Pools below Court Street now posted...

[James01 223]

I just chatted with the C.O. as he was putting up the "No Fishing" (within 25 yards) signs at the pools just below Court Street (Court Street Falls). For those talking of pushing for it to happen next year, its done. Even though I have fished those pools I am glad it happened.

He cited the low water, giving the fish a chance to rest, and foul hooking as the reasons.

[fisherdude 69]

Good

[brookiebuster 117]

Good job MNR.They should close the Macintyre aswell....

[fisherdude 69]

Do yu meen the same pools as last year or the whole thing? I agree that some pools should be closed on the Mac but not all.

[Guest FreshwaterFisherman]

So good to hear.

Brodie K.

[Guest cstclair]

Good job guys! Way to speak up!

[brookiebuster 117]

I personally think they should close the whole river.Ive fished from the mouth all the way up John Street.Every piece of water is extreamly low and the fish are stacked up in pools that have somewhat of a depth.That is just my opinion.

[fisherdude 69]

Gotcha. I haven't bin to the Mac in a while but can imagine how it is without much rain lately.

[Guest TerryK]

I just got an email from the CO that made the call informing us (NSSA) of the closure and the reasoning. Low water, poaching and fish being harassed relentlessly are the reasons he stated for the closure. For the record, the MNR did this on their own accord. NSSA had no hand in it. Goes to show you the the MNR aren't such bad folks now are they?

Concerning the McIntyre, the water I now where near as low as it was in 2010 and with the run being over there is no reason to take any action. Lets not all get used to these temporary closures. They are for extreme cases. Technically the falls at Court Street is classified as a fishway (NSSA has done migration improvements there and that makes it a fishway) so the 25 yard no fishing zone could automatically be made permanent it it's deemed necessary. Same as the weir/falls on the Wolf river.

[James01 223]

I just got an email from the CO that made the call informing us (NSSA) of the closure and the reasoning. Low water, poaching and fish being harassed relentlessly are the reasons he stated for the closure. For the record, the MNR did this on their own accord. NSSA had no hand in it. Goes to show you the the MNR aren't such bad folks now are they?

Concerning the McIntyre, the water I now where near as low as it was in 2010 and with the run being over there is no reason to take any action. Lets not all get used to these temporary closures. They are for extreme cases. Technically the falls at Court Street is classified as a fishway (NSSA has done migration improvements there and that makes it a fishway) so the 25 yard no fishing zone could automatically be made permanent it it's deemed necessary. Same as the weir/falls on the Wolf river.

Thanks for confirming what I already reported... as someone who isn't an avid 'steelheader' I have a question: What sense is there in the over 27'' size rule on other rivers? I realize that the number of fish over 27'' is low, but wouldn't all the fish over 27'' be females and, one can assume, be fish full of eggs? And therefore, aren't they the fish 'we' want left alone? Would it not make sense to make the one fish rule a smaller or medium sized male? I bring this up to you because you seem knowledgeable about Steelies, and if I am not mistaken you make a point of mentioning people keeping 15'' (i.e. small) fish in the other thread. I also assume you are a member of the NSSA (because you use the acronym, assuming everyone knows what NSSA means - and you refer to NSSA as 'us'). I am genuinely curious about the rule - consider it a general question for anyone. All I have to compare it to is Walleye angling, and the idea that people should be releasing the big females, and keeping the smaller males.

All I can come up with is a rule to allow people a trophy fish - and that seems incredibly shortsighted, not only in terms of breeding females, but also in terms of the long term health of the population (at least as far as trophy fish go). Again to bring it back to other species, my experience is that fish - like any other living thing - have it in their genetics to grow large (or not). There are always exceptions to the rule, but for the most part big fish have it in them to beget big fish - and small fish will continue to beget small fish. My experience is with Pike and Walleye, and I read studies that confirm what I am claiming... or, just consider genetics (fish have them too). So, what is the sense of keeping a fish over 27'' - not only is the fish likely a female full of eggs, but that fish also has the genetics to have a more probable chance of producing the next generation of trophy fish. Keep the trophies and sooner or later all you will have is a genetic strain of small fish. So, again, I am curious - what is the sense of having a 1 trophy fish rule?

[Guest ayl]

I would like some clarification on the extents of the closure, I know the creek enough... How is the creek affected upwards? And while we're at it... I am confused as to the rules for keeping fish, the species and size? Just want to make sure that I'm nice and legit...

[James01 223]

Ayl

If you wander along the creek you will see the pool posted - fishing is prohibited within 25 yards downstream of the sign. It isn't affected upwards, or anywhere that isn't posted. You are allowed one fish per day (and I assume this means one fish in your possession - so no stocking up of Steelies in your freezer - its the same for Walleye, Pike, etc.). And at present - as far as I know - there is no size restriction on McVicars, although there is on the MacIntyre, and some of the other rivers/streams in our area.

Species? Well, I assume, on McVicars at least, you aren't going to catch anything but Steelhead (i.e Rainbow Trout).

Please anyone correct me if I am wrong.

[Guest Wes]

Yes a 27" female fish will potentially have a ton of eggs. She will also be very old. 8 years or so. And depending on the river she may be on her 5th spawning run. She would have contributed to the gene pool 5 times and thus ensure her contribution to the overall population.

This is very important given the 40% annual mortality after smolting. If I am not mistaken I believe the mortality is much higher before they smolt.

By having a min 27" size restriction all surviving fish will have the opportunity to spawn 4 or 5 times thus dramatically enhancing the overall population. The McIntyre is a great example. from less than 500 fish to almost 3000 since the rule was implemented.

James you are exactly correct about genetics.

Even small fish may be genetically programmed to grow very large, they just aren't old enough yet. So if we kill a medium fish or a large fish we can be taking superior genes from the population either way.

If a larger population is the desired end result then a 27" size restriction is the way to go. If you want big fish, then the numbers will be significantly less. There is no perfect formula accept C&R only. I don't see that happening.

Wes

[James01 223]

Thanks Wes... your explanation was quite simple and to the point.

And you are absolutely correct about there being no perfect formula (even C&R has its detractors), but I do think a catch limit of 1 male fish per day would make sense. Its the reason I only keep large fish - most likely females (whether they be Trout, Pike, Walleye, or whatever) - if they are injured.

Its good to see the numbers, and to see the rules are helping.

How long does a Steelhead live? And is there anything to show how many times they are capable of spawning? The journey they take up the rivers must certainly take its toll.

I ask this because I know the trophy Pike and Walleye I have released can be surprisingly old... and therefore I assume they have contributed their genetics to the spawn a lot more than 5 times. I simply don't know Trout.

[NoUseForAName_GW 18]

Also with the 27" rule is the numbers aspect. I've caught about 50 fish in the mac over the last few years, 3 have been over 27"

Thats's only 3 potential keepers, (all were released). I only average 1-2 fish every outing so if the size was one under 27" i could have kept 47 fish. and if it was one under 25 " i could have kept mabey 40 fish.

I like the one over 27", It makes it very hard to catch one that big, and if you do keep it , it's already done it's job for the gene pool.

[Guest Wes]

I think the life expectancy is around 8 years old. But they do live longer. I have caught an 11 year old once. I believe the only thing we can look at to find out the number of spawning attempts a Steelhead can make would be the data that has already been collected. The information comes from the scales anglers collect. HERE is more information on that. I don't think there is a way of telling...Yup this fish here can spawn 4 more times. so to speak.

I went down the the creek at lunch today. Saw a white guy and his native friend fishing the falls. She was the only one with the rod but under strict tutelage. She hauled one up in the rocks and into the cooler.It was funny, but not HA HA funny.

[fisherdude 69]

I was just down there to have a look and see if anyone was dumb enough to still fish it and was VERY pleased to see the MNR down there. The police even stopped by and took a little cruise down the path. I only saw two people down there fishing n one was just above the holes in the falls and one was closer to Cumberland. Though there wasn't anyone in the no fishing zone, there was before I was there as the MNR had someone's rod and a bag. Good to see all the fish making it up the falls that otherwise would of bin in a cooler... Way to go MNR!

[Bullshark 23]

How many years has the 27 inch limit been on mac/neebing?

I would like to see a 27 inch limit on McVicar. But that's because I don't keep them, I just wanna catch more fish!

[Guest TerryK]

Wes pretty much covered it. I would however like to clear up a common fallacy about big females/males. A big female is certainly an important breeding fish, as she has many repeat spawning years to become very proficient at spawning successfully but the large males are also efficient at passing on their genes successfully. The whole legend of "kill a male because the females are more important" is just that; a legend. Large males (actually most males) are capable of spawning with numerous females every season.These big guys fight for the most productive females and they are usually successful in doing so, therefore passing on their genes to multiple fertile (fecund) females. So is killing a large male better than killing a large female? Hardly. IMO the large males are every bit as important as the large females. It dosen't matter if a fish that is genetically programed for large size is a male or a female, it still has the genes to successfully produce large numbers of large offspring, multiple times.

To maintain TRUE genetic diversity, zero harvest is the only solution.

[Guest TerryK]

How many years has the 27 inch limit been on mac/neebing? I would like to see a 27 inch limit on McVicar. But that's because I don't keep them, I just wanna catch more fish!

I believe it was 1999. The NSSA has officially advised the MNR that they would like to see the one over 69cm size limit enacted on the McVicar Creek and Current River. It remains to be seen if they will go forward with it but I'm guessing it will happen for next season.

[brookiebuster 117]

Well said Terry! I totally agree with a zero harvest reg.

[fisherdude 69]

I really hope they do impose the 27 inch reg on the current and mcvicks.

[Sageboy 9]

I was just at McVicars to look and see if I could see any fish trying to pop the falls. I was on the south side and looked across the creek and there was a guy sitting on a rock watching a woman fishing. She was fishing right under one of the no fishing signs. I called to the guy across the river and said " I guess you must have missed the sign" . He said he can't read English, only Chinese. I left and called the TIPS line.

[unbedable 16]

I was just at McVicars to look and see if I could see any fish trying to pop the falls. I was on the south side and looked across the creek and there was a guy sitting on a rock watching a woman fishing. She was fishing right under one of the no fishing signs. I called to the guy across the river and said " I guess you must have missed the sign" . He said he can't read English, only Chinese. I left and called the TIPS line.

Lol I'm pretty sure they posted two written ones and an annotated one

[James01 223]

I was just at McVicars to look and see if I could see any fish trying to pop the falls. I was on the south side and looked across the creek and there was a guy sitting on a rock watching a woman fishing. She was fishing right under one of the no fishing signs. I called to the guy across the river and said " I guess you must have missed the sign" . He said he can't read English, only Chinese. I left and called the TIPS line.

So, I guess if he were to get pulled over for speeding he would plead ignorance because of his inability to read the signs .

I was strolling down the creek quite early a few days ago and two guys were fishing in the posted pool. I pointed out the signs to them, and they claimed to not have noticed them... "sure" I thought, they were fishing at 6 a.m. for a very specific reason. So, I said "Say Cheese..." and I took their picture, and I stood there repeating "No Fishing!" until they left the pool. It was enough to get them on their way... albeit, I briefly considered throwing one, or both of them, into the pool - but I may have ended up as the one in the pool (ha ha ha), so I left well enough alone.

If they had been snagging fish, I would have reported them (or tried my hand at throwing them in). But, they were actually fishing... drifting roe in what appeared to be a proper and controlled manner... unlike the old Portuguese fellow who I see along the creek on a daily basis. He has moved from the closed pool to the pool right below the Court Street bridge, with his big heavy rod and his 'snaggy' way of fishing roe bags.

If any C.O. reading this wants a description of the fellows fishing the closed pool, their truck, and the picture (which would need to be developed - its taken with a disposable camera), message me.

Cheers, J.