annually. To say sportfishing will be a memory before the commercial fishery stops makes me beleive that in the not so far future it will be the natives/commercial fishermen who will be catching 12 walleye every 4 days as they will have destroyed the population to this by then.

Gill net fishing in inland lakes needs to be stopped period or we will all pay the price, not just the sportfishermen.

My opinion.
FatRap

You failed to see what I meant by "the storm is coming' By that I meant the entire Idle no more movement

I am also quite aware of treaty rights and SC rulings . also of the bands bio and his projections plus more. From the Sparrow case in BC and on

So, I am not against Aboriginal rights at all, but with other stakeholder needs addressed a the same time

I am against A fishery management plan that has no teeth, has a singular approach to implement bandage solutions that will not work.

Are you saying it's better to give up millions of revenue dollars from Tourism and settle for 500,000 instead?

LS

Well spoken, appreciated

I just feel that the commercial harvest should have to take a hit on how much they take from the lake too. It's not right to change just the sportfishing. I don't feel that would make that much of an impact.

The only things I do in the winter is fish and watch hockey.. I almost lost my mind with the hockey lockout. I don't know what I would do to loose fishing on that lake.

I read much of doc and it clearly states the primary concern to the walleye fishery is native commercial fishing. closing gill netting during spawning season is a great start but who is policing the policy, the people who stand to lose the most if followed. I am sure the "big Picture" of the future sustainability is not being considered by the young individuals who are cashing in while the getting is good. I completely disagree with the natives policing the policy themselves which in my opinion is fruitless. I do not care if it infringes on some rights or agreements made I the past, when it come down to losing a sustainable natural resource policing should be done by a bipartisan agency that can dictate to all. It is clear there is concern for the walleye fishery yet the native quotas have increased so where is the logic. I will also state that the harvest numbers received were only the reported harvests, I am sure the actual harvest is much higher. I also watched the videos showing the native monitoring station which was set-up in someone's garage?. I would say the extra effort and resources noted that are being applied to monitor the sport fishing infractions would be better used to gain better (more accurate) data on the commercial harvesting. Must be careful not to step on anyone's moccasins while doing so or another blockade will appear somewhere. Sorry had to vent, I agree many of the agreements we have made with the native people but I do not agree with us putting money in one hand while "Native Rights" are used as a shield to grab as much cash as possible with the other. If the government cannot properly monitor and control the native fishery or the "supply" they sure as hell can control much of the "demand". Make it illegal for others to purchase or have in their possession e.g. The local establishments who create a large demand. Exporting walleye from Nip should be illegal, resources and funds should be applied to strengthening the policy around commercial fishing which should include detailed manifests of catch locations and dates. I could go on and on but there will always be some scared politician who will never make the hard calls as they may lose a few ballots.

Of course I'm not saying it's better to give up millions of dollars of tourism, but if it comes down to Native commercial fishing or tourism dollars, native fishing wins. The Supreme Court ruling gives the Natives that right, weather you agree or not, weather you think it's fair or not it dose not matter at all. It is the way it is, the ruling has been made by the highest court in the land, no government or political party can over rule it. The only way that the Native Fishery will be stopped is if Lake Nipissing Walleye are put on the endangered species list, the court ruling did go as far as not completely making the fish extinct.

By the way I'm not on the Supreme Court so I didn't make the ruling, but it is something that every stakeholder on Lake Nipissing is going to have to accept and live with.Like I say weather I agree with ruling or not is a mute point, because it will not be changed and any management plan for the fishery has to take this into account.

I will say it again, if you cannot control the source then cut the demand!

good luck with that, do you really think someone going out for a meal of fresh Nipissing walleye cares if Bob only got 2 walleye in his ice hut instead of 4.

good luck with that, do you really think someone going out for a meal of fresh Nipissing walleye cares if Bob only got 2 walleye in his ice hut instead of 4.

Hey Canadadude
I guess you didn't understand my point. The demand driving commercial fishing on Nip. Is both the local establishments and export to the West. If the establishments were banned from purchasing or to be in possession of walleye from Nip and exporting was made illegal, less demand hence less incentive to deplete the population. The government does not have to touch native rights, just take away the incentive which is outside of the native rights issue. I said nothing re: the sport fishing quota other than instead of having the MNR adding staff and costs to bang on hut doors put the resources to better controls and tracking of the commercially caught fish. I do agree the sport fishery still requies at the very least the same level of policing it currently receives.
This is my personal opinion or view, if you do not agree that's fine and that is your right as it is also mine to express my opinion. All I ask is that you understand my opinion before responding.

You just said it.....ergo......It is not a management plan, nor ever will be

The MNR do not have resources to police Nip. I agree, cut the demand for walleye from the natives. Make it illegal to sell out of local establishments or anywhere else for that matter. Let the natives use their nets to feed themselves, period. They've already depleted the slot lines, and when the little ones, which are basically all us white folk are catching, grow to slots, they'll be gone too. Natives won't need such a high quota if there's no one buying their fish.

WOW, do you really think the government can ban the sale of legally caught fish, if they ban Nipissing fish they will have to ban all fish commercially caught. The government can't discriminate between Nipssing and other producers,in fact they would have to ban the possession of all Walleye caught on Nipissing. The biggest hurdle to climb for the Nipissing Walleye population is, and has been the militant, prejudice mud slinging between the stakeholders. The good news is all parties are finally working together towards a common goal, hopefully put the useless mudslinging behind them and work together to manage the populations. This is the only way to get the fisheries management on track, it has worked on many lakes with neighbours to the south.