Hi there,

Longtime lurker first time poster.
Anyways I'm not trying to push my luck given the current situation we find ourselves in but I was wondering if you still need a RABC to fish in Quetico if I never touch land? For example if I fished for lake trout on basswood on the Quetico side but camped on the US side? I know when I fish LOTW this is how it works but I'm not sure if its different for the BWCA? Thanks for any help.

No. You really can't wander into Canada very far and get away with fishing there. I was checked one winter on Basswood just across the border by Ontario COs showing up on ski plane. Luckily, I had a valid licence and was legally in Canada.

I'm sure you'll get some leeway if your 100 yards in, but if you get caught blatently in Canada you will be ticketed and could have gear confiscated--especially in the current political climate.

I don't blame them at all. Have at 'er.

Thanks for the response. I'll just plan on staying on the US side then, until they get this crossing thing figured out.

I don’t want to start a big thing but i don’t believe that is fully correct, arctic. The same rules that make it legal to cross the border on lotw apply to other border lakes.

I can’t weigh in on specifically on basswood since that’s quetico and I don’t know how you’d handle that permit-wise. But on the Canadian side of border lakes where the water is not in question—- eastern side of Saganaga, for example— it’s the same rules as lotw. You would need an Ontario license and to follow all Ontario regulations while you’re in Canadian waters, but you do not need an RABC as long as you do not get touch Canadian soil, anchor on the Canadian side, or come in contact with another boat on the Canadian side. Those were the rules last year, and I have not read anything about a change to this policy this year.

Quetico must have its own regulations for this that are separate from other border waters.

Gilded gopher is correct in what he said. In regards to Quetico though it’s the whole permit thing to be in Quetico park. If you could do a day permit you’d be OK but getting a day permit isn’t all that simple since you have to get it from a park office.

Ryan

Gaidin53: "Gilded gopher is correct in what he said. In regards to Quetico though it’s the whole permit thing to be in Quetico park. If you could do a day permit you’d be OK but getting a day permit isn’t all that simple since you have to get it from a park office.


Ryan"

I feel like I’ve read about an annual quetico pass that would cover day all day use as long as you don’t stay overnight?

The Webster-Ashburton Treaty of 1842 would likely apply to travel along the border. The treaty allows citizens of both countries to use portages to necessitate travel. I don't believe this would cover you while fishing though, as the treaty, I believe, is only meant to facilitate travel along the boarder routes.

Esoxhntr: "Hi there,

Longtime lurker first time poster.
Anyways I'm not trying to push my luck given the current situation we find ourselves in but I was wondering if you still need a RABC to fish in Quetico if I never touch land? For example if I fished for lake trout on basswood on the Quetico side but camped on the US side? I know when I fish LOTW this is how it works but I'm not sure if it’s different for the BWCA? Thanks for any help."

I am pretty sure thegildedgopher is correct.
To fish the Canadian side need:
Ontario’s outdoors card
Ontario license
Follow all Q rules no live bait, only use barbless hooks
Quetico permit. Day permit or yearly vehicle pass
No RABC if you don’t anchor, land (can’t do shore lunch or stop off to pee :)

The not needing the RABC is newer…all of the other requirements have been in place a very long time now. Follow the rules—you are in a foreign country. I’ve been stopped many times by Canadian officials always courteous but thorough. They don’t believe in warnings they will throw the book at you and make an example. I don’t have a problem with that. But in the US we are used to “warnings” so beware. They can confiscate all your gear and hold you till someone pays your fines.

T

thegildedgopher: "

Gaidin53: "Gilded gopher is correct in what he said. In regards to Quetico though it’s the whole permit thing to be in Quetico park. If you could do a day permit you’d be OK but getting a day permit isn’t all that simple since you have to get it from a park office.



Ryan"

I feel like I’ve read about an annual quetico pass that would cover day all day use as long as you don’t stay overnight?"

Yes you can get an annual vehicle pass. Would cover 1 canoe. Around $100.!

https://www.ontarioparks.ca/fees/dayuse/2025

We can cite all the rules and laws as we understand them and know them but in my opinion, I would be extreamly cautious about crossing borders right now without any of the proper permits/passports/RABC/license.

Manitoba border patrols welcome new resources as they gear up for potential effects of Trump presidency

Black Hawk helicopter provides beefed-up security along Manitoba-U.S. border: RCMP

Canadian Black Hawk helicopters patrolling Minnesota border along with conservation officers

Minnesotian: "
We can cite all the rules and laws as we understand them and know them but in my opinion, I would be extreamly cautious about crossing borders right now without any of the proper permits/passports/RABC/license.


Manitoba border patrols welcome new resources as they gear up for potential effects of Trump presidency


Black Hawk helicopter provides beefed-up security along Manitoba-U.S. border: RCMP


Canadian Black Hawk helicopters patrolling Minnesota border along with conservation officers "

I get the sentiment but the Canadians are the ones who changed the rule in 2021 or 2022. It’s not a secret unwritten rule, it’s the official policy. So until they change that official policy I don’t see why we would follow anything else.

Check out this page and see the top section about reporting exceptions for foreign national boaters. The RABC is/was the way to “present yourself to the CBSA” (aka reporting to customs) on these waters—- so even though the RABC is not explicitly mentioned here, I’m inferring that being exempt from reporting means being exempt from the RABC in these particular scenarios.

CBSA

Esoxhntr: "Hi there,

Longtime lurker first time poster.
Anyways I'm not trying to push my luck given the current situation we find ourselves in but I was wondering if you still need a RABC to fish in Quetico if I never touch land? For example if I fished for lake trout on basswood on the Quetico side but camped on the US side? I know when I fish LOTW this is how it works but I'm not sure if its different for the BWCA? Thanks for any help."

Call the Quetico Park office and ask this question. They should be your best resource to know the specifics.

Sunburn: "

Esoxhntr: "Hi there,


Longtime lurker first time poster.
Anyways I'm not trying to push my luck given the current situation we find ourselves in but I was wondering if you still need a RABC to fish in Quetico if I never touch land? For example if I fished for lake trout on basswood on the Quetico side but camped on the US side? I know when I fish LOTW this is how it works but I'm not sure if its different for the BWCA? Thanks for any help."

Call the Quetico Park office and ask this question. They should be your best resource to know the specifics."

I would say yes you need a RABC permit, Basswood also goes like 6 miles into QUETICO. Where do you draw the line? I think it is a mixed bag on crossing the line. Yes contact Quetico.

2021 regs CANADA

This topic has been discussed before but I will summarize....

You can fish on the Canada side of a border lake without an RABC permit or going through Canada customs provided you don't anchor, moor, or get out of the canoe and onto Canadian land IF you have a valid fishing license (Canada) .

Here is a CBSA link on the matter: reporting exceptions link

The link posted by Pinetree was during Covid. That was lifted October 2022. See this article.

However, to be on the Canada side of Basswood you need to have a valid Quetico permit since you will be in Quetico. The Ontario Parks day use permit is fine for this purpose and you can buy a seasonal version online at the Ontario Parks Store .

The Summer seasonal day use permit is good for one canoe. I believe they are $75.

If you have an RABC permit and the day use permit you can go into Quetico for the day but you cannot spend the night.

Below is one of many threads on the subject:

Fishing Quetico while camping BWCA?

I agree with plander.

Pinetree: "

Sunburn: "

Esoxhntr: "Hi there,



Longtime lurker first time poster.
Anyways I'm not trying to push my luck given the current situation we find ourselves in but I was wondering if you still need a RABC to fish in Quetico if I never touch land? For example if I fished for lake trout on basswood on the Quetico side but camped on the US side? I know when I fish LOTW this is how it works but I'm not sure if its different for the BWCA? Thanks for any help."

Call the Quetico Park office and ask this question. They should be your best resource to know the specifics."

I would say yes you need a RABC permit, Basswood also goes like 6 miles into QUETICO. Where do you draw the line? I think it is a mixed bag on crossing the line. Yes contact Quetico."

I think you make a good point. There is a difference between fishing part of Bayley Bay vs. heading all the way up to North Bay on Basswood. And what’s the likelihood you don’t need to land your canoe for various reasons way up in North Bay or travel back and forth. That’s not a 20 minute paddle…You would likely be in trouble way up in North Bay.

But for the most part, just fishing across the border is doable without an RABC….

BUT…not trying to dissuade the OP…you will notice it takes A LOT… make sure you have all your ducks in a row.

Better not have live or dead bait on you at all.
You can’t use a barbed hook
To get an Ontario License you also need an Outdoors card
You need the day pass—best option is the yearly vehicle pass on each canoe..

Then when it’s all said and done…you gotta hope the people that stop you know all the above too :) I respect law enforcement but they aren’t infallible. Carry some of the link plander referenced. Email the Q Park and keep a copy of that documentation.

Remember you are in a foreign country…and for better or worse they might have a chip on their shoulder right now…

T

These threads would be a lot less confusing if everyone took the time to read all previous posts (as well as links provided) before they add their own interpretation or provide seemingly contradictory opinions supported by links that pre-date the already-provided links.

I’m not picking on anyone in particular, this happens all the time and everyone is guilty of post first read later at times— but our goal here should be to provide the facts as clearly as possible. This isn’t nearly as complicated as this thread makes it out to be.

thegildedgopher: "These threads would be a lot less confusing if everyone took the time to read all previous posts (as well as links provided) before they add their own interpretation or provide seemingly contradictory opinions supported by links that pre-date the already-provided links.


I’m not picking on anyone in particular, this happens all the time and everyone is guilty of post first read later at times— but our goal here should be to provide the facts as clearly as possible. This isn’t nearly as complicated as this thread makes it out to be. "

Totally agree. One of the challenges with this forum is the search function for the forum. It's less than optimal. I'm sure a better search function would result in less posting of unnecessary and incorrect info. An example of a good search tool can be found on the bogleheads.org forum here .

Another issue with using previous search is these rules change over time. I mean the last time I fished LOTW if you went over the imaginary border by a couple of feet somehow they knew and were on you quick...Arnesons and Zippel Bay were two places that told us NEVER ever cross the border and had numerous examples of the implications.

Flash forward a few years it's a lot different.

When I first started going to the BWCAW you could just do what ya wanted along the border...it was all good.

Also I'll argue it is more complicated than you are making it out to be. Almost no posts, including my own, cover everything needed to legally fish across the border.
Some one inevitably leaves out something important such as the Q permit, the outdoors card, the Ontario license, the not landing or anchoring, the special Q fishing regs etc...

and yes there is a lot of info that is simply incorrect...but usually it's based of previous users experience (see my previous part "it changes") :)

20 years ago on this board the argument was I've been fishing across the border with nothing more than a MN fishing license so it's okay and that was the advice being given LOL

So if it was easy...there would only be one post with all the right info...

I do agree with the essence of what you two are saying...I get your point...but also there is a reason for the variability...

T

timatkn: "Another issue with using previous search is these rules change over time. I mean the last time I fished LOTW if you went over the imaginary border by a couple of feet somehow they knew and were on you quick...Arnesons and Zippel Bay were two places that told us NEVER ever cross the border and had numerous examples of the implications.


Flash forward a few years it's a lot different.


When I first started going to the BWCAW you could just do what ya wanted along the border...it was all good.


Also I'll argue it is more complicated than you are making it out to be. Almost no posts, including my own, cover everything needed to legally fish across the border.
Some one inevitably leaves out something important such as the Q permit, the outdoors card, the Ontario license, the not landing or anchoring, the special Q fishing regs etc...


and yes there is a lot of info that is simply incorrect...but usually it's based of previous users experience (see my previous part "it changes") :)


20 years ago on this board the argument was I've been fishing across the border with nothing more than a MN fishing license so it's okay and that was the advice being given LOL


So if it was easy...there would only be one post with all the right info...


I do agree with the essence of what you two are saying...I get your point...but also there is a good reason for the variability...


T"

Yep.

It's a always challenge using online forums to get accurate information. The way people ask questions might not provide clarity/accuracy regarding what they want to really looking to understand. Responses can veer off topic and may not have much to do with the OP's initial question. Good intentioned responses can provide innacurate or misleading info. But all that said, the value of the community aspect that these forums provide cannot be overstated. And this forum models that last point as well as any I've seen, it's top notch. And in particular, the displayed etiquette (giving of grace) is one of this forum's highest qualities in my opinion, and somewhat atypical.

Having an effective search tool on a forum is extremely valuable. On this forum, the way the search results are displayed on my screen (Chrome or Safari on Mac) on this forum renders the results more or less useless. I can't even search my own posts or someone else's posts.

Overall, I'd say the BWCA.com forum is exceptional but it's search function is lousy.

I agree this forum is wonderful and I love the patience and grace that are consistently applied by users. I truly hope my post didn’t suggest otherwise and if it did, I apologize.

For searching I typically use Google. Just enter my search terms and add bwca.com at the end and it will search this site. The way the results are kicked back feels more usable to me. I think bulletin based and forum software is not keeping up with the technology being used by the big search companies.

thegildedgopher: "I agree this forum is wonderful and I love the patience and grace that are consistently applied by users. I truly hope my post didn’t suggest otherwise and if it did, I apologize.


For searching I typically use Google. Just enter my search terms and add bwca.com at the end and it will search this site. The way the results are kicked back feels more usable to me. I think bulletin based and forum software is not keeping up with the technology being used by the big search companies."

I think we are all on the same page and definitely no need for anyone to apologize. Before retiring, I worked frequently with a patent attorney that used to say "we are in violent agreement" during heated discussions. I'd say the tenor of that phrase is applicable to some of the strong feelings often expressed on this forum.

My observation is there are a few topics that come up on a regular basis on this forum that elicit strong and varied responses...sometimes even in parallel ongoing threads. Questions on border lake rules seems to be one of those. Others include RABC, permit hoarding, etc.

By the way, I entirely agree with your take on reviewing before commenting (a few posts up in this thread), though I must admit I'm guilty of having made that mistake a few times. In fact, every once in a while I see that someone responded to a post that was made years earlier in a way that definitely sounds like they are addressing a current, recent enquiry.

Agree no need for an apology. Thanks is for the contributions,

T