JohnF

I've tried to figger out the attraction of the ultralite rods, I mean the expensive ones. I started off with very lite rods and small reels and liked them for the river wading. But I got into better rods to find some backbone and I have a hard time understanding the rationale of going to a $100 or $200 rod that feels so much like the $25 rods I was trying to escape. I asked one guy why and he said it was for panfish mainly but also for the fun of fighting the odd good sized like a bass that caught you unaware. I get the fun part but I'm not sure i can't have the same fun with the cheapies I have standing in the corner. I looked at the Compre UL today but honestly it just felt like some of the cheap stuff I set aside a few years ago. Mebbe the feel is better and the warranty but I have a few cheap rods that were good enough for feel for me and who cares about warranty on a rod that probably cost less than $25. In fact my fave UL was $6 in a bin at Gander Mtn. It was really nice till I snapped the tip off (in my basement) after a couple of years of fairly steady use. It caught everything from Sunfish through bass and even one 30" Pike. If I'm gonna lay out $100 - $200 it'll be for something I'm going to use regularly. JF

I'm just cynical enuf to wonder how many companies offer a great warranty because they know it looks good and even if their product is no better than the other guy's they'll make enuf extra from the sales it gets them to offset a few warranty claims. JF

It might be tough to get industry specific mags to jump on this as they probably have substantial revenues from the Tracker name. OTOH I don't recall seeing Tracker spending big bux in Ontario news media. That makes it a perfect target of opportunity for them. JF

Here's a thought. I've been following this thread and think I have a sense of the timelines. I wonder if it was made clear enough to Tracker that this damage was clearly done before you received the "new demo" boat from them. It seems obvious to me that someone did some repairs, evidently before you took delivery, and whoever was responsible for selling you the boat (Tracker or a dealer) owes you an explanation and service, not just buck passing. As long as you're convinced that the timelines have been made abundantly clear to Tracker and the dealer involved then I think you should give them fair warning that you're taking this to the next step. That next step could be litigation, small claims court, or trying to involve either a national tv/newspaper (Dale Goldhawk style) or the Consumer Protection people. Heaven knows there's enough legislation out there designed to protect the consumer against unethical business practices. Frankly I think the tv/newspaper route is a great alternative. I wouldn't think Tracker or their dealers would be too happy about having the story on tv or in the Star with the Tracker name splashed all over it. It becomes a relatively cheap problem to solve compared to a load of bad publicity in a highly visible medium. All the best with it. JF

Even fishing is more relaxing than golf - at least the way I play. JF

That was pretty blatant. If you say the later rounds will only get worse then it should be quite entertaining. JF

Do you suppose it has anything to do with all of us now watching on HD big screens. The holding and fakery is pretty obvious now. In the olden days of small lo-res screens mebbe we just didn't see it and assumed the refs were getting the call right. JF

Ground control redundancy? I'm just worried about all that electronic junk slowing the thing down. JF

Might cut into the refs' pocket money? JF

The announcers were saying yesterday that there's a 4th observer (linesman?) who can advise the ref about calls. Not sure what that adds to the equation. JF

At least they aren't as screwed up as France. That whole club should be sent to the corner to stand until they learn to act their age. I feel bad for Ireland being out because of them and a bad call. JF

Do you include feelings in that? I can't get over the number of phantom whacks they get. Somebody needs to tell 'em how silly they look in slomo. But then I guess they don't care since what happens on the field in real time is apparently all that matters. Video reviews would necessitate an entirely new thespian skillset for soccer players. JF

Nice! I'm struggling to come to terms with the new power to hull ratio standards. Back in the day when I played with boats 5 1/2 Johnsons were the norm for fishing and us kids and a 35 HP was a big deal, something we used for skiing. Obviously that was long ago. I believe it was back in the late 80's I saw a kid with a 75 Horse tiller on an oversized rowboat rippin' & snortin' down in Ft.Myers and I thought that was pretty awesome. This whole 300 HP concept is a very bad thing for a guy who never outgrew his speed fixation. There's a reason my wife only lets me have normal vehicles these days. She says I act very undignified when I get near powertoys. Again - very very nice. I doubt I'd ever shut it down to fish. JF

I'm starting to get it. The diving is really worse than the NHL. Just when I was thinking there should be a yellow card for faking I saw a ref nail a guy for not getting off the field quick enuf after an injury break. But some of those guys sure are good at sucking the ref in, and that's kinda crummy when they are able to get a second yellow against a top player so he's out for a game. But as an announcer pointed out - why was he in there at the end of a game they'd obviously won when he already had one yellow? And I thought hockey players could be cheap shot artists when the game was out of reach. They got nuthin' on soccer players. I can only assume there are massive penalties for fighting or I'm sure there would be some major donnybrooks with some of the crap that goes on. Anyway, I haven't seen Holland yet but I saw Brazil win. They're pretty impressive with the ball on the attack. Last night I saw NZ again. They kinda stymied the Italians which apparently was akin to the Leafs beating Chicago. This FIFA stuff came along just in time. I was afraid I wuz gonna be reduced to watching baseball again with hockey over. JF

So how long from breeding to breading. I'd think you'd want to grow 'em up a bit to make the eating worthwhile? JF

With you peering out from behind a curtain of bearhair? JF

I'm not absolutely certain I'm right but it makes sense given the article Cliff posted. JF

I just reread the article and was reminded that this fight against the erosion of property rights is something the various real estate associations have been battling for years. Unfortunately it's tough to get folks onside with a battle about things that appear to be already carved in stone. This article is a great example of how property owners can join together to demand the rights to which they are entitled. I'm not here to overthrow the gov't or anything like that, but there are too many assumptions and preconceived notions floating around that conspire to help our various gov'ts herd us along like little complacent sheep. Sometimes we need to stand up and demand what is legally ours. If we don't know our rights then we'll never know when to stand up and demand 'em. Not that I'm a big gun guy but the IRA second amendment fight in the States is a classic example of this kind of action. It's also a classic example of arcane language leading to misinterpretation, even in the courts. Again, thanks Cliff. That article should be thought provoking for all real property owners. JF

Of course. When am I ever at a loss for words on this stuff? That's fairly arcane stuff they're talking about. Perhaps arcane isn't the right word. More like obscure. And to be honest I'm not positive I get it yet but I think I'm right. If you were to go to the local registry office and discover that your property was registered under the Registry System as opposed to the Land Titles System you could ask for a copy of the "abstract" on your land. It would be a list of "instruments" (documents registered against or pertaining to your property) and would go all the way back to the Root of Title or the original Crown Patent when the land was first conveyed to private ownership from Crown holdings. If it's on Land Titles then you wouldn't be able to see that unless the property has never changed hands. The point is that most land in Ontario, as far as I know, came into private ownership through a Crown Patent or Grant. Either way you'll only get the original language by ordering the report as described in the article. I suppose a few of you might still have in the family archives all the paperwork from a few hundred years ago (in the south) or more recently in some of the northern Ontario areas. As you know when we own real property in Ontario in fee simple we not only hold title to the real estate (land and buildings) but to certain "rights" that "run with the land". In some cases those rights have been limited by law. Zoning by laws are a good example. A good example for this forum would be the broad assumption made by most fisherpersons that all watercourse beds are public domain and the owner of surrounding lands cannot restrict access provided we don't step onto the land. I'm pretty sure this article speaks directly to the exceptions to this general rule, among other things. If the original Crown Grant included specifically the lands, water courses etc then the owner may well have a legitimate claim to exclusive control over the riverbed. Evidently the language wasn't always consistent and that left open the door for our lawmakers over the years to adopt certain civil law that claimed the waterways for general use and access and these laws were interpreted by many to mean they applied to "all" waterways. If you own a piece of land with a waterway and you're concerned about people trespassing in the water you could order a copy of the original Crown Patent and get a good lawyer to interpret the language therein. You might find you can in fact refuse to allow folks to come into your creek. The same goes for some of the other things happening over and under your land. I have no idea how this might apply to mining companies tunnelling under your land or hydro lines & airports with flight paths over your lands. Some of these are provided for in the relevant utility legislation but perhaps the original Crown Grant language overrides the newer legislation depending on the language used. I'm not sure about that. I suppose it could even be applied to expropriation and taxes but again I have absolutely no idea how that kind of interpretation would be received by the good folks in our government bureaucracies. And, as the article says, a lot depends on the date of the original registration. Sure sounds like it would be interesting to order a copy of the oiginal grant for your property, even if you're in a modern subdivision created under a Registered Plan of Subdivision. Then, if you find out you have got more rights than your neighbours, good luck with the fight you'll probably have with the gov't and just about every relevant authority. I assume though that most or all of the "rights" would have been removed from the title at the point where the new lots were created. Interesting piece, Cliff. Thanks. I hope I haven't led you astray with my interpretation. JF

I've already forgotten. Which one is Roy? JF

Great song for any air travellers. I always travelled in fear with my dive gear and now golf clubs. But ya might wanna start out a little more modestly. I'm not sure if Taylor makes an entry level unit but it seems to me my bro spent something over 2 grand for each of his. I kinda remember numbers like 3,000 being bandied about. One of his looks a bunch like that cutaway model the guy was playing in the vid. JF

Yes. You will. JF

Huh! They don't? JF

Jeez. They've figgered out to breed 'em now. How's that for really lifelike? JF