4thgen

You just need to read the accompanying text --

http://deepseanews.com/2009/06/creatures-from-the-sewer/ Apparently Tubifex worms.

30% deet Deep Woods Off (blue) will do a pretty good job. I've found that anything less is useless.

Yes, he slept in the same bed as kids etc. etc. but I think he was just really messed up and liked kids/thought he was a kid. I really doubt that he was a full out pedo. I think that some of the parents found out about the admittedly weird stuff that was going down at Neverland and decided to cash in on it. I didn't particularly like Micheal Jackson, this is just the conclusion that I've drawn from the media reports. OJ did do it -- there is no question. Hell? I suppose this opens up a whole new can of worms (fitting analogy for this website), but when we die, that's it - there is nothing else. Before anyone jumps on that, I've stated my belief as fact just as was done earlier in this thread. Can we get a bet going on how many times the lego joke gets played? I'm going to tentatively go with 3.

You nailed it. Garpike is just a slang term for longnose gar and other gar species. I've seen them from time to time but have never had the chance to try the nylon rope trick, which apparently works pretty well.

In order to land large fish on light line, you need to use your drag. Your drag acts as a brake while your line is being pulled out. You need to keep your drag just tight enough so that the line doesn't break, thereby putting maximum pressure on the fish. The fish will eventually do one of two things depending on its size -- 1) it will tire and you will be able to land it 2) you will get spooled (it will take all of your line) I have landed only a handful of carp on line heavier than 6lb test -- they are usually pretty picky about what they eat and spook easily, especially when sight fishing for them. Grabbing your line with your hands is the worst thing that you can do-- it takes away all the shock absorption of your fishing rod. Also, carp rarely hit lures so chances are you had it foul hooked. This would have made it much more difficult to land. This 38" carp was landed in about 10 minutes on 4lb line, just to give you an idea of what can be done with a bit of patience.

This snapper was laying eggs about 10 feet from my front door yesterday! The nest has since been covered with a wire cage to stop raccoons from getting at it. So far I've only found snappers this year, but last year I found a couple of maps and a Blanding's.

Funny you mention this -- apparently every sail boat on Lake Ontario believes the answer is #1.

This guy seems like the authority judging by his tournament success... With that said, I've found that if you are consistently catching 1-3.5lb fish, it is only a matter of time before you hit a bigger one using the same technique. Senkos have been my go-to for a few years now but spinner baits are a close second.

I've never had much success with lipless cranks in shallow water. One lure that I've found to be pretty unbeatable is a 2" suspending hardbody minnow bait called a "Mystic minnow". I've always preferred the long, skinny cranks as opposed to short/fat. Tiny floaters like the "Crickhopper" can be alot of fun to fish as well.

Nice job. One thing I've always noticed while musky fishing is that you accidentally catch BIG walleye on musky baits.

I also think that the "Pleasure Craft Operator" card is ridiculous in its current state. Back in 2000 when I got mine, I skimmed through the book before hand and easily passed. I thought I lost the card a couple of years ago and found it is impossible to have it replaced because there isn't any sort of registry(and I forgot what company issued it). The way it stands with no regulation, private testing companies make more money as they deal out more cards so why not make the test really easy? You can even do an online version so you can just look up the answers as you go... Fishing licenses may not require any knowledge of regulations but at least a portion of the cost, however small, goes toward the resourse. I would be happy to see a test associated with fishing licenses, even if it was just proof of being able to use the regulations book.

Good job in posting something that lays out the facts while letting people come to their own conclusions, although claiming to want to shoot them regardless really makes you sound like one of those inbred freaks that just plain gets off on killing things. Government studies can't always be depended on for accuracy but this one seems to sum up the facts pretty well. As for the "every cormorant eats a two pound fish a day" argument -- have you seen that picture of an osprey with a 30" musky? Does that mean that every osprey is going to catch a 30" musky every day?

I was going to quote everyhting you've typed but I figure that this single sentence sums up your knowledge of the natural world quite well. Are you actually saying that humans haven't been responsible for any extinctions? I can see that the "pseudo-science cormorant hating bandwagon" is all full up, so I guess I'll just have to take a different path. Hmmm... a species that is growing exponentially and degrading the areas they inhabit? I'm pretty sure that I can think of another species that matches, but on a planetary scale as opposed to a few small islands... Good luck to all those who live in ignorant bliss, I envy you.

What model and year and how did you convert it? I looked into that a while ago but found that it was only straightforward (carb swap only) on a few model-years and aside from those, it is more economical to sell the 9.9 and just buy a 15.

I caught a 17" off of the government pier a few years ago when I was up there along with a few smaller ones. I also caught 15 pike that day and lost a pile more -- why did I only bring my ultra-light...? The walleye bite at dusk was pretty good too with a bunch of sheephead inbetween.

Net? You don't do alot of shore fishing do you? Nets for the most part do more damage than good (aside from the weighty rubber models). I'm talking about shore fishing here. Some people don't have the luxury of a boat and are forced to fish from steep rocky shorelines with four foot waves breaking, piers, etc. What do you propose then? The way I see it, holding a pike horizontally requires two hands, unhooking the pike requires one. Last count, I had two hands, meaning that one is left holding the fish and the other unhooks it. Have you ever fished from shore? Do you have any idea what that entails?? Have you ever been to the Toronto islands? I doubt it. Carrying a net while you are hiking 10km+ a day is ridiculous. Keeping them in the water while being unhooked? Try it while you're standing on a 10ft breakwall. Oh, and you're going to correct my grammar after that series of fragments you posted? Do you know what hypocrite means? I've caught more pike than most on this board have seen and I limit the time that they are held vertically and take any pictures horizontally. I don't like to see fish mishandled but as GCD has pointed out, I would like to see some sort of data relating to the negative effects of it.

I've always wondered how all the "horizontal hold" advocates unhook their fish. I usually fish alone from shore for pike and I don't see how it is possible to unhook them without holding them vertically (aside from throwing them on the ground which is likely worse). I realize that it is better for the fish to be held horizontally but I don't see how you can unhook them. So the question to those who jump on everyone for vertical holds is: How are you unhooking your fish? or are you just a bunch of hypocrits?

Nope. Due to the design of them, they don't spin/twist your line -- you'll see what I mean when you use one.

I've caught pike out of the marina on the East side and seen them caught almost everywhere else. I've also caught crappie and a few jumbo perch there.

Definately a Cooper's or a sharpie. It's hard to tell which without anything to compare size. The Cooper's is slightly larger but there is overlap (ie a large female sharpie compared to a small male Cooper's). The Cooper's hawk also has a slightly rounded tail when it isn't spread -- compared to the squared tail of the sharpie. I honestly go by size more than anything. That's a nice picture -- we have some migrants up here but not much yet. As far as birds of prey, I've seen a couple of broad-winged hawks, harriers, kestrels and about a dozen bald eagles over the last week.

It is a hoax -- it came out a week ago I think. They just used a BBC layout to make it look more realistic. When I saw it I was like "Awesome!" -- disappointed to find out it wasn't real.

The beefsteak fungus ( Fistulina hepatica ), is entirely unrelated to false morels ( Gyromitra spp.). You can eat False morels if cooked well (boiling twice discarding the water each time is recommended) but I think I'll just stick to the more palatable species. The active toxin in false morels is gyromitrin, which is metabolized by the body to form monomethylhydrazine -- a rocket fuel. That was actually a bonus question on a mycology test I wrote this year!

Looks like a fun trip! Always nice to be out camping regardless of fishing. Those are false morels. If you had eaten them, you would probably be dead by now.

It's just a funny-shaped carp. Redhorse suckers tend to have a silvery body with red fins. Nice fish BTW, I grew up catching carp as there wasn't much in the Toronto area that got bigger. Finding carp up here is a bit harder but luckily there are a few other species to fill the gap!