craigdritchie

I absolutely love my Highlander. Tows up to 5,000 lbs without even knowing that it's there. Fuel economy is awesome, the seats are really nice on longer drives, it just eats up snow and there's really nothing I would change about it. But all three are excellent vehicles. You need to drive all three and see which you like best, since there are subtle differences in the seats, rear visibility, and the placement/layout of climate controls etc. But you really can't go wrong with any of the three, and you'll be shocked at the difference from a 10 year-old F150.

I love early spring pike, there's nothing better IMHO. Opening weekend weather can vary quite a bit. If it's a late spring and I'm facing colder water and inactive fish, I use use smaller baits and fish slow. The smaller Husky Jerks that msp suggested are a good choice for covering water. In more defined areas I prefer jigs - I've caught a ton of big spring pike on four-inch Sassy Shads. I also like Mark Kulik's Swammers, they have a killer action to them. I normally rig the bait on the lightest jig head I can get away with (weedless jig head, ideally), and probe the entrances to spawning bays, especially the first bit of deeper water (6 to 10 feet) as the bays lead out to the main lake. You know you're in the right neighborhood if you catch a few smaller walleye by accident, since they're the reason the pike are in those spots to begin with. If we've had an early spring and by opening day the weather's nice and the fish are active, then I usually go with a bit larger baits (6 inch range is good) and fish a bit faster to cover more water. I've usually found that spinnerbaits or big inline spinners are pretty tough to beat. That's when I focus on sharper drop-offs located between the spawning bays and the deep water. It's not easy fishing, but casting really large Flatfish in those spots, retrieving as fast as you can, can be really effective for big pike. By the end of the day your arms will be rubber, but it's often worth it. Good luck.

For me, northwest Ontario has good fishing for a lot of things, but it really doesn't have the best fishing for anything. By the time I look at travel costs to NW Ontario, the reality is that Saskatchewan or Manitoba isn't much more and both of those have far better fishing for pike, walleye and lakers. For everything else, I find I catch bigger fish here in the south. 150 walleyed a day is fun, but when they're all the same cookie cutter 15 inch fish, it gets dull fast.

The keel is a physical structure that's either attached to, or configured into, the bottom of the hull to provide directional stability. A seam down the middle where the hull plates join together is not the same thing. Most boats have one keel, usually made from heavy extruded aluminum, which is attached over the center seam so it can serve a dual purpose of providing directional stability while also protecting that joint from physical damage. Usually T-shaped in cross section, a real keel is quite unlike the stamped seam caps that are sometimes passed off as keels due to cost-cutting measures. Boats may have multiple keels, normally one down the center and one or two more at the back on each side, although specialized race boats might use multiple keels, none of which are located on the centerline. Some V-hull boats use a one-piece lower hull which is folded along the centerline. While the fold gives the hull a V shape, that fold itself is not a keel either, and doesn't give the boat the kind of directional stability that a proper keel does. That's not a knock against one-piece bottoms, by the way - I quite like them, especially when they then have a proper keel attached. Strakes look like a keel but serve a different function. Keels provide directional stability, while strakes are normally attached closer to the chines in order to provide additional lift. They're also widely used on pontoon boats, which otherwise are more prone to plow through the water than plane up over top of it. In cedar strip boats, a "strake" is one line of wood strips that runs continuously from bow to stern. Bottom line to all of this is still the same. Pay attention to the construction details to be sure you get what you think you're paying for. The retail price means nothing, it is quite possible to pay a lot of money for a second-rate product.

With aluminum boats you have to look beyond the graphics and the paint job and whatever Joe Blow the Sponsored Pro says, and focus on the construction details. They reveal everything about how the boat was made. If you take one thing away from this entire thread, let it be this - during the recession a lot of boat companies made HUGE changes to the way their boats are built, because with sales being down, cutting costs was the only way to keep generating profits for their shareholders. As a result, there are a lot of boats out there today that are no longer built anywhere close to the way they once were. How do you make sure you get what you pay for? 1. Here's a simple thing - are the cleats through-bolted, or just screwed on? If the builder took the time to actually through-bolt them properly, then it's a safe bet they didn't cut corners anywhere else. But if they're just screwed on with simple wood screws, where else did they make compromises? 2. Look at the transom. Does the wood go to the floor? Or is it just a strip where the motor bolts on? It's cheaper to just have a strip. But it won't last anywhere near as long. 3. If the boat has a full walk-through windshield, then how does it attach to the consoles? Is it through-bolted? Or just screwed on? 4. Do some research online and find out how they put in the foam flotation that's required by law. Some builders install the floor, then inject expanding foam underneath it, so it fills every crack and space. Others just lay in flat sheet foam, or pour in non-expanding foam, then bolt the floor on over top. This method is cheaper, but the problem is that it leaves air spaces, which water can then get in to. The inevitable result is rot and mold issues, which can then deteriorate the foam itself. But water can't get into a boat that's been injected with expanding foam. It's a BIG difference. Besides that, the expanding foam bonds with the hull and deck to give you a solid, rigid structure that equals a smoother, quieter ride. 5. Sounds crazy, but does the boat even have a keel? Have a look because some don't. Others cheap out and only have a center cap where their aluminum plates attach. Others do it right and have up to five proper keels. Guess which boat will track straightest? Guess which one delivers more protection against rocks? I could go on all day, but since I don't get paid for this, I won't :-) Suffice to say that the world has changed. You have to do your homework and look at how the boat is built to make sure you get what you pay for.

Not a good forecast if you like to ice fish, no. But if you like to fish open water, it's a very nice forecast indeed.

Received this press release this afternoon and thought some here might find it of interest. This winter Evinrude is offering a 10 year warranty promo on its E-TEC outboards. The promo runs through the end of March. Here's the press release, verbatim: BRP OFFERS INDUSTRY FIRST 10-YEAR COVERAGE ON EVINRUDE E-TEC ENGINES STURTEVANT, Wis., December 14, 2016 – BRP, a world leader in powersports, announced today an industry first in a consumer offering for marine engines – an exceptional, 10-year, factory-backed extended service coverage on all Evinrude E-TEC and Evinrude E-TEC G2 engines. The 10-year, factory-backed extended service coverage offer runs from December 12, 2016 through March 31, 2017. “Boaters deserve peace of mind when on the water,” said Krista Sparkes, Vice President of Sales North America for BRP’s Marine Propulsion Systems division. “In addition to our thrilling performance and intelligent design, Evinrude owners can now enjoy the security of a 10-year factory-backed non-declining coverage.” Consumers who purchase and take delivery of eligible Evinrude E-TEC engines during the Boat Show Sales Event will qualify for a 10-year, non-declining, 100% factory-backed extended service coverage valued at up to $7,500 (USD). Unlike competitors’ coverage, this offering will never be sold to third parties and will not change over the 10 years. In addition, the service coverage is transferrable to every future owner of the engine – greatly increasing the engine’s residual value. Evinrude also offers the longest corrosion coverage in the outboard industry, five years of solid protection on E-TEC G2 outboards. “This coverage is unheard of in the marine industry and offered by no other engine manufacturer,” continued Sparkes. “This exclusive program further validates the confidence we have in the reliability and durability of our E-TEC engines, including our brand new G2 models. Between unmatched product superiority and this bold consumer offering, there really is no other option but to power with Evinrude.” For more information on the promotion or to see the product line-up, please visit the Evinrude booth at one of the following upcoming boat shows: January 6-8 Denver Boat Sow January 6-15 Houston Boat Show January 11-15 Chicago Boat Show January 18-22 Vancouver International Boat Show January 19-22 Minneapolis Boat Show January 20-29 Milwaukee Boat Show January 20-29 Toronto International Boat Show January 25-29 New York Boat Show January 26-29 Baltimore Boat Show January 27-February 4 Seattle Boat Show February 2-5 Montreal Boat Show February 9-12 Hartford Boat Show February 11-19 Detroit Boat Show February 11-19 New England Boat Show February 16-20 Miami International Boat Show March 1-5 Atlantic City Boat Show March 16-19 Edmonton Boat and Sportsmen’s Show BRP's Evinrude engine line up, from 3.5 to 300 HP, offers customers superior value across a full range of applications. The all-new Evinrude E-TEC G2 engines are now available from 150 to 300 HP. Engines are available at authorized Evinrude dealerships worldwide. Become part of the online Evinrude community at www.evinrudenation.com and follow Evinrude on Facebook at www.facebook.com/brpevinrude. For a complete list of new and existing Evinrude dealers, visit www.evinrude.com.

Anyone looking for a cheap Lund? Crown Assets is listing a 2002 Lund 1650 with a Merc 50 four-stroke and a Shoreland'r trailer on its online auction site. Minimum bid is $1,000. There are only three photos, but it looks to be in decent shape. The description says they ran it this year. Link to the auction here. Just for fun, here's a link to a 2002 Lund catalogue with more info on the boat. I expect it will sell for more than the $1,000 minimum, but this could still be one heck of a steal for someone. Boat is in Port Rowan, auction closes Dec 2. Happy bidding!

And we did better by electing Trudeau?

As noted, you have a Cotton Cordell Ripplin' Redfin. These are tremendous lures for all sorts of fish, one of my favourites actually. They're made of hollow plastic, which means in the water, their buoyancy is super-touchy. It doesn't take much to put the lure in or out of tune. Apart from checking to ensure the hook hangers are all straight, check the front eye, to which the split ring you tie onto attaches. This little wire loop must be dead straight, or the bait won't run properly. It doesn't take much, even being off by a hair makes a HUGE difference in how the bait runs. Just because a lure is new doesn't mean it's right. Check it. Also check the hooks. These lures are super-sensitive, and the action can be changed by going to hooks that are slightly heavier or lighter than the originals. Look at your two baits, and look at the hooks. Of course they won't run the same. The different hooks result in a substantial weight and balance difference between them. Finally, as Steve mentioned in an earlier post, at some point Cotton Cordell did make a minor change to the lip - I don't know when or why, I just know that there is a slight difference in the diving lip between old baits (over 10 years old) and new ones. The reinforcing strip on the back of the lip on old baits was straight, and the new ones have a slight curve. There is a similar, almost identical change to the lips on another of my favourite baits (Smithwick Rogue) which is (was?) made by the same corporation. In my personal opinion, the older baits work better than the new ones do. But even so , the new ones are still pretty good. Point is, neither of them will run right if they have oversized hooks or a bent eyelet (and yes, I do think the stock hooks are slightly oversized). Finally, the change in the lip slightly affects the speed where you will get optimal action. Older baits seem to work best at a slightly higher speed than the new ones will. Try a bit slower or faster retrieve / trolling speed, and see if that makes a difference. Check all of the metal eyes on your new lure. If you're sure everything is straight, experiment with retrieve speed, and replace the original hooks with either the same style in a slightly smaller size, or something in the same size but lighter in weight. You should see a difference. Balance is absolutely critical with these things.

Thread locked in 3 .... 2 .... 1 .....

320 million people to choose from .... and this is the best they could come up with? Wow.

LOL ..... tell you what, you go write off your boat and tell us how it goes.

It's a Liberal government. That being the case, money vaporizes into thin air every single day. Why should a fishing fund be exempt? Shall we recall some other examples of where the Ontario Liberals had money disappear without a trace? $70 million is just pocket change compared to things like ... e-Health. Established by Dalton McGuinty to put health records into a digital database. More than $1.2 billion spent to this day, and not one electronic record produced yet. 'Smart' hydro meters. They said it would cost $285 million to replace existing meters with the new ones. To date, they've spent $1.6 billion and they're not finished. OLG scandal - more than $1.3 billion missing, and no idea where the money went. Ornge medical helicopters - $1.5 billion in spending still unaccounted for. Green Energy Act - $7 billion supply deal signed with Samsung Group to carpet the province with wind turbines, producing electricity no one needs, and which we are required by law to buy even when other sources are cheaper. Gas Plant scandal ... another $1.1 billion in tax money disappears without a trace. No reduction in our HST and no pay-down of debt in spite of receiving $4.3 billion each year from the feds since McGuinty was premier Teacher Contracts. Wynne just this year paid the Ontario teachers union $2.2 million so they could fight the government for a better contract. Say what? Oh man, I could go on for a long time but I don't think my stomach can take it. Maybe our fishing fund went the same route as CancerCare Ontario. Remember? McGuinty gave $75 million to two consultants for a report on how to improve care of cancer patients in Ontario. No report has been produced yet. No idea where the consultants went. Or, even who they were. Bottom line is, there's no telling where our $70 million fisheries enhancement fund went. Maybe it helped fund the Pride Parade. The news story John bacon quoted is wrong - $70 million in public money does just disappear. It happens every single day here in Ontari-owe. Remember that next time you vote.

That's not true at all. The Transport Canada capacity plate has legal authority. Beyond that, if you ever have an accident with an overpowered boat, your insurance coverage is automatically null and void.

Not my photo (it was sent to me) but it's a scenario I know well. Cats like roe. Be careful when tying roe bags! (click the pic to make it larger)

Great pic, Jon ... and what a sight! Brookies and Atlantics in the Humber ... pretty amazing, really. If only there were more than one of each!

Yes on the Humber. I know, I still can't believe it either. Has to be a lake-run fish. There's no way it would survive through the summer down in the frog water. Temps would be way too warm. I'll guess maybe pushing two pounds? Really nice fish.

I was shooting some photos of salmon jumping at a dam the other day. It was only after I started going through the pictures that I happened to notice this guy, way in the back of one of the shots. I know this image is lousy ... it's zoomed in and cropped like crazy ... but still. There's no mistaking what it is. Who knew that brookies could jump like that?

Waders are no different than anything else. You really do get what you pay for. I've been wearing Simms for years, and never had any issues with them whatsoever. I agree they cost a fortune, but you can't put a price on having dry, warm feet when you're standing in ice water for hours at a time. Given how long they last, my next pair will also be Simms.

I see a couple of different issues where the Lake O system is concerned. Biggest one being, MNR has extremely limited budgets, and zero chance right now of seeing that change. That makes it tough because nothing - meat market fishery or rehab of native species - can happen without money. To me, the put-and-take salmon fishery is the low-hanging fruit. It's obviously popular, and it's obviously the most visible. If MNR were to develop (or re-develop, I guess) a strong Lake O fishery centered on the GTA and built around coho, chinook, rainbows and browns, we would (1) have great fishing within sight of something like six million people, with (2) all sorts of economic activity that's clearly associated with it. When you have people buying tackle and boats and gas and licenses, it becomes impossible for the Ontario government to dispute that fishing creates jobs and contributes to their tax coffers in a serious way. It also brings a lot of new people into fishing, and they buy more licenses and spend more money on gear. And that brings in still more taxes. All this spending is what opens the door to MNR getting a little more clout with policy makers, and getting more budget to work with. That extra budget can easily fund habitat projects and native species restoration programs. The problem with focusing on self-reproducing, native species from the very beginning is that it just doesn't yield the same results. Queens Park politicians can't easily see people fishing for brookies on tiny headwater streams scattered all along the lake shore, or appreciate the economic impact that might represent. It is far easier for them to understand it when you show them a lineup of boats at a suburban launch ramp. Let's face it, politicians need to see results. That's why the Atlantic program has been such a colossal failure. In spite of all the press coverage they got when they stocked fish in the Humber, nothing ever came of it. There was no return of adults, there was no sport fishery created, and most importantly, there was no evidence that stocking all these fish contributed even one penny in extra tax revenue. It failed on every level. I hate for it to be about money, but where Queens Park is concerned, that's all that matters. We once had a great salmon and trout fishery right in the GTA, and at that time, MNR did spend a lot of money on fisheries projects. They built fishways, they removed dams, and they spent money on habitat work. But somewhere along the way, we squandered the big fishery that funded it all, mainly by spreading the stocking over too many locations to produce the kind of concentrated results the politicians need to see. Once that steady exposure to the downtown Toronto politicians disappeared, so did the support for MNR. Their budgets quickly followed suit. I do not believe put-and-take fisheries are the final answer - not by any means. But I do believe they are a critical key to giving MNR some legs to stand on, and bring in money to fund other projects. We need to rebuild that base fishery that pays for everything else. The other issue I see is that in many cases, unfortunately, the habitat has been changed to such an extent that it will simply no longer support the fish communities that it did 300 years ago. Some of that damage simply cannot be undone.

OMG that's so bad ... wish I had thought of it myself!

A friend sent me this, thought I would share it. Oh well, it was a nice looking gar. You can click to enlarge.

When I was a young man, buying a house was also a pipe dream ... the fact that interest rates at that time were at one point over 21% (as opposed to less than 4% today) didn't exactly help when it came to financing anything - homes, cars or boats. We had low-paying jobs and gobs of debt too. Yet people went into hock for boats back then because the fishing on the big lake made it totally worth it. Today? Not so much. The economic impact of Lake Ontario's fishery decline would easily measure into the hundreds of millions ... if not more.

Interesting slide show, thanks for posting it. Interesting that MNR doesn't feel that reducing the number of Atlantic salmon stocked would have any impact whatsoever, in spite of the fact they continue pouring 700,000 of the things into Lake O every year. Could this finally be an admission that the stupid things just don't survive and contribute to the fishery? I doubt it. First major return of chinook was in the fall of 1978, into Bronte Creek ... I remember writing about it, and going there to take photos. Bronte was selected as the stocking site because the MNR fisheries managers of the day thought they could better monitor the results by keeping the chinook separated from the then-booming coho run into the Credit. Of course that was back in the day when Bronte Creek actually had water in it ... long before the subdivisions and urban sprawl dropped the water table and led to the current microscopic water volumes in the creek. Agree 100% - coho are still a superior sport fish to chinook in every measurable way. Though they don't reach the same maximum size, IMHO coho outfight chinooks and are way more fun to catch. Even in the lake, chinnies are little more than carp with teeth, as a friend of mine says. It's nice they can pull line, but they don't jump and they don't turn and twist anything like a coho. Unfortunately, it costs a lot more to raise coho in a hatchery than it does to raise chinook, and that's precisely why chinook are the focus of the salmon program today. They're cheaper. Back in the heyday of the coho program, on any given Saturday there would be 2,000 boats fishing for salmon between Toronto and Bronte. The derby used to attract 10,000 entrants, and hotels along the Lakeshore were booked solid through August and September. Tackle shops sold rods and reels and equipment by the carton. Boat dealers sold a ton of boats and engines. It was good, in spite of some economic uncertainty and interest rates being five times higher than they are right now. Today, the number of boats out there is probably measured in the dozens. The derby survives, but it's not what it was. Hotels and tackle shops have closed due to lack of sales. Boat dealers aren't exactly flipping salmon boats like crazy either, despite financing rates at all-time lows.Yet there are more anglers in southern Ontario today than there were back then. What does it tell you? It tells me that Lake Ontario is being BADLY mismanaged. Every year they dump in hundreds of thousands of lakers that no one could care less about catching. They stock only a tiny number of browns, and spread the stocking so thin that they're basically never seen again. Coho plants have fallen through the floor, to a fraction of what they once stocked, and now they're put in at such a small size survival is pretty much zero. They still waste money and hatchery space on stocking hundreds of thousands of Atlantics every year, in spite of that program having been proven a complete failure 25 years ago. And for decades they've relied on natural reproduction to support the steelhead fishery (in both the rivers and the lake) in spite of overwhelming evidence it simply can't keep up. Were it not for chinook, Lake O would be a complete and total wasteland. If MNR wanted to actually provide a good fishery and get people out there the way they once were, they would save the small fortune they waste each year on greasers and Atlantics and use it to fund a serious coho program. Stock rainbows on a put-and-take basis into urban rivers to create fisheries there, and take pressure off wild fish. And concentrate their brown trout stocking so people have a chance to actually catch the things. It's not rocket surgery. Yet all we ever hear are excuses after excuses.