oldschool

I just voted, and I will again. Roy

I just thought that a few more folks could view this. Roy

I am afraid that my answer falls short of being complete in that I have too little experience with the braid mentioned. However, I can say simply enough that the reel turns the spool the same amount with each full revolution of the handle. As line fills the spool, the reel retrieves the line faster as the filling spool has a larger diameter, thus faster retrieve, with each revolution. Therefore, whatever line has the largest diameter will have the faster retrieve throughout the same number of total revolutions chosen between the two line diameters. Truly, such a difference is miniscule, and will not count for much, especially near the empty spool when the total diameter is smallest. We normally do not use the full amount of line on the spool, so the total allowance for difference is limited to the length of line used. Perhaps I would think much differently if I was able to spend the amount of time fishing as I would like. Saving even a few turns of the handle with each cast may be a big deal at day's end. If one was reeling the larger diameter line and the spool was nearly full, the retrieve would be significantly faster than another spool with the smaller diameter with a low amount of line already spooled. I suppose a person could do some calculations given an identical spool with different line diameters, but I do not really think the outcome would justify the effort. A quick check of the spool capacities that are listed on many reels would yield a percentage difference that could be used for a quick, down and dirty estimate. If all of this seems like gobblecygook, or if it does not seem to conflict with others' experiences, please know that I am married and I am accustomed to a blank stare, or even to know after 27 years that I am wrong Roy

I really don't think that it is fair to say that there are little to no fish. I do believe that there are much better lakes to catch fish. This lake has access from a paved road, has a few lodges on it, and as a result it has much pressure. I know that it is deep and has some lakers, with the usual walleye (sorry, pickerel) and northern population. One can catch fish there, but some times it can be very difficult to find them. I would not worry too much. I truly believe that my week in Canada this year will be a wonderful success even if I do not catch a single fish. I will be with friends, not working, and surrounded by a beautiful country with animals I do not see in Iowa. Yup, I really like to catch fish, though. Catching fish only makes it better, if possible. Good luck. Roy

Many good replies here. I just posted on the carp topic that we have good luck using carp that has been "aged" for a few days in a closed container left out in the heat. It hangs onto the hook well and stinks well so the catfish love it. This takes a bit of planning but it sure is inexpensive. And fun considering one has to first catch the carp. In Iowa we use many of the blood baits and chicken livers as said above. Seems anything that has a large odor and will stay on the hook so that the odor will drift downstream works well. Here we look for holes in the streams and let our baits drift into them. The catfish lay in those holes and wait for their supper to come along. If the hole has a downed tree or other cover, all the better. Roy

Carp are very good to eat. They do have a large amount of bones comparatively, and can be difficult that way, but the flesh is very good. As I live in Iowa we have access to both the Missouri and Mississippi rivers where carp are caught in great numbers. Many of the restaurants along the rivers serve them, usually breaded and fried. Most of these are commmercially deboned via slices perpendicular to the backbone. Still they require care when eating. The larger carp are easier, of course, because the bones are farther apart, larger and easier to spot, so they can be removed more easily. I grew up with my dad smoking the larger ones (above 5 pounds usually). They are very good this way and very much like any other fish with a white flaky flesh (not in the category of the walleye). There can be a layer of darker meat near the belly that can be scraped away with the knife, or it can be left. It is just not the same firmness as the rest. But all in all very good. Some of the smaller carp can be cut up and left for a few days in a closed jar and used for a very nice catfish bait. Done correctly (for the correct amount of time and the right temperature) they stay very well on the hook as the flesh is quite firm. It takes only an open mind and a small sense of adventure to conquer this particular bias. I can only imagine that any of these caught north of Iowa are only better quality. Our waters have much agricultural runoff and have a great deal of sediment usually. We can have fish eating alerts here, but the carp do no worse on that front than any other species. Good luck, and good eating. Roy

Very nice work. It must be rewarding to have such artistic talent. Thank you for sharing. Roy

Truly, there is simply not enough time in all eternity to continue with this excruciating example of futility. But it was kind of fun. Back to watching the infinitely more rewarding opportunity of watching paint dry.

I just checked. I am okay to enter on my end. Roy

Sorry, but this is the first post in the new format. I thought that I had at least a slight grasp on posting in messageboards, but for the life of me I could not the place to enter my comments. There certainly are a bunch of options available for formatting the text, however, and I can only believe that with choices come complexity. My choice to marry my wife added complexity to my life, so I guess that proves the theory. If this is the place, I am truly amazed at my lucky guess. Perhaps the lottery is is order. Now to my extemely anemic post: I tried the link and it worked. Sorry that you had to suffer through the rest of this. Roy

Another nice option for future cold days, and all days really, is a recirculation loop in the hot water side. This is a feature that nearly all higher scale homes have as standard. It is a simple return pipe to the water heater that allows the water to flow freely even while the tap is off. This reduces the time it takes to get hot water to nearly zero. With such a system it could also solve the water line freezing in winter with no need to heat a crawl space simply to keep the water flowing. Normally the hot water line on older homes is placed closest to the outside wall in the thoughts that the hot water flowing through them would assist with resisting freezing of the lines. In times when the water is used fairly frequently, this is true. Other times, as you know now, this makes no difference. The expense to add another line is minimal and the cost to have it circulate is very litte. It can be done two ways: with a small recirculating pump near the heater, or many times it will work from gravity utlizing the natural tendency of hot water to rise. Either way, the total cost of installation and use would be less than the cost of buying heaters or using furnace ducting and heating a crawl space. Every time you turn on the tap for hot water you will have a warm (no pun intended), fuzzy, feeling all over as no wait is needed. Imagine how much water flows directly to a drain as we all wait for the water to heat. I am a new poster, long-time reader, and will not now or ever get even close to showing disrespect for anyone. However, please consider the issue of hot water freezing before cold water. As a young lad that would occasionally partake of the barley pops, I would enter into challenges with other bar patrons of a similar ilk. We would allow for anything other than outright violence. Two of our nights were consumed challenging the 'wive's tale' concerning water freezing. Our test confirmed that cold water freezed first. Now please try this before jumping on me. I was the one that lost. And it cost me more than you in that I had to anty up for several rounds. That's a lesson that I learned for a long time. Subsequently, while in college, I did ask my physics professor about this. I never did understand his reponse (yeah, I graduated, but not as a physics major) but he said that it is usually true that cold water freezes faster, but at time in certain conditions, it is not true. So essentially, unless we define parameters more in depth, we are both correct. The issue of hot water being clearer can be valid. The fuzziness in ice is essentially bubbles. Hot water allows for fewer bubbles, therefore, clearer ice. Of course many other things can come into play, such as, mineral content, and time to freezing, but all of that is a bit over my head. Please take my comments as to how they are intended, to provide whatever assistance I can with my limited set of knowledge. I did, at age 50, enter into a university seeking a formal education to match what life has taught me. I graduate this May with my undergraduate degree in Accounting/Management. No other work since then than the college classes. That is and was enough. It is never too late folks, it is mostly just realizing that we can do pretty much anything given a proper attitude. By the way, I do love to fish. Since going to Canada for the first time 10 years ago, I am spoiled. It is a wonderful country with good people and great fishing. Thanks, Roy