all myths in this thread are clearly labeled as "opinion"

Quote:


I know Preacher is a Canadian, and I'm assuming from your blood pressure raising response too my comments, you are as well

I know from talking to Q Dave and other Canadians I've met over the years, that those high tax rates you pay and the subsidies/handouts you mention are a source of anger/outrage by many of you.

Many here in the US, can sympathize! I know I do.
I'm guessing that your form of government, like ours will never eliminate them entirely.  I like too see my taxpayer subsidies go too groups that need a little help now and then, pay their taxes, work hard everyday, and contribute more than they take overall.

IF anyone deserves a little help, it's the little guys like the outfitters who are citizens and not the legal/illegal immigrants, many of them who take more than they contribute and plague your social system like they do ours. I know, it's not a PC thing too say out loud, but the figures don't lie  That $4 for the outfitters I mentioned works as a multiplier when it's spent in the local economy, a good investment in my book.

I've never had a conversation with a Canadian that when the subject came up, they didn't express anger to how generous your social system is too new immigrants.  

I'm of the opinion we/you should take care of our own, before we take on the plights of others.

My comment about the Native tribes use of live bait has nothing to do with whether it's their treaty rights or what agency handles it.
But if banning live bait, even bait obtained in waters outside the park but connected too it by innumerable small streams and no-name lakes is a biological necessity, then what's the point of it, if the Natives can bring in such bait?

Q-Dave had a leech/minnow supply from a little area behind his camp on Warner Lk. I find it hard too believe that his minnows/leeches were biologically different enough to pose a threat to the Q Eco-system?
Maybe those damn aggressive Ugly American leeches but surely not the local ones, served by the same watershed?

   I know people who don't like the wilderness who consider tax dollars spent on outdoor projects, unfair subsidies, since they don't see the need or use the resource.I started backpacking/canoeing on my own, with minimal if any outfitter contact. I use one now because I'd rather not leave my vehicle un-attended for that long, and frankly, I enjoy the rapport and knowing I've put some of my vacation money into the hands of someone who works as hard for his, as I do mine.

"Fair" preacher would be you diving in and grabbing them.

Why do people complain.  Because it is easier to complain than to make a constructive comment.  Sure, Quetico is more expensive than the BWCA, as the saying goes, you get what you pay for.  Now I do have to say that I haven't been in the BWCA for about 20 years so my memory of the BWCA may not be valid today.  I only enter Quetico from the north.  I view paying higher fees for Quetico as a way of supporting provincial parks.  I don't think it so much that Quetico is over priced , but that the BWCA is underpriced and subsidized by taxpayers.  My 7 or 9 day trip to Quetico is a lot less expensive than my winter vacation and more enjoyable than my winter vacation.  But my winter vacation keeps my wife happy.

Westwood

Joe_Schmeaux wrote on Jun 30^th, 2010 at 1:20am:

Actually, over the years here the barbless idea was originally hated but has pretty much become embraced and even extended to other places by those who normally use artificials. Live bait, slip-bobber aficionados? Well there's the rub, a problem I can understand all to well. First off it's a different type of fishing. That's why I asked about Gulp and slip-bobbers. Even if it produced as well, the challenge of keeping bait alive has become a useless art for Q fishermen & women.