Hedfish

Awesome pictures and video, thanks, man, you made my day at the office a little bit more bearable. What's the make and model of your toon? It looks awesome.

Damn, trolling sounds complicated! Thanks, guys, I will try to experiment with it this spring/summer. Man, and I thought what could be simpler than trolling - just throw out your spoon, slow down and eat something.

Oh. So say, we are trolling for pike in the spring in one of the western Kawartha lakes. What we usually do (without much success) is move on our trolling motor really slowly while keeping our spoons/spinners about 10 meters behind the boat. Not sure what else we could be doing there.

We only troll when we get from one spot to another and I haven't had much success with trolling. Any tips on how to troll properly? I don't have any fancy equipment like planar boards though.

Me too. Taro is the best. I've had one of the best fishing days ever with him.

Sucks. It'd be nice to have it on iPhone. For those with iPhones though, you can use MNR's new web site FishOnline: https://www.gisapplication.lrc.gov.on.ca/FishONLine/Index.html?site=FishONLine&viewer=FishONLine&locale=en-US It's not as comprehensive as this app but still has lots of nice info - maps, depths, launches (at least some of them), species, seasons, limits, no fishing zones, etc.

Do you actually need GPS? If not, Cabela's has a GPS-less sibling of that unit, called Hook-5x for 419.99 and Lowrence also offers $100 rebate on it. Sounds like a great idea for $319 CAD, if you don't need GPS (if your old unit has it or if you use your phone for GPS).

Looks interesting!

No, it's not reality. Tables A9 and A11 are completely separate and table A11 has nothing to do with the discussion here as it applies to major purchases only, i.e. boats, trucks, real estate, fishfinders, reels, etc. Table A9 is talking about stuff like transportation, lodging, food, charters, etc. Read descriptions on pages 8 and 9. As a result, the claim is that "the economic impact of fishing for all of Ontario is about $27.8 million" is incorrect, since, for example, Food and Lodging angling related expenditures alone exceed $325.6 mil. And again, I don't care how it all applies to Port Hope, since without data it's all just guesswork, I just wanted to point out that ACTUAL economic impact of fishing for Ontario is much higher than $27.8 mil and in fact far exceeds $1 bil. Now back to the Port Hope discussion.

Not that it really relates to the topic but that $27.8 mil figure does not mean what you think it means. You seem to have simply pulled the "Other" number from the Annex A.11 "Major purchases and investments...". Quite obviously, it doesn't give you "the economic impact of fishing". To get the economic impact of fishing one also needs to consider A.9 "Direct expenditures..." and A.10 "Major purchases wholly or partially attributable to angling...". I just hate it when people manipulate statistics to drive whatever point they are trying to make.

Which one is it?

No need to use words like "whine", if you want to have an intelligent discussion. The goal is noble an all but the HOW is more important than having good intentions. "Hell is paved with good intentions". Without a clear picture of where the money will go, Carbon Tax definitely looks like a cash grab and lots of people have no doubt that money will be misused. That's why Trudeau is criticized, no need to scream "DENIERS!" and post tons of graphs. As for the Paris Agreement, I have no doubt that thing was dead even before it's been born. "Name and encourage", lol. Tax is never a solution, tax is supposed to be the means to implement a solution. The problem is that Trudeau secured the funds but has no solution. At least so far.

The question really is not whether ppm is rising. The global question is what humanity should or can do it about it. Or more specifically to this discussion, how the hell Trudeau's carbon tax is going to affect that rise. (Answer: it will have zero impact on warming or CO2 levels, the only thing it's going to impact is our pockets).

Yeah, looks like only the store in Kitchener has them, to much driving for me.

What do you guys think about action - fast vs. slow - in regards to salmon pier fishing? On one hand, a fast rod should allow for better hooksets. On the other hand, a slow rod should absorb salmon's power better making fighting the fish easier/safer. What do you think?

Hmm, interesting. I didn't even know it was an option!

My old salmon rod broke last week and, trying to find some positive in it, I thought it will be a great opportunity to get something really good this time. What do you guys think would be a good salmon fishing rod for pier fishing? Length, action, etc. I usually throw spoons, sometimes use roe. What's your favorite salmon rod? My old one was Shimano Convergence 10', medium fast IIRC. I liked it but I wonder if something else would be better.

I bought one from them in April or so. According to the CS lady, they don't really have them in store anymore and she recommended ordering online. So I did and got it within a week or so. Just use their web site.

Nah, I'll just leave this discussion. This thread just proves that there is exactly zero sense in discussing this kind of topics on the internet. No one here is interested in changing their points of view, some of us don't even bother to read what is actually being posted by others, so yeah... Pointless. No offense. Oh and sorry if any of my posts sounded insulting, I swear it wasn't intended. I would rather go watch a video comparing the Frog and Sunfish LiveTarget lures.

It has nothing to do with Americans being afraid and socialism. Talking about mental health, hate crimes, etc. doesn't win any votes. Talking about guns does, doesn't matter if it's pro- or against. That's why this circus never ends. None of the current politicians are actually interested in solving the issue, all they care about is getting a bit more votes every time a shooting happens.

I hate this kind of rhetoric. You are basically implying "if you are against a gun ban, you actually want more massacres". It's a very cheap approach to arguing and, unfortunately, it's being used way too often. I assure you, no one on this board wants more massacres. Some of us, however, think that doing stupid expensive things that will achieve very little besides making a large part of population angry is stupid. Think long gun registry in Canada. This is the kind of stupid populist solutions that don't really solve anything except wasting money and delusion people into thinking all is well now, our government is on top of things. As far as I see, on this board, your opponents don't say "Nothing needs to be done, everything is peachy". They say "Something needs to be done but we haven't seen anything effective and thoughtful proposed so far". But hey, who cares about thinking. Let's just keep repeating "Strict gun control laws will prevent mass shootings". Like they prevented Toronto Eaton Center shooting in 2012 or Norway shooting in 2011.

This is just wishful thinking. For a lot of communities, government/police is an outsider and is considered an enemy. There is no way they would report "one of theirs". Another problem, do you think police doesn't get enough tips from nutjobs like "I think my neighbor is Osama Bin Laden"? Again, it's all about time and resources. There is no way to adequately investigate all leads, so asking for more is kind of pointless.

All of you saying "no, he shouldn't have been able to buy a gun" do it armed with the post factum knowledge. No reasonable background check would have found anything wrong with the guy prior to the shooting. As far as I know, he was never charged with abuse, he was never admitted in a mental institution, he had no criminal record. "Was investigated in connection to..." sounds scary after the shooting, in reality it probably means that he was a friend of a friend of a relative of some guy suspected to be a terrorist. Probably a lot of people that migrated from Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, etc. can be (and have been) investigated in connection to terrorists, it doesn't mean all of them should be banned from certain things. That's the problem with most of the shooters - they seem completely normal prior to shootings. I am not saying background checks are completely useless - at the very least they can catch the most obvious cases - but don't expect miracles. Canadian PAL procedures are a good example - they wouldn't catch this guy either. Any "real" background check would take so much time and resources, you would wait years for your PAL license.

No but you shouldn't keep increasing your "lawn cutting" budget either. There are lots of better ways to spend your money. Hehe, gotta love analogies.