Twocoda

Here is a RSO framed in for a 6 foot door notice the studs and cripples on either side of the door...i like to put my headers under the sill plate and build down to my required height..the actual opening for this paticular door is 73 inches wide by 89 inches tall which translates to one inch too wide for the door and one inch too high...giving you room for shims and insulation

awesome ....i used to have a pair similar to those in the 80s...i still wear mukluks today (moose hyde} but not as high as those...can your feet breath in these ones? What are they made from?

But they do win the hearts of MANY...I took a buddy down there last year and although he has caught 100s of fish all year long he hasnt stopped talking about that adventure...its going to probably be an annual pilgrimage going forward....

All your doing is transferring the roof load from where a wall use to be to either side of the RSO with the header unless the rim joist structure of the mobile home is damaged you shouldnt have to add any additional support under the door

being a mobile home if you do not have the thickness to accommodate a 2 ply 2x10 then youll need to purchase an laminate beam that are narrower in width and can be cut to any length required for a header. If you are repurposing old studs for your cripples (jacks)make sure your header or LVL is long enough to accommadate the extra width of the material 72 inches plus cripple width (x2) plus 1 inch will give you your header length Once the cripples are in your RSO should be 73 inches giving you 1/2 inch gap larger than the door on either side to accommadate adjusting for Door Level and Plumb Dont forget to silicone seal the base of the door to the floor it sits on (you can use contruction adhesive if you wish) and shim the 6 points around the door to snug it up in the RSO Screw through the shims into your cripples but dont drive the screws home (just snug them up) insulate the RSO ( if your using foam make sure its low expansion type and close and lock the door (dont open the door until it is completly set) if your using high expansion foam you will need to make a brace to put inside the door frame to keep it from bowing the door in....or you can simply tuck batt insulation in the gaps around the door Depending on the manufacturer specs can vary for the RSO due to nailing flanges and brick moulds ...make sure you know the RSO of the door you are using Good Luck...

We call them Scabbys...as in scabby ole salmon....Boots is reserved for lakers....Im making the trip down this weekend for some of those boys and hen....They are a great fight!!!!Nice shootin Bill Definatly worth sorting through for the hoes

Congrates nice fish ...IF it isnt your intentions on keeping the fish its probably best not to put your fingers in its gills...beauty fish

small mouths will be hens..males mouths kype...salmon have fork tails...steelie Square..beauty fish though...nice shootin

Still reading ....Still following....Still expecting this to be the greatest success story EVER without a doubt

This is a BSL thread from the start because it took the life of a dog and ruined a family half way around the world not even in Canada ...but since we live under the same conditions as that dog named Lennox it pertains to us here in Ontario as well..It happens here too...As the reasons of BSLs existence became a reality i found it disturbing so i thought the people (who care to know) on this forum would like to know as well..History will speak for itself as time goes on ..Im not advocating for PC or NDP or the Peoples Party Im advocating for DOGS and it just so happens the Liberals are the ones that created this mess in Ontario...thats not to say it coulsnt have been a different party that did it but it wasnt...there are level headed Liberals that know BSL is wrong and have stood up against it... and against their BOSS by standing for the people of their constituants. Kim Cotrel is probably the BIGGEST man in our Country right now because he is a Liberal and the co author of Hersheys Bill 16 ( talk about Cahonas) ...As of today there are 3 Liberals that know its wrong and are stepping out against their boss...who knows if the PC or NDP would have the gumption to do the same as these three Liberals...but ...Randy Hillier (PC) and Cheri DiNovo :NDP} hearts have been in this from the beginning and will see it through one way or another until the end....Are they good politicians???beats me never heard of them before until i got myself into this but from what i have learned of them...they both seem like fine balanced people and passionate for what they believe in ( keeping in mind they are politicians) So im not slamming all liberals just the ones that wont stand up for their people and allow Dalton to intimidate them with his methods to force them to be "whipped" and of course Dalton himself, When he grew up with a dog that falls under his BSL law to be euthanized and knows better then the general public what these dogs are all about but yet still buys into Bryants smokescreen to collect votes one euthanized puppy at a time...Dalton Sr and Dalton Jr lived a loving life with their family pet...but the rest of us cant???? Something wrong wouldnt you say?

its seems to me you havent been reading everything ...only the things you choose to read which is your prerogative i suppose as well as its your prerogative to NOT click on the link that is Titled "Dog Lovers" i said it before and ill say it again...i realize this is a fishing forum and i also realize there are alot of people in this fishing forum that own and care for their pets...you havent provided one ounce of intelligent debate but remedial criticism of this thread without debating anything of the wealth of information i have provided of NOW statistics and proof...im sorry but i feel you arent representing YOUR opinion of the matter very well other than being a troll to this thread. If are a type of person that cant pass the media hyteria out of your system and see the truth for what it really is ...go fishing and leave this thread alone...if you have more information than the 4000 plus veterinarians in this province or the thousands of EXPERTS around the world then feel free to post it ???? Contrary to YOUR belief your not the only person in this forum...and this is listed in Genersl Discussion....(keeping it civil) If the truth pulls on heartstrings then maybe there is something wrong with the Law as it pertains to BSL? what is your opinion??? Its Ridiculous how OUR Liberals that represent OUR Ontario are campaigning their accomplishments towards education in this province but yet they deny to listen to the educated EXPERTS as it pertains to their BAD Law that was formed from Panic Policy ( Proof is spread all out through this thread).... In case you missed it or it was deleted like some of my posts here it is again feel free to debate this and if you cant ...dont call Dalton for an answer because he cant either! I honestly hope you do reply to the OVMA Proof of EXPERTS and if you dont,,,then ill just accept the fact your out fishing and having fun To answer your question about how BLS violates the Charter of rights....PM me and ill give you the phone number of a police officer in Winnipeg (upon his consent) and he will tell you how he isnt free to move from Winnipeg to Ontario to accept a job with the OPP because he has a dog that falls under BSL...(Now read the Charter) Cheers http://www.ovma.org/pdf/oepnletter_bill16_may12.pdf

it sure would be quicker...a concrete saw would eat it up in no time or if you have a large angle grinder that would be quicker than a saw zall too... keep in mind to wear your safety equipment...fiberglass can embed right into your skin or eye and the dust from the epoxy and paint isnt very good for your lungs

The only thing i disagree with here is the reference that Pit Bulls are a breed..They arent but for the sake of argument they are using the term "Pit Bull" as a description of several breeds http://www.andersoncooper.com/2012/02/13/shorty-rossi-on-love-of-pit-bulls/

Its not politically motivated at all...its BSL motivated...and to do away with a Bad Law and inform the people of this forum as best they can be informed on BOTH sides of the fence. There are alot of dog owners on here and i would think they would appreciate knowing whether or not they agree or disagree...

Tragic Suicide After Pet Dog Is Destroyed: Mark Amston, aged 20 years, committed suicide in 1991 the day after he had his own dog, a pit bull terrier, destroyed, he had failed to get the compulsory insurance.The pit bull terrier ‘Sandy’ had been brought as a six week old puppy in March 1991 before the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 was introduced. The death of Mark Amston was investigated by Coroner Mr Dewi Pritchard Jones, the inquest heard that dog owner Mark had been worried as he had failed to get the compulsory insurance for his dog under the restrictions introduced in 1991, the coroner Mr Jones said that Mr Amston’s position changed from having a family pet to being the owner of something which in the eyes of the law was dangerous and had to be controlled, Mark Amston had his dog put down and the following day he hanged himself. The Coroner said: “In this case it was a family pet that had to be put down, not a fierce animal. There was no evidence that this dog was fierce. I think the lesson from this death is that legislation should be based on reason and not on panic.” Mrs Christine Amston, Mark’s mother said that the dog had been brought as a puppy before the new regulations came into force and that the family had no idea her son had been planning to have the dog put down or, after he had, that he was planning to take his own life. Mark’s Amston’s seventeen year old sister found him hanging from an attic doorway at the top of the stairs the day after Sandy the dog was destroyed. Coroner Mr Jones said that the death of Mark Amston, aged 20, from Caernarfon, was “a consequence of legislation rushed out and not properly thought out”. He also said that it was obvious that the Government had been pushed into an action by a press campaign which had highlighted dog biting incidents, however trivial and “all of a sudden this family pet became a dangerous weapon, you might say, subject to controls and compulsory insurance, as if one were in possession of a lethal weapon”. Mr Jones said that Mr Amston had left a note and it showed that he was closely attached to the dog and had decided to die with him. The note had simply read: “Goodbye; me and Sandy will be together for ever. Me and Sandy will never be parted again.”

Kemper Please convince me Breed Specific Legislation is making OUR Ontario safe and not a waste of our tax dollars and does nothing but ruin Good peoples families and kills dogs...dont keep quiet...a civil discussion can go on here...i hope it does...have your say ...

Green Canada I cant speak for Selma but i have heard her say words along the lines of "not ailienating" but for me its a pill thats hard to swallow when the liberals alienate the EXPERT opinions for which good Law is based on, for example the 4000+ veterinarians of Ontario ? The post to Selma's Caveat was to show you that this issue isnt just about dogs and to point out to you what you refer to as "silly". Police Officers are required by law to have a warrant to enter someones house if unwelcome..."Silly" in my mind is that an Animal Control Officer doesnt require one and can steal your property (dog) on an allegation of an untrained eye (neighbour/politician/peace officer) just by saying the word mythical "Pit Bull" You seen in the video Bryant trying to pick the "pit bull" out of the photographs. DO you not think if he is writing a LAW for us Ontarians to abide by..he should at least KNOW what he is writing it about? Now thats "silly" and ignorant. Silly is not looking to a sucessful format such as Calgary's. If it seems harsh against the Liberals then its for good reason...Im sure you know of many other issues regarding the Liberal Regime as i do too but this thread isnt about that...its to provide information to the people of this forum that are not aware of what is going on...if you have secret information to justify BSL that is current and proven then please do post it and help the people out of the forum so they can make an educated decision as to where they stand.

HMMMM im feeling like there was a team meeting and i wasnt invited...lol...Nice Shooting guys Ive been plugging away as well...but the only fish ive seen bigger than our salmon entry was caught by my Buddy...too bad too it would have put us up there...no worries though ...where there is one ...there is MORE and ill get them (knock on wood)... Cheers

Green Canada this is for you ...enjoy! and please do your homework on the author to try to debunk her impeccable reputation and passion as a person http://caveat.typepad.com/blog/2012/08/psst-wanna-buy-a-pit-bull-ban.html

Here is an article and video interview explaining the ineffectiveness of the Bad Law as it pertains to Dogs...The man in this story is Bill Bruce. One of the key people in Calgarys success of animal control and the reason their statistics of dog incidences have dropped 78 % even though Calgary as a city has grown to over a million people.Since i posted the video of the the "clown/human and animal killer" Michael Bryant to this one sided discussion...i thought it would only be fair to bring an EXPERT opinion to this thread regarding BAD LAW as it pertains to YOUR pets Ill post the link to the bottom of this post for those that want to watch the video Ineffective Laws Ineffective laws set neighbor against neighbor, discriminate against responsible owners, create unsolvable enforcement problems for animal control officers, waste precious public resources, and do not address problematic owner behavior. Bill Bruce, advisor to NCRC, and Director of Animal and By-Law Services in Calgary, Alberta, discusses ineffective laws in this video interview. NCRC Interview with Bill Bruce on Ineffective Dog Laws. Ineffective Laws are: Over and under-inclusive. If a dog owner complies with the standards set forth in his community, how many dogs he/she has, or what kind of dogs he/she has, should not be public business. Ineffective laws penalize responsible dog owners while failing to isolate the problematic ones. For example, in a community that limits owners to three dogs in an effort to control nuisance and other issues, a responsible pet owner with five dogs, who does not create a nuisance or threat to neighbors may face a loss of one or more of his companions. A limit law does not address the irresponsible owners who, however many dogs they have, leave them out at night barking, allow them to damage neighbors' property, or worse, allow them to threaten other animals or people. Difficult to enforce. How can animal control officers know when responsible pet owners are in violation of a limit law, breed-specific law, a time-limit tethering ordinance, or a mandatory spay/neuter law? They can't -- unless they patrol door-to-door looking for violators, which, in the case of a timed time-limit tethering ordinance means making a second stop after the expiration of the time limit. All this is timely, costly, and just not practical. Breed-specific legislation is especially difficult to enforce because it is impossible, even for animal professionals, to breed label dogs of unknown origin. Learn more about Breed and Behavior and the inaccuracy of Visual Breed Identification for a more complete understanding of the ineffectiveness of breed-specific legislation. Costly. Ineffective laws waste precious public resources. Laws that target a breed of dog not only waste currently budgeted resources, but demand additional appropriations. Best Friends Animal Society developed a fiscal impact calculator that allows communities to estimate the cost of attempting to enforce breed-specific legislation. A recent study shows why the expense related to enforcing ineffective breed-specific legislation does not produce the desired result of reducing serious dog bite-related injuries. Click here to read about this study. In addition to the taxpayer expense, ineffective, discriminatory laws are costly to individual dog owners, who may be confronted with the high emotional cost of having their family pet taken from them and destroyed. Or they may bear ordinance-imposed financial costs as a result of a requirement that they maintain higher liability insurance limits, or purchase expensive containment systems. Finally, because ineffective laws lower license compliance, communities also lose licensing revenues that could have been used to fund important animal services. Alienate pet owners from each other and from the community. Ineffective laws set one group of pet owners against other groups of pet owners. Responsible pet owners who may be over the limit law, who own a breed or breed mix targeted by breed-specific legislation, or who have an intact pet in an area with a mandatory spay-neuter law, will be less likely to license pets and less likely to take pets to the vet for fear of facing stiff fines or worse: having their pets taken from them and destroyed. The resulting impact to communities is a loss of licensing revenue, and an increased threat to public health for animals that do not receive vaccines that prevent the spread of disease in the community. http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/dog-legislation/ineffective-laws/

Heres a reflection back to 2005 with an interview with Michael Bryant regarding putting the "pit bull" ban into legislation...He states in the interview that things were going to be discussed and debated with EXPERTS and go from there...they did NOT do this...the Liberals pushed the bill through disregarding the EXPERTS to accommodate their agenda of creating a sense of security to the public (i hope you read the article above this one) Corruption runs rampant through the OLP of yesteryear and still does because the Liberals are still disregarding the Experts advice that BSL does not or work and in violation of our Charter...Its important that everyone in the ridings of Vaughan and Kitchener/ Waterloo vote in the this upcomming Sept 6 "Buy" Election to remove the Liberal regime from a majority power and restore democracy in Ontario sending the message to Dalton that his antics will no longer be tolerated... Exercise your rights and send that message! This issue is MUCH more than just "dogs" and the violations of our Charter of Rights

bud worm is probably the right answer ..phinitrathion or malathion are two chemicals to kill them i used to work forest protection in the late 80s in New Brunswick.. unfortunately for the tree..it needs to be removed though its going to be a fire hazzard soon

its a glass boat...they make for ALOT of black smoke that can be seen for miles...unless you burn it at night with no moon...

Big fish are ALWAYS caught one week before a derby or 2 minutes after a derby ends....such is fishing

Patrick is a part of the fabric of your being...who you are as a person... he served you well as you served him well Congradulations on the experiences you shared together Condolences for your loss