Forums Forums Help/Rules Help Edit Profile My Profile Member List Register  
Search Last 1 | 3 | 7 Days Search Search  
Ottertooth Forums * Temagami canoe routes & backcountry travel * Archive through July 25, 2006 * Lady Evelyn Lake < Previous Next >

  Thread Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post
Archive through January 6, 2006mike25 01-6-06  11:24 am
  ClosedNew messages will be added after most recent message, not on archived pages        

Author Message
 Link to this message

paul_t
Member

Post Number: 17
Registered: 08-2005
Posted on Sunday, January 8, 2006 - 10:01 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post

Mike:

Humor me, as you said, its going to be a long winter. Go back to the beginning. How does a native of Buffalo, NY become a LUP holder around 1970? How did you find Lady Evelyn? Please describe the process and your expectations as a LUP holder at that time.

Shot in the dark: My dad bought our cottage on Lake Temagami in 1969 from a fellow from Buffalo by the name of Joe May. Any acquaintance?

Paul
 Link to this message

mike
Member

Post Number: 19
Registered: 12-2005
Posted on Monday, January 9, 2006 - 4:16 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post

Paul,

No acquaintance.

Back in the late 60's I was living in the Was. DC area and having come from Bflo I was familiar with Algonquin and in fact I had traveled it a couple of times.I was looking for a place where I could hang my hat for a weekend or so.I started to look around but most of the stuff available was in the form of controlled developments,the condo life.These things were just becoming to be popular. This was not my kind life. So out of a clear blue sky and with Algonquin in mind I wrote to the Ontario government asking if there was anything available.I cant recall where or to whom I wrote.Then out of a clearer blue sky I received a note within a couple of weeks that informed me of the LUP system in the area.I told them I was very interested and soon I received another reply along with a copy of a map indicating the places that were available.There were about 6 if I recall correctly.I chose one, sent in the $20 lease fee and I was there.Over the years the lease fee has fluctuated wildly.First it went up to about 150 and then dropped to below the 20 fee.Over the past several years it has remained where it is now,650.If directed properly,these fees would more than offset the cost of hiring people to patrol and enforce the sanctions that have been proposed.In that era not even the natives of the area knew of the program and some of the sites remained open for some time.Eventually they were all taken . At the time the MNR was considering expanding the program and as word got out there was suddenly a waiting list beyond belief.Then in the early 70's the ski resort issue on Maple mt came up.This was followed by the land caution that lasted for years and years and now here we are. I was driving through Temagami about noon when it was lifted.I couldnt believe what I was witnessing.About 20-30 individuals racing into the bush to stake their prospective claims.It was like the 440 in the Olympics just after the starter gun went off.That is how it started for me.

You know Paul, in my mind I can find no substantal or valid reason why we should go. In Obabika there are a mere 6 of us disbursed over a vast area. At the start we had to be 400' into the bush which my place still is. The regs were changed and some moved their place closer to the water.Not many tho.Most people dont even know we exist or where we are. In no way do we conflict with the beliefs of this forum.Over all the years I have been there have I ever heard a complaint from anyone including the Ministry.Our places are well kept.In fact the only comments I have heard over the years is how we have helped canoeists who were lost or injured.Just the year before last we took a leasurly ride down to Diamond to show some new guests the area.Out of nowhere a party of 3 came up, a fellow about 35 and his parents both of whom had to be in their 60's. The father was dressed in a light topcoat one would wear to work in the city. He had lost a lens from his glasses.They only had a beat up photo copy of a map,no compass and had no idea where they were.They were headed to Maple Mt but had to be back at their set in point somewhere on Temagami in a day and a half.They had to do the Sharp lake portage.I advised them not to try it as there were strong north winds forcasted for the next day.I pointed out a campsite and thats the last I ever saw them.This scenerio goes on over and over throughout the summer.

Another case. My wife and I went out fishing one day in late Aug.There had been a horrible storm the previous day. On our way back in I spotted an anomaly on the shore. We stopped to check it out.What do we find but a young boy about 14 that had been placed there by some church group so he could experience "reality".He was cold, wet and his tarp was torn to shreads. All he had to eat were "berries and woodchips".His matches were soaked. We begged him to spend the upcomming nite at our place but he declined saying he was going to be picked up the next day.All we could do was get him set up the best we could,give him a lighter and leave.Believe me all I could think of that nite was "Hypothermia". I have had a touch of it.On the way down from Beauty Lake I was wet and cold. It was May and had rained the entire trip. Suddenly I began to shiver and soon it was uncontrollabe tremors. It took 3 people, one on either side and one on top of me to bring me back into the realm of reality.I went back the next morning to check on him and he was gone. Insanity to the utmost.Many of us remember the tragedy on Temiskaming several years ago.A day or so later we were coming up the river on our way out and we passed a large Indian canoe with about 8 people in it.There he was and he recognized us.Without missing a stroke he raised his paddle and acknowledged . What a great feeling it was.As I said,these things go on year after year and the cottage owners and LUP holders are always there to help.

Another topic that is in the realm of your concern is boat traffic on the lake.There are 11 patented cottages and 6 LUP holders in Obabika. At any given time there are no more than two or three of these units occupied .Of course, there may be the exception. 90-95% of the traffic is from the visitors from mainly 3tourist camps.It never used to be that way.They stake out the fishing spots with buoys and send their customers back in.I dont like it but there is nothing I can do.I guess if you paid 1300 bucks per person for a week on the lake you would expect this.As far as the degregation of the campsites goes I want to be very emphatic in stating that we[as residents of the lake] are in no way responsible.If I visited one which I rarely do other than to pick up visable trash from the water level,I wouldnt leave so much as a toothpick behind. I am confident I speak for all of us.People just have no comprehension of how we as a group try and maintain the lake.That is a story in itself.We cant do it ourselves.All it takes is one can at a site and the next one through sees it and says to himself " what the hell, he did it why cant I, someone will pick it up eventually"

Paul, to get back to your question. I cant really describe my expectations when I first got the lease other than say that I thought I had died and went to heaven and I feel the same today.I often have wondered that if the MNR reopened the LUP program today how many people on this site would apply for a permit.I would like an honest and soul searching answer to that question from the participants of the forum.Remember there is nothing like a base camp to operate from.When I first got the lease there was no expiration date and at one time the ministry considered expanding the program.This was kind of reasurring that it would go on forever.Then came the ski thing, etc,etc,.I would like to hear from anyone, including the ministry,who can supply some substantial and realistic facts why we should go. I hope I have provided some insight as to who and what we are.

Mike
 Link to this message

onlypassnthru
Member

Post Number: 30
Registered: 02-2005
Posted on Tuesday, January 10, 2006 - 8:24 am:   Edit Post Delete Post

Mike,

FYI.

Currently there is only one tourist camp operating on Obabika, and it was closed for repairs last summer.

The majority of the bouys mark dangerous rocks and snags, a couple of us parcel holders do this to prevent drownings. Obabika has taken several lives over the years.

There is one whitefish bouy I can think of, but the only one I can think of related to fishing.

I can only think of 8 cabins on Obabika, one being a LUP, and one is Alex's at Obabika river.

Regards,
Bill
 Link to this message

mike
Member

Post Number: 20
Registered: 12-2005
Posted on Tuesday, January 10, 2006 - 11:20 am:   Edit Post Delete Post

Bill,

I was referring to the park, not Obabika lake itself which I do not believe is even within the boundary of the waterway park. Strange situation, a park that doesnt even include the lake for which it was named.As for the bouy situation, I know whhat you are saying. I am on LE and the closest marker I can think of is in the narrows leading into LE. There are two of them in the middle of the channel.These are usually white for visability reasons.The ones I am referring to are painted black and in one case [north tip of Long Isle]they are in water 40-60 ft deep.As I mentioned, I have never been on your lake.Later,

Mike
 Link to this message

paul_t
Member

Post Number: 18
Registered: 08-2005
Posted on Tuesday, January 10, 2006 - 3:50 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post

Mike:

First, you have provided excellent insight. I didn’t and still don’t know much about the LUP program, but I am curious have a few other questions if you don’t mind.

What was the Province’s intent for the LUP program, was it to promote development of the backcountry?
Why not sell the land rather than lease it to you?
Have you been informed by the Ministry what will happen when your lease expires in 2010?
Are there patented (titled?) properties on the mainland surrounded by the park?
Are the tourist camps LUP holders, patented land or both?

If I was in your shoes in 1970, before the parks and other issues, yes, I would have been very interested in a backcountry retreat. Of course, I would have to swap wives with you. My wife is not as keen on extended backcountry stays as yours is. I also would have been leery about the lease concept and the implied impermanence, as opposed to ownership. Your attachment to LEL is obvious from your posts. I don’t blame you for not wanting to leave; you have invested time, money and emotions in the area.
 Link to this message

brian
Moderator

Post Number: 516
Registered: 02-2004


Posted on Tuesday, January 10, 2006 - 8:36 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post

Incidentally the park that covers the lower basin of Lady Evelyn Lake and the very northern edge of Obabika Lake is called the Obabika River Waterway Park. Yes, it is a strange name for a park on Lady Evelyn, but it was named for the river.
 Link to this message

mike
Member

Post Number: 21
Registered: 12-2005
Posted on Tuesday, January 10, 2006 - 10:03 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post

Paul, thanks for your comments. I will try and answer your questions. I really dont know the intention of the ministry way back then. I doubt if it was for any development.The Maple mt thing started that. I would tend to think that because it was such a vast area that was not utilized by many,someone came up with the idea that it might be good to open it up a bit for those who wanted to experience life in the inner bush.I am sure they are all gone now and we will probably never know.All of us wanted to buy but were unable to do so. If they had been willing to sell the present situation would be non existent which would make it a lot easier for everyone.As they allowed us to build, I doubt if their original intentions were to be of a short term nature.

All of the tourist operations on the entire lake are patented operations with possibly Garden Island being the exception. I just found this out when reading the background document and it stated there were 6 LUPs in Obabika River park including one tourist operation.I can account for 6, including myself so that would make 7.I guess it comes down how you interpet the verbage.No matter what, I am sure nothing will happen to his operation.I do know from what I have read there are several types of LUP that can be issued by the gov for various reasons.We are classified as a "remote hunt camp" or at least we were.I believe the lease covers about .5ha. By no means were we given a Carte Blanch opportunity to do what we want. We are strictly regulated and on ocassion we are visited by the ministry to ensure compliance.

All of our places except one are on the mainland enclosed by LE lake,Sucker Gut and the Willows.The other is off the east shore of LE.There is another on the west shore of Sucker Gut but he is in the LE-Smoothwater Wilderness park.There are no patented properities on what we call the pennsula.They are all on islands with the exception of one who occupies an old lumber office on the north shore just a bit before the ranger cabin.

No I dont know what is planned by the ministry when the lease expires. I do know if they dont let us stay its going to be one hell of a mess for everyone.

Paul, I believe I am correct in what I stated.Anyway, it is to the best of my knowkedge. Give me a shout if you have any more questions. Do you still have the place on Temagami that your dad bought many years ago?

Mike
 Link to this message

paul_t
Member

Post Number: 27
Registered: 08-2005
Posted on Monday, January 23, 2006 - 11:26 am:   Edit Post Delete Post

Hi Mike

Sorry I haven't replied sooner. Yes, we still have our place. My parents are there all summer. Stop by if you are ever on Temagami. We have a pretty good tavern set up like yours.

Sure would like to hear some more about your time on LE and see some pictures.
 Link to this message

mike
Member

Post Number: 24
Registered: 12-2005
Posted on Monday, January 23, 2006 - 5:27 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post

Paul,

Good to hear from you.As you have shown some interest in my posts on the LUP situation I will be making some more comments with pics in the future. I have gathered some that include my place,my boats, a moose that came into camp last summer. She came right upto within 15 ft of us. The last anyone saw of her she was swimming across the lake at its widest point.I also have some showing a chipmunk eating bird seed off the chest of our German exchange student.It is really kind of funny in that as soon as we arrive they come out to eat.We even have names for the 3 of them. Also harvesting the ice in the winter at Mitchells camp and my one and only trip into the bowels of a silver mine in Cobalt.Believe me, that was kind of wild. You cant imagine what it is like to desend into the depths in an open elevator that was not much more than a platform with a railing.I would never repeat the trip especially in view of what has happened recently in West Virgina.

When I started this series of posts I wanted to give my objective perspective of what the LUP system was and why I felt we should be able to stay.I really think I have done this.I think I can safely say that this was a topic that was virtualy unknown to most readers on the forum.However to my dismay I have only had a response from one person. If you are interested in further dialogue let me know your opinions one way or the other. I am pretty thick skinned and can take critisism with an open mind. Later,

Mike
 Link to this message

c_mel
Member

Post Number: 81
Registered: 02-2004
Posted on Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - 1:05 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post

Hi Mike,

Re: Pic Posting – Your welcome.

Re: Grids – No problem. The first one is on me!


Re: LUP in Waterway Parks, Specifically Obabika River Waterway Park;

I’m not sure who stated that, “you have to leave”? What I personally did state in my letters on this subject was that in ALL Waterway Parks, “Crown should buy out at end of lease OR when put up for sale.”

From my perspective if this TIP process is to be successful, there should be some consistency on allowable land use activities within these so-called protected areas.

I find the manner in which the Backcountry has been carved up into these designations to be most impractical for everyone with an interest in The Land and especially for those of us who enjoy The Land in a traditional manner. Those of us must look for the protection of wilderness related values wherever we can possibly get them, because they are under assault from all corners and quite frankly no-one seems to give a damn!

It appears that the only vestiges of wilderness that might be held are the immediate areas surrounding the most popular routes, which are the Waterway Parks and to a lesser extent the Conservation Reserves. From a wilderness integrity or conservation/protection or historical preservation perspective they are a JOKE!

What we have is a relative scale of protection radiating down from The Wilderness Park, in theory the most protected, to the Waterway Parks, to the Conservation Reserves and then to Crown Lands – the least protected. Traversing all of these areas we have the historical travel routes (canoe/foot – Nastawgan) The use and enjoyment of these historic routes should not devolve into an exercise in dodging traffic, logging trucks and cut blocks – (destroyed historical sites and travel routes), ATV tracks – (ruined sites and portages), and lakes with heavy boat traffic – (ruined sites), in order to make one’s way back up this chain of protection so that one may get into an area where the “Wilderness (Temagami) Experience” can begin.

This is all fine I suppose if one is merely content with the illusion of an unbroken wilderness. However, this is not the “Temagami Experience” that I am seeking and hoping to hang onto.

Is this all that we have now? No, but it sure looks like this is where we are heading in many respects.

I’m sure we have much in common regarding our appreciation and respect for Wild Temagami. Can we develop a mutually beneficial position – the LUP holders and the Backcountry Users?

Chris
 Link to this message

onlypassnthru
Member

Post Number: 34
Registered: 02-2005
Posted on Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - 3:13 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post

Chris,

I believe that the LUP holders and the Backcountry Users can develop a mutually beneficial position.

At least for all concerned, we had better hope so. With out the support/co-operation of the parcel owners, LUP holders, business owners, Camp operators, Outfitters, TNF, Ministry of Culture, MNR, and backcountry users Temagami will be consumed by the big business interests. If we can’t get most or all of these factions collaborating, get ready to kiss it goodbye. The backcountry users will be impacted the most, because that is where the real change will happen, the backcountry.

Specific regulation, management, enforcement, and some increased protections are needed. What we have to do is develop a consensus on what is needed that is palatable to all who want to maintain and protect Temagami. Mike is on the right track here.

If the hoi poly can stick together we can avoid being victims of the great compromise. I don’t see it happening if we alienate people who are simpatico with our views.


Bill
 Link to this message

c_mel
Member

Post Number: 82
Registered: 02-2004
Posted on Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - 4:12 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post

Bill,

I do agree with you and Mike - developing a consensus would be the most productive way to address our collective concerns.

However - how can we channel our thoughts and ideas into a constructive information exchange?

Would these other parties be interested in such a diologue?

Do you think this medium is appropriate, or would a less open venue be more advantagous?

I have some ideas and I know others like Paul T have some great input to contribute.

Chris
 Link to this message

mike
Member

Post Number: 25
Registered: 12-2005
Posted on Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - 4:49 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post

Chris, good to get a reply on this subject. First, a couple of points. I was never asked to leave and I hope no one interepts my comments to mean that.I thought my posts were very informative, especially for those who had no knowledge of the LUP system.When one receives no response it can be very frustrating. As Bill just mentioned in his post, I think everyone who uses the lake and the Parks for whatever reason has one common goal and that is to prevent further degradation of the area.It has to be a unified effort.

This is 2006, not 1906 and things have changed dramatically in the world. We are now facing powerful political machines with self interests closely aligned with big business.We have to realize this and approach the challenge in somewhat of a unified manner.I think the goal should be control, not elimination.In my very first post on this matter I stated there is a vast abysim between theory and reality.

Now back to the LUP for a moment.In your last post you made some references to destroyed historical sites and trails as well as heavy boat traffic and ruined camp sites.In all honesty can you make a substantive statement that will connect we LUP holders with these issues? I know for a fact that the Ministry has never made this connection nor have they ever given any reason whatsoever as to the "WHY" of their plan.This is what is so frustrating.

The "Temagami Experience" that you are trying to hold on to is another point. I have been on the lake for 36 years now and others much longer.Most likely we were there when you first started to explore the area.Aparently we were of no issue at that time and I have to ask you why are we now.New LUP have not been issued for 25 years or so nor will they ever be issued again.

If you think about it seriously I can not see any reason why we can not establish a mutually benefical solution among all of we users.

When I look back at the old days when I would go up alone and rarely would I see another boat or canoe on the upper part of the lake, I wonder what the response would be if I stated my present plilosophy as" too much boat traffic from the tourist camps,too many canoers who are destroying the campsites,lets get it back to where it was in the early 70's. Lets regress rather than face reality" In my opinion it would be very unrealistic.How do you think I feel after developing so many fishing spots over the years and now when I go out in the evening I find them marked with black bouys along with several boats from the tourist camps.

Chris, we cant allow ourselves to regress but the future must be accepted with moderation on the part of everyone.How we accomplish this must be in a unified manner.

Mike
 Link to this message

mike
Member

Post Number: 26
Registered: 12-2005
Posted on Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - 6:02 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post

Chris, Bill

I just finished answering one response and find two more. I have to agree with both of you and Paul. Organization in my opinion is the key to everything. I think we have to form some type of formal unit that speaks for all.The logistics of doing this are mind bogling considering where we all live.Paul is in Florida, myself in Bflo and who knows where the others reside.I would be more than willing to invite any who are interested to my place for a real discussion.I have a 3k sq ft house and a huge workshop that is heated.Beer on tap at all times and have the private access to some 500 acres that we utilize for snowshoeing in the winter months.Probably just a fantasy.

Anyway I dont think there would be any problem with establishing a dialogue with other groups.I have access to LOUA and something someone might never have happend to think of.This being an open letter to the people of the area via the Temiskaming Speaker.My comments have been published on two ocassions over the years.In this case the comments would have to be very delicate and well presented.One has to remember the socio- economic situation of the area. These people have to put the supper on the table every day.As I stated earlier in one of my posts,I have lived with them in the winter and know their plight.Latchford where I resided before we went into the bush in the winter has declined in population from 600 to 300.That might not seem to be many in numerical terms but when you look at a 50% reduction it is pathetic.By the way this subject has never been adressed on this forum other than by myself and in my opinion it is just horrible. We have to remember that this is their turf and we are merely guests with the possible exception of myself. The Mitchall family took me in as a son and have treated me the same ever since.It has been a real high in my life.

The Ontario Anglers and Hunters Assoc. as well as the local people of the area are very involved in the issues and support we LUP holders. I understand the turnout of the locals at the last meeting was phenominal.

I understand that one of the big issues with canoers over the years has developed as a result of their indifference to the rules of water traffic, especially on the LE river and how they pull up to the lower part of the dam, canoes and gear all over the place blocking the commercial interests of why it was designed.Arrogance and conflict result and this is what none of us want.

Well just a few thoughts from an old timer who is on everybodys side

Mike
 Link to this message

ed
Moderator

Post Number: 260
Registered: 03-2004


Posted on Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - 8:04 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post

Of course Mike a lot of the canoeists going in there are new to the area, on their first trip through there and may not understand what the proper etiquette is at the dam.
I for one have not been at that dam since about 1973 and I portaged my own way around it. I vaguely remember seeing some sort of a marine railway there but had no idea that there was a paid service available to move you over the dam.

The answer to this problem is for the service provider to erect a few signs to let canoeist know where they can park to reduce interference with the paying customers. Most of them will follow that advice without any prompting...
but every human endeavour has some morons who practice it......
 Link to this message

paul_t
Member

Post Number: 28
Registered: 08-2005
Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 9:35 am:   Edit Post Delete Post

Mike here are 2 examples regarding the socio-economic situation, both places I know and love.

#1 Temagami: When I first visited my uncle was chief electrician at Copperfield’s Mine on Temagami Island. Despite being one of the richest copper strikes ever, I don’t see any lasting economic benefit to the community from the day the mine closed in the early- seventies, let alone today. Same for the Milner lumber mill and Sherman Mine.

#2 Western North Carolina (Appalachia): in the early 1900’s was probably the poorest part of the U.S: large First Nation (Cherokee) population and an economy heavily reliant on mining and logging. In the Early 1900’s the Vanderbilt family begins buying forests later donated to the newly developed National Forest System. Modern forestry was born here and Great Smokey Mountain National Park was created in 1922 followed by the Blue Ridge Parkway. The park is now the most visited in the country. The areas relies heavily on tourism, but the economy is diversifying and towns like Asheville and Boone are touted as some of the best places to live in the U.S

Oversimplification, yes but Temagami has all the pieces: wonderful land and waterscapes, pleasant summers, excellent cultural heritage and accessibility to major cites for it to develop into a significant tourist destination. Logging and mining may be better paying jobs in the short-term. In the long run, I think the promotion of the areas cultural heritage and emphasis on nonmotorized recreation by protecting/promoting assets already in place (Nastawgan) is a better and sustainable opportunity for the community’s economic stability. You mention that we have to remember that it is 2006, currently Temagami is closer economically to N. Carolina in 1906.
 Link to this message

c_mel
Member

Post Number: 83
Registered: 02-2004


Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 10:28 am:   Edit Post Delete Post

Mike,

Sorry, I got stuck at “beer on tap…”

“In theory, practice and theory are the same. But in practice they are not.”

I agree that times have changes, and these issues face the reality of powerful political machines with self interests closely aligned with big business. That’s always been the case has it not?

Strength in unity – agreed.

The goal of control versus the goal of elimination - I think that should depend on the issue and the location.

I have never, anywhere, drawn a direct correlation between LUP and destroyed historical sites, trails, heavy boat traffic and ruined campsites. I made the statement that in areas with increased motorized access and use, this has been the case. Some example would be: Lady Evelyn Lake, Sturgeon River - Yorston River (Hwy 805 area), the route area from Red Cedar to Jumping Caribou, areas peripheral to the Red Squirrel road in from the Hwy among others. Without some forms education, controls and restriction is some areas, I believe this degradation will continue and expand

Which "WHY" of what plan are you referring to?

The issue regarding present LUP – you state “they have not been issued for 25 years or so nor will they ever be issued again” I would like to learn more of this and just what specifically states and guarantees this. The issue needs to be addressed specifically within Park Management Plans. And Plans can and do change - just like times.

From my own personal perspective – I do not have a huge issue with existing LUP, my issues are more related to continuity in management, long-term controls/security, allowable uses and related activities within ALL of the Backcountry – including the Parks as I previously mentioned.

I’ll go you one further and say that in my own opinion, I could see a case for a limited increase of LUP in certain areas related to remote tourism, backcountry recreation and four-season usage, though they probably wouldn’t be on the main Lady Lake. This would have to be within the context of a long-term Recreation AND Land-Use Management strategy.

I fully agree with this point, “we can’t allow ourselves to regress but the future must be accepted with moderation on the part of everyone.” However, I have yet to hear of any moderate solutions from other parties – I know that many feel that there are too many Parks and too much management already. I will state that from a traditional backcountry travel perspective, these Parks and so-called “Protected Areas” are woefully inadequate.

I empathize with those who live in the area as someone originally from the East Coast, with family in the forestry industry. I know what it’s like to have to leave and find work.

I’m not sure I agree with you that, “it’s their turf”…
I’m a Canadian Citizen – over 350 yrs in Country (not that this should matter), bit of 1st Nations blood in there way back, now a long-time resident of Ontario. I pay my load in taxes – I consider this my back-yard as well. I can only spend about 3 weeks a year up there in the bush. I’d spend more, but I’d have to get a divorce first. I don’t go to Cuba or Mexico or Disney Land when I need a break from this mad rat-race - I go to Temagami.

I wonder how many of the local and vocal OFAH members actually only spend one or two long-weekends a year in the bush? Spring fish and fall-hunt. Nothing wrong with that and I have hunted my share and I fish. But Public Lands belong to all citizens and like it or not, that is the rule of law in our country. Some should also remember as well that the resources coming off of the land are not an individual’s property, they are in fact communal property to which the government has given license for extraction/development. Some might take serious exceptions to all of this and I might agree where the 1st Nations are concerned, but this is the way it is and that’s another topic.

The arrogance also runs both ways. I have been given the finger and treated rudely passing through the area. Not a big deal, I can take it, but it’s enough to know that I’m not welcome in certain circles/areas. There have also been reports of vandalism and thefts on left vehicles. I’m sure you heard about the canoeists threatened at a site on Lady Lake?

Misunderstandings and blame can go all around. Lets not dwell on it.

I’ve sat and had a pint with some Lads at a Hunt-Camp and I have also lunched on a portage with hunters on Thanksgiving – they shared their turkey sandwiches with us. Nice Lads – all of them! Though I’m sure some might be uncomfortable to go through the bush with their dog when there are hunters working the area…

People are generally all-right – they work, have a wife and kids, perhaps take a drink and get out and unwind when they can. But when people feel threatened – whether it’s their family, their safety, job, lifestyle or their preferred form of recreation – they tend to defend their interests – that is if they have any spine at all. You and I are not much different I guess.



Paul,

Excellent points – once again!



Chris
 Link to this message

doug_2
Member

Post Number: 96
Registered: 12-2004
Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 11:18 am:   Edit Post Delete Post

Re: LUP's in Parks.
I don't see any evidence in the existing park policies that would permit new "private" LUP's in Provincial Parks. However, clearly, there are possibilities for commercial tourism developments in Provincial Parks. (I think policy says something like " when consistent with park values; could be considered "...or something along those lines. I presume that would be a commercial "LUP". That is something worth keeping a close eye on. Also, policies can change over time; especially with changes in government. Right now I don;t think there can be any more new private LUP's in Parks. From a park perspective it would make no sense to change that but it probably is not etched in stone.
 Link to this message

onlypassnthru
Member

Post Number: 35
Registered: 02-2005
Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 3:15 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post

Chris,

I think the central thing we are lacking is an unified organized effort. While ottertooth forum may not be the most appropriate, it is certainly convenient and best of all it is ready made. I myself am not in favor of a less open venue. While more advantageous in the short run, it may well be the downfall of our efforts in the final analysis. Besides I have an intense dislike for backroom deals.

Most of the discussion about LUP's/TIP/TUP that has been generated in the forum has been in Temagami Environment, but there are many splintered threads. It is hard to read all the ideas and concerns. I just today came across this gem you posted back in September.. Issues and Ideas Development:



Issues_access.htm (18.9 k)


Where the hell was I when that was posted?

I believe that these other parties, and probably several others (Earthroots, ORCA) that I didn’t mention would be greatly interested (no slight intended in my previous post.) There was a pretty good list you folks already had going. Motivations may not be the same, but all with an interest in Temagami preservation. Have entities on that list been contacted?

I know you and some other folks on here have some good ideas, we need to put them to use.

What are the chances of getting Brian and/or Ed to set up a forum dedicated just to this to help us organize, collect info, and enlist other allies? Or maybe move/organize some of the existing threads under your basic outline. The “Issues and Opportunities” phase is looming nearer. We need to have our ducks lined up.

The pace of the process is a double edged sword, we have time if we organized now and work smart. It will happen without us if we do nothing.

Bill
 Link to this message

brian
Moderator

Post Number: 523
Registered: 02-2004


Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 9:20 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post

We can set up a special forum.
 Link to this message

paul_t
Member

Post Number: 30
Registered: 08-2005
Posted on Friday, January 27, 2006 - 6:22 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post

Hi Bill:

Excellent idea about a separate forum to organize information. Thank you Brian.

Regarding the list of contacts you mentioned, I have been talking to the activist organizations with similar concerns to explore how they formed, current projects, how they function etc. We have also made early contact with some canoe clubs. I’ve also talked to John Salo. There is no point in talking to other parties such as tourist operators yet, without knowing better what we stand for and what we want to do. I will post what I have found once I summarize it in an organized manner.

I agree Chris’ outline is very impressive and thorough, but I suggest at this point we need to see if we can agree on a consensus among ourselves regarding what we want to accomplish: a simple understandable mission statement. For the group to have staying power it needs to appeal to disparate groups: cottagers, LUP, residents, camps, business etc.

We have been repeating our opening arguments for months now and I hope I have stated clearly on other posts what I would like to see happen:

1. Promotion and development of 4-season non-motorized recreation and protection of cultural heritage via the preservation and maintenance of the entire Nastawgan.
2. Preservation of remaining Temagami Wilderness via MNR adherence to the 1997 Temagami Land Use Plan
3. Align with commercial operators for support


What are your specific issues?

I agree Bill, if we are going to get organized, now is the time. Also, please consider writing a letter if you haven’t already, it can only help from what I am told. I don’t have any desire for backroom deals either but sometimes it is useful to correspond directly rather than cluttering the posts. My email is paulintemagami@bellsouth.net: feel free to contact me.
 Link to this message

onlypassnthru
Member

Post Number: 37
Registered: 02-2005
Posted on Monday, January 30, 2006 - 9:36 am:   Edit Post Delete Post

Paul,
I sent my letter, to Minister Ramsay in November. The MNR indicated that my comments/concrens would be forwarded to the district office (North Bay.)

I'm with you on your issues. Other concerns and issues that could/should be addressed:
1.) Greater protections and enforcement of/for Native cultural sights, fisheries, and game animals.
2.) Recognition of the Nastawgan as a cultural sight(s)
3.) Promotion and development of local eco-friendly small business.
4.) Greater co-operation and assistance in backcounrty management from MNR. (Central garbages/recycling collection sites, portage signing and maitainence, thunderboxes, campsight maitainence.)

Let's work on a Mission Statement. I'll try to come up with a draft and e-mail you, you draft one too, and e-mail me at wiiliam_ball@bellsouth.net . We can come up with a proposed mission statement and post it for general comments/input.

Regards,
Bill




(Message edited by onlypassnthru on January 30, 2006)
 Link to this message

gil
Member

Post Number: 1
Registered: 02-2006
Posted on Monday, February 20, 2006 - 7:37 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post

Hello Mike and others on this forum. I guess it's time for me to weigh in on this thread. First of all, my history. I began fishing Lady Evelyn Lake at one o0f the lodges in 1978 as a one week a year thing. In 1980 I started canoeing the area first with my son, then the next year with my scout troop, as well as fishing from one of the lodges once a year. I fished out of Garden Island Lodge from 1979 to 1989. In that year the owner of Garden Island decided to put the lodge up for sale, and I bought it in February of 1990. My wife and I have owned and operated it ever since.

In reading some of the earlier conversations I have noted a couple of discrepancies, or erronious thoughts. The first of which is the LUP issue. Garden Island is not an LUP, it is patent land. It is also the largest parcel of patent land on Lady Evelyn Lake, comprising of 12.88 acres at the time of patent.

There was also comments about placing marker buoys to indicate the location of prime fishing spots. We have never placed marker buoys anywhere on the lake other than to mark hazzards, or on occasion (as in the black mrker incident off the north end of Long Island that was prviously alluded to) to place temporary indicators for special reasons. In the case of the notorious black marker, this was to indicate the location of a $600.00 rod and reel combination that was accidentaly dropped overboard. I was scuba diving for the errant item when we got the call that there was a forest fire on an island at the entrance to the narrows (started by the way by a canoeist that failed to extinguish his campfire prior to leaving his camp site). We had to leave the area and spent the rest of the day fighting the fire (as Garden Island has the only fire fighting equipment on the lake). By the time I got the ashes and cinders off my wet suit, it was impossible to return to the buoy that day. It was in fact several days befor conditions were condusive to diving again. By that time the mrker had been moved, possibly by the strong winds that were present for a couple of days. I retrieved the marker and have attempted to fix the site in memory for a possible recovery attempt this coming summer.

We do not believe in spoiling the vista of the most beautiful lake in Ontario by placing markers willy-nilly along it's shores.

I would also like to state, in print, my possition on the LUP situation on Lady Evelyn Lake with-in the bounds of the Obabika River Waterway Park. I am in FULL SUPPORT of the LUP owners maintaining their leases on their present lands. I do not want any more land leased, or any present lease-holder to be able to expand their present leases, however.

I am open to comments, and like Mike, have a thick skin and can take criticism when well intentioned.
 Link to this message

mike
Member

Post Number: 37
Registered: 12-2005
Posted on Friday, February 24, 2006 - 9:33 am:   Edit Post Delete Post

Gil,[Norm?]

Thanks for the LUP plug.The info I posted on the LUPS came from the Ministry. They said there were 6 LUPS on our lake including 1 commercial operation. I can account for 6 and you are the only commercial unit I know of. It just doesnt balance. I think I mentioned that in my post.

AS for the bouys. Carolyns daughter and her friend spent some time at my place a while back. They were the ones who first alerted me. When I went back later they were still there, all around Long Isle.Naturally when I saw the black ones last year I felt they were back again. I had no idea they were for your recovery effort. My apology. Did you have yet another fire last year? I remember the one on the back side of your Isle and of course the big one a few years ago. I remember going by it on my way out.

I was talking to Brett Medland about a month ago and he said he got hit again last Aug. Same MO. break in but nothing was taken. We were up in Aug and again in Sept and when we left everything was still ok. I had a couple of queations re "our friend" from the year before last.Could you send me your email address. I think it would be better to discuss the matter off the forum. Thanks,

Mike
 Link to this message

marty_s
Member

Post Number: 3
Registered: 07-2005
Posted on Friday, February 24, 2006 - 6:44 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post

Mike - just tuning in recently ( since it was offseason ) and have enjoyed your posts as I read through them . Keep them up ! I would love to see some pics if you get a chance . I first came to Temagami as a teen in the mid 1980s and can only make it up about every other year, but I enjoy keeping up with the happenings and the history . Last time was in Fall 2003 , when unfortunately a tendonitis injury shortened what was supposed to be a two week trip into a one weeker .

I do agree that the Sugar/Angler loop is wonderful and I recommend it to people new to the area . Lots of work , but worth the effort and often safer than LE during bad weather .
 Link to this message

mike
Member

Post Number: 41
Registered: 12-2005
Posted on Saturday, February 25, 2006 - 6:28 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post

Marty,

It it nice to hear from someone fairly new. I cant think of a worse place on the face of the earth to suffer a tendonitis injury.In all the years I have been up there the only injury I suffered was when I nipped the tip of a finger off while cutting kindling. Nothing really serious but that nite all I could feel was my heart beat at the point of injury. It was my own fault, too many manhattans.

I see you also really like that loop. What camp sites did you stay at? I hope I dont regret my promotional comments when I go back this summer.There are really not too many places to spend the nite back there and sleeping in a canoe just doesnt apeal to me.

Mike
 Link to this message

marty_s
Member

Post Number: 4
Registered: 07-2005
Posted on Monday, February 27, 2006 - 12:03 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post

The injury wasn't too bad - but I knew that adding another week plus wasn't a good idea . It was more frustrating that anything else . It had been the second time in a row that a long trip had been cut short . My previous trip I had horrible weather to the point of being stuck in the same place for 3 days and had to turn back . I used the loop to keep off LE as much as possible that time .

The most recent time, I had started at Mowats and gone through the Sugar/Angler loop and camped on an island in the south end of LE Lake ( the same place I had been stormbound for 3 days back in 2001 ) . I used the loop due to some unsettled, windy weather .Next day , down through the rest of LE to Diamond and over to the NW arm of Temagami when my wrist started to throb . I made an early stop that day to rest . The next day I took it slow, and it was OK for a while , but by the time I got to Obabika that day it was hurting again . The next morning it wasn't any better . My original plan had been to take a left in Wakimika Lake and head out to Florence lake and then down the LE River . But I didn’t feel it wise to head out into the deep backcountry solo with a potentially debiliatating injury . So I made the reluctant decision to cut my trip short and headed back to Mowats the next day after spending a night on LE in the narrows . I didn't do the loop back because I had absolute calm weather coming up LE Lake ; glassy smooth in the late afternoon .

The only time I have ever camped in the Sugar/Angler loop was back when I was a teen - I think we were on Angler where we camped, I can't remember . Since then, I have usually just "passed through" either on the way to or from Mowats . It’s gotten so that I am used to it and don't mind the work . About the only downside are the outboard motor hull carcasses at the Sugar end of the LE/Sugar portage. Nasty . My last time through the loop I saw one party, that was it .

Forums | Last Day | Last Week | Search | User List | Help/Rules Home