Gregoire

I think the second rod and reel conbo sounds pretty good. You could use it for all types of fishing, crank and jerk baits, frogging for bass and pike. It might be a bit short for salmon,, but my only experience with them is catching them on Lake O, and we use really heavy gear out there. As far as line goes most people seem to be spooling up there spinning rods with 20-30 lb braid. I currently have reels spooled with 832, power pre and super slick, and I prefer the original power pro. 832 is a good line as well. I honestly don't think that there is much difference between braids, it is just personal preference. Apparently 832 is on sale at sail and Canadian Tire.

We actually laid off a bit, as our instincts were to go straight over. But when we showed up the guy looked like he was in a state of shock. He said that we had lures in the boat that were larger than any fish he had caught previously.

I think I was just trying to return to favour for the 3lb largie that you broke off at boatside....za za za zing.

Wow, you are on fire. Congrats and keep it up.

Silly me, I thought you were referring to a walleye caught by your ex girlfriend.

Pete uses a cradle. When I'm out with you the netting opportunities are so far and few in between that I am always a bit rusty.

I agree that this thread has gotten pretty far of track. Sorry for adding to that.

When referencing WWII law it is important to realize that many people were found guilty of violating international law specifically human rights laws drawn out in the Geneva convention, not the law of the country that they fought for. In some cases people were found guilty even though they apparently did not violate any laws. This was the case with Adolph Eichmann. If you are interested in that topic specifically Hannah Arendt wrote a great book called "Eichmann in Jerusalem" on the topic. 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? This is an online forum, I doubt if someone got charged for punting a killing a fish they could use the information they received as a valid legal argument. Just in case, and for the record, it was not my intent, nor did I want to provide a legal opinion about what does or does not constitute the proper release technique of a fish of the catch and possession limits of any type of Ontario sport fish. Sorry for the confusion Woodsman.

This post reminds me of why I have not been posting on topics such as these lately. Sorry for insulting your knowledge of the law

Some people choose to engage in debates and hope to learn from others opinions. Others want to close off discussions. I also disagree that all opinions are right and valid. For a long time in our society we thought that women were not equal to men, amongst other things. 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.

Totally aware of how unrealistic the comparison was, just trying to make the point that there are instances where you may not be breaking the law but may want to avoid doing something.

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 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. I am just trying to give you something to think about. By the way, it is not illegal to cheat on your wife.

I won one of those shirts from the Mississauga chapter prize table last night. I'll probably wear it tomorrow and try to get some musky slime on it. I would also like to add that despite the fact that I did not catch a musky, I caught many more bass than Pete. In my mind it takes luck to catch a ski, but skill to catch a bass.

I will not question an angler who keeps a legal fish. I just worry that this angler in particular will catch much more fish that he legally must release and will end up killing them due to not having the proper release tools. I believe that if you are fishing for sport and not for food ethically you must make sure that you do everything in your power to make sure that the fish are released with as little harm as possible. Paul I think you may have jumped the gun a bit in calling this guy out. Now he is probably feeling defensive and will reject all advice that you give him. Maybe he has a pair of plyers in his boat, and water releases smaller fish. I also think that some muksy anglers, including myself, feel a little jealous that a fish this big was caught by someone else and not released, as it means that I will not get a chance to catch it. For those of you who feel that musky anglers are pompous know it all zealots who look down on other anglers: there is a bit of truth to that thinking. There is a movement in the community to change this opinion, and to stop the negativity associated with posting pics of musky. I hope that most people who are reading this thread are getting more information than negativity.

nice fish

Nice report. Thanks for sharing.

I have 80# super slick on one of my musky reels and I prefer 832 and the otiginal power pro over it.

John I thought you liked the power pro super slick

Maybe I should post a pic of a 401 conquest

If you are banging cranks off the bottom of the lake a heavier line makes sense.

Most of my reels have 80-100#. I lost one og my favourite lures at LOTW when I hooked into a fish with 65#. The fish raked me across the rocks and broke me off. I'm not sure if stronger line would have made a difference, but I know the 65# feels significantly weaker than 80#+

I have wondered about this reel as well. It seems like Shimano put a lot of r & d into this reel, and it will be smaller and lighter than the past calcuttas. Every review that I have read online claims that the new drag is actually easier to use. My concern with this reel is that it will be a bit like the winch. A really good reel, but not a reel that will last a lifetime. I own a winch and a conquest and I can feel the difference between the two. I am afraid that the new calcutta will be a little like the winch. I am not sure that it will hold up to the rigours of pulling in big blades. Having said that, I can't wait to get my hands on one of these, and will probably own one. Another new real that really interests me is the Daiwa Lexa 301, because it comes in a lefty and it is a high speed reel. From my experience fishing musky, and it has only been 3 or so years, I have found that you must use the right tools. Pulling big blades is a very effective way of catching fish. There are only a few reels out there that can hold up to retrieving big blades, and the TE was one of them. I am not convinced that the calcutta D will be able to do so. Something about it being a smaller reel with a narrower spool. It will be a very good reel for tossing other musky baits. That part of the equations sucks, as there are not a lot of options for pulling big blades if you are a lefty like me.

That must be once you reach a certain age

Nice fish

Well done. That is a really clean fish.