Don't think too many business up there live on  one type of customer alone- but a combo .
That said the profit margins are significantly diminished when ever one is taken out of the pile.
 
In other words if the other sources didnt increase and ya add in a couple of percent to his last  annual gross for normal cost increases all of those cancellations were right outa pocket.
 How many years in a row can a business take that kinda hit and still want to do the work and effort and put money into a shrinking business??
I don't like writing this  stuff---
 

While I enjoy reading all the posts about the state of the lake I must admit I'm a bit confused.  Was in not the initial goal of stocking salmonids in Lake Ontario to control the alewife population?  Now that the biomass is down by design through management or nature complaints abound about the impact it has had on fishing past, present and perhaps future.  If it's a shear numbers thing of countless hook-ups per day for it to be worth the time, effort and money then many are going to be disappointed.  I for one will continue to make trips to Lake O and her tributaries because I love the sport.  To me it's no different than fishing local creeks or some of the other outstanding rivers in New York (also the nearby Housatonic in CT).
Someday's you are a hero and others a zero but I'd rather be on the river than sitting on the couch.  

Tb,
I have to side with fichy on this aspect.
For me it's not numbers but it is about expectations vs income/ costs.
I don't have disposable income expecting to catch a fish or 2 amongst hoards of people.
If there's plenty of fish, ( salmon ) then the snaggers can have their space and the fishers theirs too.
When it becomes a fight for fish, well they win over me and I'll look towards calmer waters.
It's far different than trout fishing a stream, it's combat fishing imo..
I wouldn't be going clamming in RI if there were no more clams to harvest.
The alewife control was a basis for the salmon introduction as a sport fishery, it's now becoming a science project.

HT, I don't disagree when you refer to the behavior, it's the only fishery (salmon run) I have ever witnessed such despicable actions.  Unfortunately that's not what's on the table.
It seems the issue of alewife control was secondary to the cash cow that's been created.  If alewife control was the objective then they have achieved their goal either by accident or design.  In doing so the salmonid fishing had to take a hit and with it the cash cow is now on life support.  You can't be successful in one area without it having an impact in others.
     

Likely never anticipated the fishery to have become the huge' cash cow' that it became-now its an important issue to the states in most fishery considerations.
 
I feel very fortunate to have experienced the Salmon River  - even before DSR- in its heyday.
One may well hope it could someday be restored to that former fishery.
I firmly believe that ,if it can be done, the NY fishery personell are the ones who can do it.

The only thing that will return the fishery for predators to its former glory is an explosion in the prey populations.  And that will take an explosion in phytoplankton and zooplankton, unlikely unless we abandon all clean water efforts, and fishers are not the only ones using the lake, ,most of the other users do not want a turbid mess out there no matter how it effects the fishery.

In addition to clean water legislation the introduction of invasive mollusks has impacted the ecosystem.  As I said in an earlier post the days of countless hook-ups may very well be behind us.