Woodsman

ummmm, MNR do not have to obtain a search warrant to inspect your home/vehicle or boat

I was waiting for someone to make that Bull comment.

Although CO's have wide latitude to search without warrant it does not include your home also known as a dwelling under the Ontario Fish & Wildlife Act.

Yes they will play off this common misconception to gain entry but they do not have that power.

Read the actual Act.

My link

See: PART VIII - ENFORCEMENT

ALSO keep in mind. The MnR is highly unlikely to pay you avisit beause of 1 or 2 fillets. I mean we are talking baout horders and poachers that have dozens and hundreds of fish. Yah the caught you red handed 1 or 2 fish over, your gonna get a fine, but investigating where you live, searching your freezer? They are looking for more than one or two, and if you had say a dozen walleye fillets you would likely have a store reciept or they would be wrapped like from a store.

That's true.

They would have to have compelling evidence to obtain a search warrant for your home. One or two extra fillets would not be enough.

As you can see here Woodsman , you could mount them to the metal frame thats there or right to the wood that the bottom of the seat is made of , i suspect since the boat is quit lager it will never go that fast to give you a rough ride , atleast thats what i am thinking

I hope your right but I suspect neither the metal frame or wood thickness will be tough enough as that was never a design requirement.

Best Wishes: Rick

My concern is will the mountings survive the bouncing applied in rough water?

Can you catch carp on lures - Yes.

Is it a top producer or even an average producer - No.

Worms, corn or boilies will produce far more consistent results.

Should I point out that you should not reference WWII human rights case law unless you are certain of what you are citing, as you may mislead people?

Where did I "reference WWII human rights case law" ?

All I stated was "Cases in point - WW2 war crimes trials where may were found guilting as the orders they followed were illegal".(Note may should have been many. My spelling mistake.)

This I stand completely behind. Did not not say all.

War crimes trials were not human rights trials. They were charged and tried for committing crimes against the accepted standards of war. Yes in some cases human rights violations did play a part. In most cases their home countries were signatories to these standards. The point was following orders contrary to the law is not a valid defense which has been held up in legal trials.

By engaging in discussions about what we think is right or wrong we, as a group, can come to a consensus and hopefully make changes for the good.

I agree with this but I feel it won't be that simple. Unless an overwhelming majority are on the same side changes to the Fish and Wildlife Act are unlikely from the politicians.

So call expert opinions will go way further. Some of the larger groups such as OFAH can at times play a role but also sadly the same applies for groups like P3TA.

While I respect your opinion, I think that claiming that you can act however you want as long as you are not breaking a law is a bit shortsighted. In my mind it is similar to the "I was just taking orders" defence.

"I was just taking orders" defense is only valid if the order is valid.

If someone is given an illegal order (ie: to do something against the law) it is their legal obligation to refuse such an order.

To follow an illegal order is not defensible. Cases in point - WW2 war crimes trials where may were found guilting as the orders they followed were illegal.

If the order is legal than no law is broke so a defense for it is not required.

No similarity in these cases.

I am not trying to attack you with this post, I am just trying to point out that you can act within the law and still be acting unethically. As a small example, legally I could choose to release a fish by punting it as far as I can into the water, but ethically I would not. On a similar note legally I could go panfishing and keep all the fish and filet them and store them in my freezer, but since I do not eat fish, I would have an ethical problem with doing this.

If you think you "legally I could go panfishing and keep all the fish and filet them and store them in my freezer" maybe you should check out the regs. Most panfish have catch & possession limits.

If you think "legally I could choose to release a fish by punting it as far as I can into the water" you better check out the regs again. This could very well constitute allowing edible fish to spoil.

Please refrain from giving legal opinions of which you have no clue just in case someone believes you, then they get charged for it.

yeah but as I say go after the law, get them to change it and leave the fishermen alone..if the law is changed to stop someone from killing a 54" muskie then we can insult anyone killing them, but if caught with in the law it is none of our business what he does with it

Terry I'm in full agreement with you.

If someone is acting within the law I don't know why some people feel it's OK to preach their opinion to try to change their habits.

I see this just like those who will knock on your door trying to convert you to their religion. Also not on in my book.

We as anglers/hunters must support all those who act within the law.

If we divide ourselves the antis will surely use this divide and concur.

I have no problem discussing different views but trying to converting those to your views when they are acting within the law and have different opinions is over the top.

no need to get you panties in a bunch ppl. are you so offended that Frodo doesnt keep fish ? gimme a break.

Bladeburner where did I in any manner say I was offended that frodo doesn't keep fish. Please show me.

I never said that. I really don't care weather he or anyone keeps or releases their fish as long as they act within the law. Just please don't put words in my mouth.

What I took offense to is when someone criticizes my right to keep fish legally taken if I so choose. When someone states it makes no sense to me it basically says that if you don't think like me than your opinion also makes no sense.

frodo obviously you can't read as I stated & you quoted, I have no problem and take no offense with you releasing the fish you catch as this is completely legal & your choice.

It was you who ridiculed those who choose to keep there legal catch.

WOW frodo your second post on the forum and you trash a great many members of this forum by saying "it makes no sense for me" about keeping fish legally caught & kept.

A large majority of members will keep some fish for the table (generally better table fair than store bought fish) and as long as they abide by the laws there is no problem and should not be criticized for it by saying their legal practices make no sense.

The oridginal post deals with illegal activity and should be condemned and never compared to legal practices.

If you wish to release your catch that's fine, as it's legal but don't belittle those of us who do otherwise also quite legally.

Can anyone suggest a good one that is affordable for 2?

That could be a tough bill to fill depending on your definition of affordable.

Most charter boats charge a flat rate for the boat. Expect $400 to $600 for a half day charter (5-6 hrs).

Divided by 2 is far more expensive than if you have 4 to split the costs.

Not all boats handle the same number of customers with the smaller boats being less money generally.

Try leasebusters. I hear their ads on the radio all the time

Sounds like he bought it, not leased it.

If open water on the Great Lakes is the plan bigger is better but all will work.

As for "As most sellers want a strong commitment ie. deposit to water test" if they are asking for reasonable costs to cover the costs water test fine but if it's anymore forget them as a seller. Too high of a deposit is a way of getting you to buy as your already out $.

I have friends who have 1650"s & 1700's & both boat are similar.

Depending on year check for wood rot on the side sills. Some can be quite punchy.

Looks like they could work good for many things.

Just be careful as the plastic used may react negatively with some plastics use for fishing baits.

Not if you are fishin for the toothy critters as abrasion resistance is the main concern.

If that's the case run floro leader material or steel with a breaking strength a little lower than your main line.

Out in front of the dam center of the lake is the deepest area.

Should be around 30' maybe slightly more now.

Try dragging tube jigs along the bottom slowly.

Another concern is that your leader should be slightly less strength than your your main line.

That way if you have a break off you'll most likely only lose your leader & lure not all your line.

Do they pay the brokerage fees?

If they ship by USPS you should be fine.

If by courier bend over as you order & wait for the shafting.

Sure not worth the work after getting multiple ones approaching 10lbs on 10 colour leadcore.

Sadly Saturday was one of those days on Lake Erie out off Port Bruce.

I went to the MNR fishing regulations and under Gear Restrictions it states that two lines may be used when trolling in most zones on the great lakes. They remind you to check the zone restrictions on the great lakes where two lines are not permitted. Two lines are fine when ice fishing. If you aren't ice fishing or are not trolling in a great lake zone where two trolling lines are permitted than you can only fish with one line.

Actually it does not state "two lines may be used when trolling in most zones on the great lakes" but does state "Two lines may be used when angling from a boat in parts of the Great Lakes (see exceptions to the general regulations)".

There is a big difference between angling & trolling.

To the best of my knowledge only the main basin of Lake Huron requires you to be trolling to use two rods.

It is generally the number of rods that is limited not number of lines.

Many use cheaters on their rod when downrigging which will give two lines but only one rod legally.

Check the exemptions to the general rules for the Zone and particular body of water you will be fishing in.

Unless otherwise specified one rod only.

Ice fishing generally 2 rods but many exemptions of only one rod. Check the exemptions.

From a boat in the Great Lakes generally 2 rods but again check the exemptions. Some area's only allow one rod.

For two rods the main basin of Huron requires you to be trolling but Lake Erie does not require you to be trolling.

Also there is a limit on the number of hooks attached to the rod. Generally 4 hooks but there is exemptions only allowing one hook in places.

Confuzed yet?

I have a friend who has one & really likes it.

I'll have to see if I can get one also.

Why not ask for 90 days to pay?