JohnF

Those would be lobsters. JF

Looks to me like a Great Egret (darkish legs, orange bill). This area is a tad outside it's normal range but not too far off. JF

Gotta check my books but that guy looks like he made a wrong turn whilst flying around Florida. Is this what global warming is doing? JF

Thanks V. I thought that might be what it was about. Sometimes govt finds it easier to respond favourably to the more influential lobbyists by applying the mushroom principle to the rest of us who might be affected. They've learned that when they're too transparent they end up with someone upset and making noises that force the govt to justify their actions in front of their constituents. When they can quietly slide it into place and present it as a done deal they can often just ignore the complaints or with luck, the public will shrug and accept it as just another govt shanking. We've come to expect so little ethically or morally from our own govt that they seem to think they're able to get away with murder, and they're right. JF

Do them thar froggytogs keep y'all safe frum lightnin'? JF

Nice! Waytago. JF

Some folks say the blades kill birds. JF

Usually there's a kneejerk reaction against any kind of legislative changes. Some of the changes over the years have actually been for the better. I was wondering if this might be one of those situations where everyone assumes it's bad without really understanding the facts. I read one version that suggested this change might be to allow easier access to waterways for culverts/crossings which might in turn screw up the fish habitats. Is that a fact or might I just be starting an unfounded rumour? JF

Being essentially a lazy sort, and rather slow-witted, could someone who knows what this is really about synopsize it here, showing us how this really impacts us etc. JF

The only fish I can walk to are my neighbour's Koi. Should I wacky rig for them, or go weedless? JF

We can only hope we feel the same way when we're faced with the decision for ourselves. JF

Get into what - the canadians or the fish? JF

It's kinda like the Grey Power thing. Most of us get a little more conservative about our driving habits as the hair gets greyer, or less thick. Of course then there comes a turnaround point when the motor skills and vision deteriorate and then you get a driver like the little old lady I followed just now. She really has no business being out on the road IMNSHO. I wonder if a car monitor would point out her shortcomings as a driver. JF

Interesting collection of fish. Small is certainly better than no fish at all. That should become the Thames mantra this year. I noticed that even Marko's carp were little guys. JF

I'd sure want to know what the fine print says on that policy and just what part of my driving habits this thingy records. What if it absolves the company of responsibility if I've ever exceeded the speed limit or something like that. I doubt there's a driver alive who hasn't lit it up a little at least once. On the other hand it may just be a scrutiny that only someone who's a relatively safe driver would be willing to subject themselves to and the company is playing the percentages that since you believe you're a careful driver then you probably are. Kinda like the no-smoker clause in life insurance. JF

Just curious - what does the policy say the company will have to pay for if the building was totally destroyed by fire? I'm not a big fan of insurance companies but think about it from their perspective. Say the house was completely destroyed and was insured for full replacement, whatever their language is. First they have to remove the debris from the fire (or whatever) perhaps including the foundation. That could be a fairly big hit by itself. Then they have to start rebuilding. Some older homes are pretty big and have depreciated over the years. That's why they're relatively inexpensive to buy. But to replace them from the ground up can be pricey, in Ontario likely $100/sq.ft. and up. I can show you houses that would only sell for $150k including the lot worth approximately $50k so $100k for the structure. The replacement on the building would be well in excess of $200k plus the cost of demolition and site clearing, at least $250k. That's how you get a replacment cost estimate of double (or more) the market value today, and easily 3 or 4 times what was originally paid in some cases. Perhaps if you were willing to insure for only the market value of the property less the land value without any replacement or cleanup provisions your insurance could be much cheaper but not many folks would be interested in that kind of protection. Property values took a big jump early in 2004 and have generally been trending up for years so basing insurance on the original price is not realistic. The contents is a whole nuther deal. We went through an interesting exercise once and made a list of the contents of our closets along with the replacement cost. It was staggering. BTW. How many people have a list of contents just in case. One way to do that is to photograph or video everything in the house. It's hard to do from memory if there is a claim so photos are good. We burned cd's of all our rooms and closets a few years ago and probably should do them again. Then make dupes and store the cd at the office or with a friend, same idea as computer backups at work. JF

Skunk???? JF

The local authorities may well consider the area in their interpretation. For example a boat and trailer may be quite a normal part of family life in Port Carling but perhaps not so readily accepted in a GTA condominium townhouse development with narrow streets and 20 foot long driveways. JF

Typically obscure language. Some planning departments might argue enthusiastically that a boat on a trailer is not a part of a normal household. That kind of language must be interpreted any way the planning department wants to interpret it, and if you don't like their interpretation you could appeal to the OMB I suppose. JF

The lure is the one with the red on it, right? JF

And they wonder why they're often lumped in with the lunatic fringe? JF

You don't get to make that decision. It would be like deciding whether or not you want to pay taxes. These bylaws are in place already and enforceable by the municipality. If you've done your due diligence you know what you can and can't do and make your house buying decision based on that. JF

Fortunately the province & the municipalities don't agree with you. That's why we have a Planning Act, Official Plans and Zoning Bylaws. It's all (supposed to be) about logical controlled growth, and utilization of all parts of our province. The intent is to protect the character (for want of a better word) of an area thereby assuring to some extent the enjoyment of the area by the residents and giving reasonable assurance to prospective property buyers that the neighbourhood isn't going to change dramatically right after they move in. Some of these regs are actually written into the local zoning bylaw (in accordance with the Official Plan) while others may be covenants that were established at the creation of the subdivision to assure a certain set of property standards. The Ministry of Municipal Affairs & Housing is front & centre in this regulating these controls and occasionally they see fit to repeal or overrule some, like the case of clotheslines that hit the news media recently. It's possible this boat thing may be a violation of one or more of several regulations or restrictive covenants. Overnight parking in a setback zone, storing trailers etc on a residential property, developer's agreement about cars only parking, etc. Occasionally these regs seem to be a tad draconian but look at how some folks push the envelope in these situations. If one person is allowed to park a 12' tinny on a small trailer, how do they stop the guy who wants to park his 38' sailboat at his house, or his big diesel 18 wheeler. Unless some of these regs are enforced stringently there will inevitably be ridiculous contraventions. Suppose your neighbour works for a dead animal processing plant and brings his truck home each night. That might make for a really lousy bbq in your back yard if you're downwind on a warm summer evening. It's merely an extension of the law that protects your quiet residential area from being filled with offensive commercial operations, and protects the resale value on your high-priced real property. It may seem unfair on occasions like this but in the big picture it's for the public good. JF

Aw, c'mon. The fish love 'em. JF

Sheesh. Now I know where all our bass went to hide out. We never look for them there. Waytago Marko. JF