John Bacon

What is the legality of transporting a pike with a live fishing inside of it? Could this be a loophole that allows you to legally keep a game fish in your aquarium? https://www.facebook.com/iflovefishing/videos/1433186416700913/

Daily limit, and possession limit are two different concepts. Even if the figure is the same for both, the concepts are still different. If you give a fish away, it will still count towards your daily limit for that day. However once the fish has been give to someone else, it counts towards their possession limit.

Re: "1) if fish given to a non-licence holder remain as "possession" to the licence holder, and," - That statement is incorrect. The fish would count towards the possession limit of the person to whom the fish was given. Re: "So Angler A catches his limit and Angler B catches his limit. No issues. Then they both give their fish to Norman No Licence. At what point do two limits of legally caught fish become illegal?" - It would be illegal for Norman to accept limits from two different anglers. As soon as he does so, the two limits would become illegal. He would need to finish eating angler A's limit before he could accept a limit from anger B.

Has that been confirmed by the MNR? I agree with getting rid of the Conservation License.

Not everybody agrees that it should be done. I prefer everything on one forum myself.

He can't have more than one limit in his possession at any given time. But if the limit is six; then three friends can each give him two fish. If he as a wife and two kids living with him, then the family can have four limits in total. So depending on the specific details, your scenario could be legal.

The topic of having separate sections has come up many times. The decision has continually been to stick with one general section.

I think if non-fishing threads were eliminated; it would be the beginning of the end of the site. You would be getting rid of most of the content. Fewer topics = fewer posts = fewer reasons to visit = even fewer posts... etc. The site may be able to survive a ban on just political threads. But even then, I think we would be losing something from the site. I would much rather see people learn to discuss an issue without personal attacks.

If a non-licensed fisherman can possess a full sport fishing limit, does that mean that a conservation license holder will still have a full sportfishing possession limit? Normally, your daily limit is also your possession limit. But, it would seem strange if a non-licensed angler could possess more fish than the holder of conservation license.

In fairness, we don't have it with Obama, Merkel, and Trudeau either.

That's mostly because it is more efficient to provide services in densely populated areas than it is in sparsely populated areas.

Doesn't the AR15 also accept clips which facilitate quick reloading during a mass shooting? I agree that restricting a firearm based on appearance is not logical; but restricting it because it uses clips does seem logical. Based on Google images, the Remington 742 does not accept clips. I am not entirely convinced that AR15s are restricted because they are scary looking.

If your wife wearing that shirt indicates that you won't be scoring, that would imply that the Leafs' are a difficult team for their opponents to score on. How many Senators jerseys has she bought for you?

I would need more information to determine that he is anti-gun. Supporting the ban on one particular weapon does not mean that he wants to ban all guns.

I am not denying global warming; but most reports that I have read indicated that Antarctic sea ice has actually increased. There really aren't any long term comparisons for sea ice coverage. It is tracked via satellite image. So we only have data from the late seventies to present.

True, but those are usually bigger deeper lakes. And the muskies that live in those lakes are a different strain than the ones that live in the Kawarthas. I don't think the Kawartha muskies will do well with pike.

This seemed relevant... https://ca.news.yahoo.com/homemade-extension-cord-caused-blaze-005617746.html

The PH explanation sounds a little far fetched to me. The Kawartha Lakes have existed for less than 200 years. The weren't in the Kawartha Lakes hundreds of years ago because the lakes didn't exist. I think it has just taken this long for them to spread into the new habitat.

Saunders heading to Philly... http://sports.yahoo.com/news/phillies-find-perfect-free-agent-fit-in-michael-saunders-003646972.html

I am pretty sure that HeadHunter meant refugees. I assume that the net benefit of a refugee is less than the net benefit of an immigrant; although it may still be positive. Having said that, the point of bringing refugees into Canada is entirely different from the point of immigration. As a matter of principle, I still think that the federal government (not provincial or municipal) should be responsible for providing any necessary support that is required by people that they chose to settle in Canada.

Of all the odd ball comments of yours, that is by far the most hilarious one. I assume that you were being sarcastic...

Newfie fire alarm? Other then than that, your guess is as good as mine.

Matt's a little different that way...

A 24 volt system with batteries in series will give longer run time because it will draw fewer amps than a 12 volt system. E.g. if he likes to use 30 lbs of thrust to troll, the 12v motor will draw 30 amps while a 24v system will only draw 15 amps. Even at full power, the 24v motor draws 40 amp versus 55 for the 12v. The 24v system gets you longer run time and more power when needed. A second battery for a 12v only gives a longer run time.

Didn't he play yesterday? If they don't give him a rest day when they play two nights in row; then when do they give him a day off?