Fishnwire

Mighty hospitable of you...thanks! If you're planning a trip up north and don't mind bad quad trails that lead to good lakes, PM me.

You can use anything (that's legal) for bait while fishing out of YOUR boat...but you sure can't put a hook through a live mouse (or any other mammal) while fishing out of MY boat. You'll also have to stay off my dock, and there's no bed in the camp or seat at the table for you either. If you've got a problem with me dictating "bait rules" when I take you fishing...you're probably not going to like it when I enforce my catch-and-release policy either. I guess it comes down to (assuming you're legal) "your boat, your rules."

Fenwick Highlander II rods are on sale at Canadian Tire right now. They're about $45, which makes them a half-decent rod for the price. I've been waiting for them to come on sale since the last time they were. I bought a 5 foot ultralight and 6.6 foot (both spinning) last time and was very happy with both until I broke the ultralight while bushwacking, and snapped off the tip of the 6.6 in the tailgate of my Jeep. It feels good to have replaced both for around $100. These aren't Loomis quality rods, but they're also far from the price of Loomis rods. They're good for occasions (like bushwacking and tossing in the back of your Jeep) that you don't want to risk your good rods on. For the price, you won't be disappointed.

You say, "It doesn't sit well with me that if I purchase a hunting or fishing license in my country that a foreign country's federal anti terrorist agency could obtain it."...why is that? What could happen? How might your life be impacted? Also, why would Homeland Security conceivably want a list of Ontario residents that applied for a fishing license? Even if they did, what would they do with it? Why do I need to keep secret from "a foreign country's federal anti terrorist agency" the fact that I fish? Why would H.S. care that I fish, and why would I care that they know I fish? I don't like seeing government services privatized either...and if they are, you'd think they could find a Canadian company (with Canadian employees) to do the job...the fact that Homeland Security might compile a list of Ontario residents that fish though, is not a valid argument against it, or (that I can see) a reason to get upset, worry, or feel "unsettled".

So if you're pensioned off from a career with say...the railroads...or some other (likely union represented) job...you probably have decent insurance, or can afford decent insurance...great! At the same time, if you've "never worked", then you can't expect very much. But what about the millions and millions of people that can be described as the "working poor"? There are a lot of individuals that work as long and hard as you and can barely afford rent, let alone medical insurance. What about people who find themselves suddenly laid off and without insurance? For these people, a trip to the doctor...even the ER...is at best a severe financial hardship, and at worst simply out of their budget. Whether or not your health care system is the best in the world is totally irrelevant to them, because they can't afford to access it. So like I said, IF you can afford it...

There's no way that catching/keeping frogs is less hassle or easier than bringing in a 6x4x1.5 inch Plano box full of lures...using live frogs is more about tipping the odds in your favour, and less about convenience. Necessity isn't a factor at all. Given the choice of throwing artificials all day, or splitting my time between catching frogs and actually fishing...there's no doubt in my mind I'd catch more fish using plastics and plugs. I don't think the question I asked is "stupid". Suggesting the mouse is "not dying from being hooked" on the other hand...

So you would have no preference over having your necked instantaneously snapped vs being impaled with a metal shaft and slowly bleeding to death or drowning? If you need to use a live mouse to catch fish, you're doing it wrong.

Assuming you've got the cash. Sorry Bob, I couldn't resist. There's no evidence to suggest that that is what happened with the personal information of Canadian firearm owners either...this is no more than a matter of some paranoid individuals suspecting it may happen. Even if they're right...what's the difference? I'd love for someone to explain to me how their freedom, privacy or any other aspect of their lives can be impinged upon by the mere existence of their name documented as a legal firearm owner in a foreign database. Do naturally paranoid people tend to be gun owners...or does the act of firearm ownership make one paranoid? I ask because I notice a lot of gun owners I talk to seem convinced that the world is conspiring to take their guns away, and only their constant vigilance prevents that from happening. Is that what this is all about?

I don't understand what is "unsettling". Your name may exist in a data base in a foreign country...so what? What could happen? How is that a "loss of privacy"? I bought a new Hyundai a few years back. My name may very well exist in some Korean data base, and I'm perfectly fine with that. Why would I feel differently if the name of that data base is "Firearm Owner" instead of "Accent Purchaser"?

Somebody gets it.

PM me and I'll tell you what I know. Rules are rules, right? I wouldn't want to upset anyone about discussing a specific spot on a public forum...that kind of thing tends to get (some) threads locked up and/or removed.

I have a feeling that guy is going around telling people, "I know one sport fishing enthusiast (as a close acquaintance) and I find him tremendously annoying."

I guess you missed the point...I asked about the apparent difference in the way information about specific bodies of water is allowed to be presented depending on it's geographic location. If the thread was called "So-and-so Creek", "Such-and-such Harbour", or "What's-it Conservation area"...and the area in question wasn't up here in "the sticks"...someone would likely be complaining. I don't even really care. I could post GPS coordinates to my favourite spot and almost no one reading this could find their way in there, even on the off-chance they have a lifted 4x4 with 36's and a winch that they don't mind beating the snot out of to the point that stuff breaks. But there's probably a few individuals "up here" who would prefer their honey holes don't get mentioned on an public forum any more than the individuals "down there" that have been vocal about it in the past.

Why is it when someone asks about a particular creek or pond located somewhere in Southern Ontario the OP gets reminded that mentioning specific bodies of water is against forum rules...but if it's up here in Sudbury or somewhere else in Northern Ontario, anything goes? I've never fished Trout Lake but if it was one of my regular haunts I'd be just as horrified at seeing it mentioned on a public forum as any of you are at seeing your favorite trib talked up. I'm aware there's a much higher fishing spot to fisherman ratio up here, but we still get crowds at spots that become well known and those spots take a pounding. I'm not sure why potentially good fishing areas within an hour or two drive from the CN tower are regarded as worth protecting and keeping secret, while there seems to be a different attitude about the rest of the province.

If I had to deal with crowds and other people who (for whatever reason) made fishing difficult...I probably wouldn't even bother with the sport. Thank God for Northern Ontario and off-road vehicles.

I hear U-haul does it. In Sudbury there's a place called Larry's Service Centre that works on trailers and tow vehicles only...maybe where you are there's a similar outfit. I'd try the local yellow pages under "trailers". My dad had it done at CTC, but he bought the hitch there...probably whoever sells you the hitch can do it or at least point you in the right direction. I'd get one that is removable...it'll save you banging your shins into it when you don't need it. Take it off and lock it up inside the truck when it's not in use...otherwise it might go missing.

That test doesn't prove the guy who had the accident was impaired at the time...and what you do on your off-hours should be your own business. It's more likely the guy burned a few on vacation than showed up for work stoned. Seems to me that guy got a bit of a raw deal. If the second guy had an existing medical condition that he didn't divulge when asked to do so...he should expect to get fired. He was perplexingly honest though...he could have claimed the problem was new, having been brought on by working for that company. I can't stand people who pull stuff like the third guy...pretending to be hurt to get off work or get modified duty. I'm not exactly infatuated with the company I work for, so it's not the notion of them getting screwed that upsets me...it's the idea of someone taking it easy while others pick up his slack that rubs me the wrong way. I do wonder about the details a little though. Just because you can ride a motorbike for a few minutes to pick up a loaf of bread, doesn't mean you can do 8-12 hours of repetitive and/or hard physical labour. It sounds like they had the right to make those moves...but I'll just say I'm happy I don't work for the company you do, and leave it at that.

People often dump stuff near my Dad's house so one day after a big pile of junk was left he sifted through it hoping to find a piece of mail or something to be able to identify who did it. Instead he found a brand new 300 piece socket set. The next morning he noticed the pile had been shifted around again...the guy must have realized he accidentally shoveled it out along with the junk and came back looking for it in the night. My Dad gave me the socket set...he didn't even want it. He was just glad the litter bug had to buy a new one.

I have a few friends with American Bulldog Terriers and they are all great dogs. I think the biggest problem the breed has is that (at least where I'm from) it's the "breed of choice" for drug-dealer, biker-wannabe losers who think it makes them look cool and tough.

There's always a handful of individuals who are only too eager to ruin it for everyone else.

OK...so I met the guy. I was wrong about him being pensioned off from the company I work for. He did work for them but was laid off about 20 years ago, so he's in his late 40's. I also met two brothers who work with him. They all showed me their driver's and prospectors licenses, and seem like good guys. We had a beer. Also, he's just some contractor...not the claim holder. He was committed to doing the work before he even discovered my camp, and would be doing it regardless of any help I offer him, or compensation I receive. The actual claims he's working are not on "my" land...(the railway owns the land anyway, I just lease it.) ...he's working the opposite side of the river to which my camp sits. All I can do is hope he doesn't find anything. Even if he does, it's not like a strip mine is going to spring up overnight. It would be years of further surveying, prospect drilling, environmental assessments...I can't worry about something like that which is completely beyond my control and may or may not happen at some point in the future. I already lose sleep at night worrying about a logging road getting punched through to my back yard that will bring un-lifted trucks full of fishermen and hunters who don't have the gear/guts to traverse the existing trail. There's a good chance the near pristine qualities of the area and privacy I enjoy will one day be lost...but I don't think turning down this $700 is going to bring that day any closer. I'm still on the fence...and besides, I probably wouldn't admit to entering into a cash deal on an public forum.

We can assume the occupants of the SUV didn't suffer. The driver of the transport was probably OK but will have to live with that memory the rest of his life. Chilling.

I must admit, I never considered liability. The guy stated he'd pay cash and not require a receipt...a lawyer would have a hard time proving I didn't decline his offer (which I may still do) and he used the facilities without my permission and therefore at his own risk. He doesn't need me bad enough to offer half of whatever he might earn, and I think he's just contracted to do the prospecting, and couldn't offer me a piece of any "motherlode" anyway. If he wants the camp for further prospecting I might bring it up. I'd probably prefer he finds nothing and won't risk losing my private paradise to a mining operation. If one does spring up...it would be nice to be compensated somehow.

The other day there was a message on my machine from some guy who said he's prospecting (for minerals) across the river from my camp and wanted to rent it this coming week. At first I wasn't even going to call him back, but decided I would just to be courteous. I figured why give up a weekend of getting to use the place for a couple hundred bucks or so, which is a reasonable offer I suspected he'd make. He's an older guy...having been pensioned off (from, coincidentally, the same company I currently work for) for over 20 years. He obtained my name and phone number off a note I keep pinned to the door. He's got a couple of helpers and was planning on tenting somewhere and having to haul in (the last 3.2 kms is a rather punishing quad trail) a boat or two. I told him what sections of the river I have boats and they are right where he needs them. When I told him my motors are in storage in town and not at camp yet he said he'd bring his own. I still wasn't crazy about the idea...so I asked him what number he had in mind. When he said $700 I almost dropped the phone. An interesting coincidence is the land-lease for that camp for one year is...that's right...$700. The guy told me I can come by his house and check out his ID, prospector's license, and the paperwork on the claims he's working, so I'm pretty sure I can trust him. He even said that if I wanted to be there, he and his helpers would sleep in tents in the yard, saying he was more interested in the boats and having a base camp with cooking facilities, than a place to sleep. I just keep thinking about if something seems too good to be true...well, you know how the rest of that goes. He did mention that he might have more work to do back there later this summer, so I might be turning down more the just the initial seven bills. Should I have alarm bells ringing off in my head?...or should I just consider it a windfall and take it?

I think you're right. Most working people have a hard time paying the taxes on water front property that's been in their family for years...let alone afford to buy what's available. Eventually only the very rich will have waterfront ownership as an option.