Ontario Bait Policy Review public comment period

[mad scientist 140]

The Strategic Policy for Bait Management in Ontario is now on the Environmental Registry for a 120 day public review and comment period.

 

http://www.ebr.gov.on.ca/ERS-WEB-External/displaynoticecontent.do?noticeId=MTMxNzQ3&statusId=MTk5ODc5&language=en

 

(posting #012-9791)  

[Resource Pimp 60]

 

 

"Anglers would be required to retain the receipt in their possession for two weeks in order to demonstrate that the bait was purchased within the respective BMZ within the previous two weeks. Anglers would be required to use or lawfully dispose of all commercially harvested bait within two weeks of purchase.

 

What a crock of $hit,  What is the rational of stale dating minnows and leeches ? To help bait dealers sell more bait?  It will just push more people to trap their own.

 

                              

[mad scientist 140]

Without a "stale date" on the receipt, the regulation becomes unenforceable.  Consider this scenario:

 

Let's say an angler from Minnesota comes across the border on April 1, buys a dozen minnows, fishes for a couple days, then goes home.  But he keeps his receipt.  He makes subsequent trips across the border on May 1, June 1 and July 1, each time smuggling a dozen minnows across the border that he caught himself in Minnesota.  On July 2 he's inspected by a Conservation Officer, at which time he produces his receipt from April 1.  Obviously, the CO is going to know that the guy hasn't kept the same dozen minnows in storage, in Ontario, for three months, but without a "stale date" on the receipt, it's valid indefinitely...so that means that, in order to write a ticket, the CO would have to undertake an investigation to prove that the minnows the tourist has in his possession in July aren't the same ones he purchased in April.  That becomes costly, complicated, and would likely involve court proceedings.  It's far more effective to have a "stale date" on the receipt.

[Some Old Guy 968]

Ok. I get that scenario. 

 

Does that apply to Ontario residents?

 

Roger

[mad scientist 140]

Sure; currently, most of the bait in Ontario comes from Lake Erie...bait wholesalers from Lake Erie ship their bait as far north as Sault Ste Marie.  So you could just as easily substitute "SSM" for "Minnesota" in my scenario above, and think of how many Lake Erie minnows (potentially carrying VHS) could be moved from the Soo to Thunder Bay in that kind of a situation.

[Some Old Guy 968]

Hmm

 

If my minnows that I buy locally don't die in two weeks, I have to dispose of them because of an expiration date. I don't like that decision. 

 

 

Roger

 

 

[Resource Pimp 60]

I get the vhs thing. I don't see the rational on how this applies to a resident. I buy my leeches by the pound and my wife and I can easily fish off that pound for a month and a half.  Explain the danger of vhs of a pound of leeches I bought from larrys sitting in my fridge for a month and a half?  This reg in this scenerio benifits the bait dealer more than the environment.

[NWO 23]

According to the MNR, fishing regulations were streamlined a few years ago because people were confused about lakes with individual regs (ie. people were not reading the reg book.....it wasn't about cost-cutting measures....no).

 

So now the thought is that people are going to read and adhere to a 30+ page bait guideline?

 

[mad scientist 140]

It's not just about VHS...leeches were included in the bait policy review because there are non-native species of leeches used as bait (such as the medicinal leech) that MNR doesn't want spread further, as well as pathogens carried by leeches.

 

And you're right, leeches in your refrigerator aren't the problem.  It's the guy that dumps his leeches in the lake after a day of fishing that is the problem.  Especially if those leeches come from a different part of the province.

 

In order to limit the movement of bait (including leeches) around the province, MNR needs some way of figuring out where people are buying their bait...the solution is receipts...but in order for receipts to be of any use, they need to have a "stale date", as has already been discussed.

 

 

[hunt or be hunted 59]

interesting 🤔 I trap my own minnows anyways so not really concerned about this until they find some sorta way to make me "prove " I trapped them, I see it being an easy way to control minnows more on the US/Canada border crossing as mentioned above but not really in our own waters. If say I go buy 6 dozen minnows for a day trip, their in bags/oxygen water, well I come home with 3 dozen left over and keep them alive in my tank and wanna re use them again for a day trip say 4-5 weeks later, but this time I put them in my own personal pail with a bubbler, so a CO pulls me over and says where my minnows from ? I could be honest and show him a receipt if I actully still it 🙄 Or I could just say I trapped them! How does he actully know the difference or prove it ? Same as if I bag and oxygen my own trapped minnows at home and get pulled over, they automatically would accuse u of buyn them when u actully didn't, but u have all ur own supplies at home ( which I do ) to bag them up like a bait shop ? Theirs some serious "grey" areas here, personally I'm not worried nor care but curious how they would go about proving their facts if this was the case lol

[Resource Pimp 60]

18 minutes ago, mad scientist said:

In order to limit the movement of bait (including leeches) around the province, MNR needs some way of figuring out where people are buying their bait...the solution is receipts...but in order for receipts to be of any use, they need to have a "stale date", as has already been discussed.

"When" someone buys the bait would in no way imply "where" they bought it. The receipt would clearly say "where" they bought it.

[mad scientist 140]

Certainly the proposed system isn't foolproof; there will always be people who will try to exploit the loopholes. But here's the thing - bait bucket introductions have been shown to be a major vector for the introduction of non-native species in inland lakes in North America.  Not just "invasive" species and diseases, but spreading native fish species into waters where they don't naturally exist.  This has led to a major shift in the fish communities in many lakes across Ontario, particularly lakes that formerly supported naturally reproducing populations of brook trout.  Brook trout are particularly sensitive to competition...pike or perch accidentally introduced to a brook trout lake will most likely see the brook trout wiped out in short order.

 

Ontario currently has the most relaxed rules around bait harvest, possession and movement in North America...most other jurisdictions have banned live bait outright.  The most streamlined and foolproof approach for Ontario would be a complete ban on live bait...but MNR recognized that that option would have been unpalatable for the majority of anglers.  So they came up with a compromise.  It may be a tough pill for some people to swallow, but one needs to consider it compared to the option of no live bait at all...

[mad scientist 140]

5 minutes ago, Resource Pimp said:

"When" someone buys the bait would in no way imply "where" they bought it. The receipt would clearly say "where" they bought it.

That is correct; the bait receipt will need to include a location of purchase.

[Resource Pimp 60]

4 minutes ago, mad scientist said:

That is correct; the bait receipt will need to include a location of purchase.

I wasn't asking, I was saying "when" should have no bearing at all considering that "where" I bought them is on the receipt and shows the origin of the bait.

[Blackfootbaits 53]

PERSONAL HARVEST

MNRF is proposing that personally harvested bait may not be transported beyond the waterbody where it was caught. (i.e., no iverland transport), with the following exception.

 

In Bait Management Zones A,B,C,and D, personally harvested bait may be moved beyond the waterbody where it was caught, provided that the angler possesses the appropriate documentation allowing the overland transport and the bait stays within the BMZ where it was harvested.

 

Documentation may be in the form of either a personal harvest licence or a personal log.

 

Bruce

[Blackfootbaits 53]

Being a bait retailer and harvester, it was a very difficult read.  We will not be able to bring in bait from other BMZ., which means that there could very well be a bait shortage in our area.  Bait harvesters will not be allowed to harvest from natural Brook Trout lakes, which is where a majority of bait in this area comes from.  

Time to read this for a third time.  See what else I can get out of this.

 

Bruce

 

[fishingfinn 42]

In my opinion, it is the personal harvest loophole that people will be most likely to exploit.  From what I understood after reading the policy, only commercially harvested bait is required to be disposed of after 2 weeks.  Not personally harvested live bait.  Like others have said, I also buy leeches by the pound and it might take up to a month to go through, keeping them in the fridge in the meantime.  It would be really easy to say to a CO that the bait in possession is from personal harvest (regardless of whether I purchased or trapped them)

 

I feel this will drive anglers in Northern Ontario to trap their own bait, which also poses issues.  "It has been shown that, in general, Ontario anglers experience great difficulty distinguishing legal baitfish species from illegal species. Consequently, personally-harvested bait brings with it an increased risk of moving invasive and other non-target species across the landscape."

 

I will be sure to post my comments/opinion.  I encourage everybody else to do so, we have the privilege to have an input on the policies and decision.  Follow the link from original poster. 

[Resource Pimp 60]

"Anglers would not be allowed to move personally harvested bait in more than one BMZ of their choosing. (Note anglers may still personally harvest bait in other zones but would not be allowed to transport over land.)

 

Where and how is my choice of BMZ documented ?  What if I want to change the BMZ of my choosing, how do I do that ? 

[mad scientist 140]

11 minutes ago, fishingfinn said:

In my opinion, it is the personal harvest loophole that people will be most likely to exploit.  From what I understood after reading the policy, only commercially harvested bait is required to be disposed of after 2 weeks.  Not personally harvested live bait.  Like others have said, I also buy leeches by the pound and it might take up to a month to go through, keeping them in the fridge in the meantime.  It would be really easy to say to a CO that the bait in possession is from personal harvest (regardless of whether I purchased or trapped them)

 

I feel this will drive anglers in Northern Ontario to trap their own bait, which also poses issues.  "It has been shown that, in general, Ontario anglers experience great difficulty distinguishing legal baitfish species from illegal species. Consequently, personally-harvested bait brings with it an increased risk of moving invasive and other non-target species across the landscape."

 

I will be sure to post my comments/opinion.  I encourage everybody else to do so, we have the privilege to have an input on the policies and decision.  Follow the link from original poster. 

Certainly, providing comments via the ER registry is the most appropriate means of having your concerns included in MNRs review of stakeholder concerns on this policy.  The 120 posting period is indicative of MNRs desire to get public input on this

[mad scientist 140]

32 minutes ago, Blackfootbaits said:

Being a bait retailer and harvester, it was a very difficult read.  We will not be able to bring in bait from other BMZ., which means that there could very well be a bait shortage in our area.  Bait harvesters will not be allowed to harvest from natural Brook Trout lakes, which is where a majority of bait in this area comes from.  

Time to read this for a third time.  See what else I can get out of this.

 

Bruce

 

Thunder Bay is in BMZ C...Commercially harvested bait can be brought in from BMZ A for sale and use in C.

[arvey 154]

The bait business can be a lucrative one , if you harvest your own and retail them the government doesn't know how much you have trapped or how much you are claiming you sold. Now with receipts the tax will have to be shown . Don't get me wrong i'm not for this once I pay for my bait I don't care what you do or how much you claim that's your business. Like what was said earlier the MNR wants to know were your buying your bait from . The tax man wants to know how much bait you are really selling.

[Blackfootbaits 53]

26 minutes ago, mad scientist said:

Thunder Bay is in BMZ C...Commercially harvested bait can be brought in from BMZ A for sale and use in C.

it can only come in from A

[fishingfinn 42]

58 minutes ago, arvey said:

The bait business can be a lucrative one , if you harvest your own and retail them the government doesn't know how much you have trapped or how much you are claiming you sold. Now with receipts the tax will have to be shown . Don't get me wrong i'm not for this once I pay for my bait I don't care what you do or how much you claim that's your business. Like what was said earlier the MNR wants to know were your buying your bait from . The tax man wants to know how much bait you are really selling.

 

 

To elaborate on this, 

 

Another thing to consider is what will be the cost to bait shops?  Typically the purchase of bait is cash only, no receipt.  Obviously there will be an upfront cost to getting modernized tills which will display date and location.  Or will a handwritten note suffice? Probably not.

 

[NWO 23]

1 hour ago, mad scientist said:

Certainly, providing comments via the ER registry is the most appropriate means of having your concerns included in MNRs review of stakeholder concerns on this policy.  The 120 posting period is indicative of MNRs desire to get public input on this

 

 

There is a perception that all the decisions have been made and "public input" is a necessary evil that policy makers are forced to go through.

 

The perception is that the cake has been baked already.

[Larry's Baits 15]

Well as a retailer of bait I DONT  like this it all.   (1) it will be harder to get bait and we already have issues with this at certain times of the year and the trappers who are out side of the proposed zones will on longer be able to make a good living supplying all us retailers bait..  , (2) anglers who do purchase enough bait to go out fishing for a couple weeks up to graham or buy pounds of leeches should not have to discard any bait after a expiration date. We stamp the back of our business cards aswell with the date and how many doz were purchased for americans so ii guess we will do the same for everyone now?   if you buy bait today and have a receipt and you end up not going fishing until two weeks from now why should you have to toss it?   it doesn't make any difference for invasive species.   our trappers check there delivery over before they deliver for any invasive species,   we then again check it at the shop on delivery.   and we check are tanks over and over again because the last thing we would want is MNR coming in and finding something that should not be in there.    if bait comes from outside of the zone and is followed with proper delivery and inspection by our shops there is no reason to make it harder for  bait shops & anglers,   The trappers who have been doing this for years for a living will be  affected the most by this from the get go and the bait shops will feel the ripple effect next and so on.   So if i miss understood anything in the 40 pages that i tried to sum up in a paragraph please let me know

thx adam