World of Caution

Dear Editor,

With all due respect to Allan Kielczewski and his opinions. First off, I am not really sure how to address his comments about the native fisherman. So I’ll start with what I agree with.
Yes, I do think there should be a closed season for the walleyes. Spawning time would be perfect. I also think that every in flow and out flow to a water body should automatically be deemed a fish santuary.
This should be a provincial law/regulation.
In order to accommodate the MNR enforcement, this should be applied to every body of water in the area. No fishing should be permitted from March 15th to May 15th within 1000 meters of an area than can be construed as an inlet or outlet, or any type of open moving water. This would include narrows and rapids.
It seems that to have any MNR regulatory willingness, the rules and regulations apparently have to be able to be applied with a brush, due to their efforts to streamlineand condense the license regulations. 
Now this might not be a perfect regulation, but for the most part, and in most areas, this will work. 
And like Pete Kysaik once told me, actually lots of times, “Try it!” And believe me it was not phrased so casually.
As for the disagreement part–how many spawning beds are silted up and destroyed by the logging practices around this area? How many local fisherman take the last cast to heart in this area? What about all the inlets and outlets that are dammed up by the beavers?
I think that to totally point the finger at the local Indians is a bit of a cop out. There are a lot more issues at work. 
Look at the Rainy River in the spring. First you have the Minnesota opener, which is apparrently gunnel to gunnel boats. Then you have the natives doing their fishing thing for the local spring feast (sorry guys, I forget the name).
Then you have the Emo Walleye Classic. Did you know Allan/Jack that the DNR in Iowa, four years ago allowed a catch and release walleye event in Iowa. They disagreed with the practice, but caved under public pressure.
What the Iowa DNR did do was monitor the fish that were caught. Their biologists manned the fish tanks, fed, oxygenated, changed the water, basically, babysat the fish. (For what it is worth, I did spend two days talking to biologists from here to B.C. through to Quebec, and Iowa, Minnesota, Illinois about fish management for the Clearwater-Pipestone Chain of lakes survey meetings, and do I have documentation.) 
 Know what? Every fish died within four days!!! The end result was that there will be no walleye tournaments in Iowa.
Actually most, if not all provinces (except Ontario) will not allow walleye fishing tournaments, and if they do there are lots of restrictions (by permit only, absolutely no live bait, etc.) And for a fact, none are allowed anywhere there is a remote possibility of upsetting the fish population.   
Perhaps the local MNR here should quit hiding behind the skirts of public opinion and user groups, and start to do what is best for the management of the resourses of the area. What a novel idea. Management. 
Do I think that every one should have restrictions? Of course. The fish and the trees are a finite resource around here. One group can not possible run rampant having it all to themselves.  
In fact, the local natives of Manitoba are launching a court case against the Métis rights to fish and hunt in Manitoba because quite rightly the Metis are not first or second people of Canada, they are third. (There had to have been a white guy hiding in the wood pile some where.)
So technically speaking, they have only been here a couple of hundred years, hardly enough to be deemed a First Nation with prevledges. And who gave them the right to hunt and fish at will? Your goverment of course. 
Maybe it is time to write a letter to your MMP, actually to a Toronto newspaper would be better. You guys know that a single letter is deemed to carry the opinion of 50 voters by your polititions?
Look at the outfitters in the area, for a lousy $25, they are issued a Resource Based Tourism Licence. With this licence they are able to fish and hunt to their heart’s content, earning revenue without paying stumpage.
Why not pay stumpage?A logger has to pay stumpage for his harvest, why not the outfitters? If nothing else, this will separate the wheat from the chaff when it comes to the outfitters who are here to ensure that there is a renewable resource when it comes to fishing and those who are strictly here to line their pockets. Base the Stumpage on the amount of possible fish harvested.
Better yet, let’s allocate the number of fishing licences availalble. Let’s generate an artificial shortfall. Base the amount of licences on the number of beds times the percentage of industry occupancy, and that’s it boys, all you get. Charge accordingly. 
 I think what should really happen around here is that all the people who make a living off the resources in this area, should take a good hard look at what is make them a living round here. 
Darrel George Kroeker
Nanaimo, B.C 
On a road trip to visit my children