LongLine

I don't know about the belly rubbing part, but Hank definitely knows what he's doing with engines. Ray how do you miss Port Bay? There's one road on the east and one road on the west.... Tom B. (LongLine)

Stay safe stan. That cascading water down the slope is a little scary...mudslides. Tom B. (LongLine)

Happy B-day J. Tom B. (LongLine)

NYS has put in 50K every year for quite a while. 1/2 have been going off Hamlin, The rest off the SR. Tom B. (LongLine)

Lake Winni is a completely different ecosystem than Big-O. Ray – You hit it right. Lake Winni is puddle (size wise) compared to Big-O. Its entire volume would flow out the St Lawrence in 3 1/2 days. Lake Winni has a max depth of 180 Ft, average depth of 43 ft & over 244 islands. Big-O has an avg depth of 283 ft & max 802 ft and would take 6 years to empty out the St Lawrence. Seneca actually has more than 7 times the water than Lake Winni, a max depth of 630 ft and is considered only the second largest of the Finger Lakes. I guess this can be likened to fishing the tribs where there is virtually no water column and you can work your bait directly by line of sight to the fish, especially in crystal clear water. Interesting that NH doesn't know how many fishermen/charters are out there. Smelt were purposely introduced into Seneca 1909-1912. We all know that “journalists†never misquote their sources & never put their own slant on their writings. Anyways, I found it interesting that this journalist points out that 30% of the fish turned in had been “wounded.†He doesn’t say if previously wounded or not. If previously wounded, then it indicates to me that previously hooked & released fish do survive, are surviving and can be caught again in contrast to what some people claim that they don’t survive. If not previously wounded, then the slant he puts on his story is total BS because it means 30% of the fish were wounded during "catching" and kept (for weigh in). Tom B. (LongLine)

Again - Thanx guys. Tom B. (LongLine) shortstring huh....

Auh shucks... Thanx guys. My Dad once said "a man is judged by the company he keeps" - You guys on LOU are the best. Tom B. (LongLine)

No problem Glenn. For NY to declare Big-O a Marine District would mean that the Legislature would be giving us a 66% reduction in fees. We all know that fees, just like taxes, never go down in NY. The state wastes money, they don't lose it. They spend the money...it's just that sometimes they don't know what they spent it on or whether they got any value out of it. Also, the state can't use the the Federal Marine District law as an excuse to raise our fishing fees on Big-O because they already have a list of everyone that is on the lake, either by NYS fishing licenses or boat registrations. The Feds wanted a list of people who "hang out" on the coastal waters. The state used the Fed law to have the fishermen pay NYS thereby creating that list, rather than have the fishermen pay the Feds directly. Actually it was kind of a smart move as it gives the state more money. Hopefully not to waste - but who knows? - it's NY Tom B. (LongLine)

Just be very careful if you try to polish it. Real silver scratches awful easy. Tom B. (LongLine)

Did a little research on the Marine district licenses. Looks like we freshwater guys would save quite a chunk of money if they did declare Lake Ontario part of the marine district. Resident licenses are only $10, not the $29 a lot of us just paid. here's the link: http://www.dec.ny.gov/permits/54950.html Also if you go more than 3 miles out, no license is required! What's that...200 FOW? Rest assured, there's NO WAY in HE[[ the state is going to declare Big-O a Marine district & lose funds. The Feds only care about the saltwater coast & were about to charge a federal fee in 2011 for being out there in the salt water, so good old NY decided to cut the feds off by getting an exemption thereby getting more money themselves. Tom B. (LongLine)

Not just "most guys", but the great majority. We'll also report violators. Tom B. (LongLine)

Musky - I'd like to know that too. I know for a fact that these NYSDEC people received letters from me along with a complete package of the petition for 3-rods: Judy Drabicki – Regional Director Reg 6 Keith Lynch – Regional Director Reg 7 Paul D'Amato – Regional Director Reg 8 Abby Snyder – Regional Director Reg 9 Shaun Keeler - Regulatory Agenda Contact for Sportfishing Regulations Pete Grannis - Commissioner NYSDEC Christopher Amato - Assistant Commissioner for Natural Resources Patricia Riexinger - Director Fish, Wildlife and Marine Resources Steve LaPan – Head of the Lake Ontario Unit Tom B. (LongLine)

Larry, I don’t think many would argue against your stance for fishery money to go into the fishery. I believe every penny of fishery money should go back into the fishery. The problem I see is that if the number of fishermen declines even more, as is the general trend for quite a while then we’ll be lucky if it only goes up that $10 you refer to. Additionally, if the fees (and fines) go too high, I guess the “open water guys†will just have to start fishing only the tribs. (above the MRL). May be a lot of guys have already gone there?. Someone claimed in previous posts that: You want more crowds up there, right? BTW - How many rods are allowed in the RML now????? Tom B. (LongLine)

Here’s the link to the DEC directory: http://www.dec.ny.gov/about/558.html Just about every one of the directors, fisheries & habitat staff, plus a lot of their bosses have received calls/letters about the 3-rod rule which is why Larry got the reply he got. The reply Larry received isn’t a surprise: 1. Because the number of LINES fishermen can use is part of the Environmental Law that can only be changed by the Legislature. The DEC can recommend a change but can’t grant the change. Only the state legislature can. (NOTE: The NYSDEC is NOT against it) You need to write/call your assemblyman and state senators. 2. It costs the state money to maintain the quality level of fishing that we have. With less and less fishermen every year, the remainder WILL have to pay more to maintain it. Tom B. (LongLine)

I'll get the list on tonight. In the meantime - maybe the DEC is understaffed because the number of fishermen has been going down????? Maybe the politicians see a connection - IE if there's less interest and/or participation why spend as much money there? Tom B. (LongLine)

THE NYSDEC conducts an angler survey on Lake Ontario every year and publishes their results in their annual report: http://www.dec.ny.gov/outdoor/27068.html In section 2, particularly table A2, (pg 31) they reveal the actual numbers used to assess angling effort and use. For “All fishing boatsâ€, the fishing boat trips, boat angler trips and boat angler hours for 2008 are the 2nd lowest in the last 10 years. (only 2006 was slightly lower) The numbers are somewhere near 40% of the 1985-98 average. (also shown) Further down, trips for residents & non-residents does the same thing – down (to the 40% level) In section D which is for boats seeking salmon/trout – again the same thing – near 40%. Also in sect D, the average number of anglers per trip is 2.99. (This later number is very close to the numbers given for all years and tells me in 2008 that for every charter with 6 people on board there had to be 3 boats with only two on board; and/or even more boats with less than 2 on board. IE there’s been a lot of “little guys†trying to catch fish.) In Table A6 on pg 37, which is specifically for boats seeking salmon & trout, 55.6% of all boats seeking T&S had zero harvest and 41% of all boats seeking had zero catch of any T&S in 2008. Further down the table for 2008, it shows that only 1.8% of the charters seeking T&S caught there bag limit for their entire party. It also shows that of the non-charters only 1% caught their bag limit. (These are the lowest numbers in 5 years.) BTW, I don’t know about lowering nets for short people, but I do know that not nearly as many people would be interested in that sport today if they hadn’t played in grammar school gym class when they were shorter and the nets lower. 2nd BTW - Salmon didn't take to the Cat - but Trout have. IMO, if the 3-rod rule helps to lower the 41% & raise the 1% then it's worth it. Tom B. (LongLine)

Thanx guys. I received a reply from Mr. Morris: I encourage everyone to hit the preview button a couple times before we submit posts or send emails as I believe we all need to let our fingers do the walking, not necessarily the talking. (except for Ray K. of course - - Musky - put that chainsaw away ) Tom B. (LongLine)

Things to do before the Games today 1. Go downstairs & put your battery on the charger for a few hours. 2. Find your boats powder fire extinguisher & hit the bottom of it a couple/3 times with a rubber mallet. 3. Run to Wally-world and purchase a mouth/blow whistle for the boat. You never know when your electric horn in the boat won’t work or when John-Law is on the prowl. Go Packers! Tom B. (LongLine)

This thread started out well, however I have been hesitant to enter it due to not wanting to argue with the aggressively belligerent, data-lacking BS from some members expressing minority opinion just because they want to argue. I have therefore written directly to this senator’s aide with the following: Mr. Morris Since the first salmon was introduced, Lake Ontario has been turned into a world class fishery thanks to the efforts of the NYSDEC and many supporting organizations. I am a big proponent for the 3-rod rule because: 1. All sportsfishermen were challenged by the NYSDEC commissioner to “help rekindle an interest in the great NY outdoors.†At least that’s what’s printed in the regulation guidebook that we got last year when we purchased last year’s license. 2. The NYSDEC has conducted a creel survey every year on BIG-O for a long time. They have the data that shows the number of annual fishing trips made to Big-O has gone down dramatically. The 2008 Lake Ontario Annual report shows the average angler caught one salmon every eleven (11) hours. Therefore for every angler that caught his legal limit of three during his outing, there were many many many others that didn’t catch anything. The biggest turn-off for a kid or a guest is to take them fishing and then they don’t catch anything. In addition, the main reason that some fishermen don’t like revealing their location is simply because they don’t want others to flock to the area where or how they themselves are catching fish. Look how many fishermen pursue the west end of Big-O when the word is out that there is where the salmon are. There are many people, and I have met quite a few, that have become very frustrated by not catching a fish and vow to take up other forms of recreation rather than make a return trip to our fishery, both residents and “out-of statersâ€. Return visits to the fishery are a boon to the local economies, which are in dire need of help. Return trips means more money spent locally for fuel, food, lodging, launches, parking, rentals, and for the “hot lures†and “local knowledge†of the area. (plus taxes on same) The 3-rod rule will not guarantee that people catch more fish; rather it will give them the potential to locate the fish a little easier and hopefully put the right lure closer to the fish. The small crewed boats (i.e. the 1, 2 or even 3 person crews) can benefit from it. The “weekend warriorâ€, the recreationalist, the vacationer, the retired couple who have saved up for a boat and now have the time & health to use it. It does not mean they must use 3 rods, it will mean they can use 3 rods per person, if they so chose, legally. The great majority of charter boats probably won’t use 3 rods per angler as they already run many more rods than the “little guy.†Trout & salmon are often scattered throughout the water column for most of the year. Often on charter boats, one or two rods are shared by all persons onboard as they are the rods dialed into the proper location of the fish. In all my years of fishing Lake Ontario (50+) I have never heard of any boat truthfully having 10 fish on at once. 3. The current NYS law, that is older than any fisherman on the LOU forum, does not limit the number of rods a sportsfisherman can use; rather it limits the number of lines that an angler can use as well as the configuration of points and baits per line. The vast majority of Sportsfishermen today use rods and reels when they go fishing. A few years back, Michigan adopted a 3-rod rule and witnessed enough success that they have recently expanded it to include all of that state’s waters. 4. The 3-rod rule will not exploit the fishery. Creel limits would still be in effect. What 3-rods may do is help a fisherman catch a fish in possibly less time, which will generate even more excitement about the fishing trip. Hence, even more eagerness to return to the fishery and even tell tales to tell his friends who may become motivated to try their luck at it. (Again – more return trips plus increased license sales.) The DEC Annual Reports indicate that the number of fishermen achieving their creel limit per trip is miniscule. 5. I have talked to members of the Lake Ontario Unit of the DEC and they do not appear to have any problem with this becoming a law. 6. A poll was taken on the www.lakeontariounited.com fishing website and the vote was 187 in favor to 31 against. As the discussion went on, many of the 31 privately emailed me to change their vote (which unfortunately, can’t be done.) I am a “weekend warrior†type solo recreational fisherman. I make no money from the fishery. I probably catch as many salmon as anyone out on the Big-O so will it help me? Perhaps it might. I know it would have helped that frustrated retired couple from Michigan that I met while retrieving my boat at the Genny and the 2 guys from Arkansas, neither of which group caught any fish and vowed never to come back. If they had come back, it would have helped the guy that owns Mitch’s Bait & Tackle in Charlotte, the Turkish-American couple that owns the 7-11 on Lake Ave as well as Monroe County that operates the launch on the Genesee River. I am therefore all in favor of a 3-rod rule and urge you to convince the Senator to push the senate to adopt it. Thank you. Tom B. (LongLine)

Another vote for the surgeon's loop. (small loop) Tom B. (LongLine)

High 40's & wearing sweatshirt & jacket? I'd be wearing a swiming suit. & Ray'd probably be doing the buffy thing. BTW nice fish. Tom B. (LongLine)

Welcome aboard Wingman. I had a '66 PY once. Very solid boat. Tom B. (LongLine)

Taking eggs from smaller fish yields smaller fish sounds almost plausible except that the salmon the DEC stocks have been taken from the same gene pool for many many years. IE Those that return to our rivers. The original eggs were indeed imported from other places but since then, have been the same stocks. They have however introduced Browns, Lakers, etc from different area/gene pools over the years. That gobies stay near the bottom shouldn’t surprise anyone. They have an air bladder problem. IE they don’t have one. Zebra & Quagga mussels directly affect the lower food web thus have an indirect affect on the gamefish. Zebras are very near shore. You probably won’t find them deeper than 20 ft or so. Quaggas will go from there out to over 400 FOW. As filter eaters, both take in everything they can suck in, including phytoplankton & zooplankton. (Up to a gallon per day per mussel) That which they don’t like gets ejected covered with mucus. (psuedofeces, not just the normal feces.) The phyto & zooplankton die one way or the other. YOY alewives that develop in the nearshore areas depend upon the zooplankton for survival and that’s how it hurts. No alewives, no salmon. There are a couple of plankton that no longer exist out there. Clearer water does not mean cleaner water. Most of the toxic chemicals dissolved in water are clear. Lake Ontario is a very dynamic place. The damage one invasive can do, can be debated, however we have over 180+ invasives so far. That, to me, is devastating. What is the next invasive or disease going to be? It has never bothered me that the dinosaurs or saber-tooth tiger populations went to zero. However, it would bother me if the Trout & Salmon populations went to zero and I don’t want to take that risk. The DEC & just about every organization associated with the Great Lakes restoration place a high value on natural reproduction. Flow is now regulated on the Sal River, some dams have been removed on the Canadian side, etc. Nat Repro is being monitored and that is a main reason for the DEC’s fin clipping trailer. (Any shaker caught on Big-O this year with an adipose fin was a natural.) Two last thoughts: what if a whole bunch of fish swam up the ladder with some kind of disease? Fishstix posted a link the Bonneville fish ladder camera a few years ago and it was amazing how many lamprey swam up it. Tom B. (LongLine) p.s. Fill in that Chi San. ditch…quick!