Steve

ahh come on...you can scrape the fuzz off and fry it up!!!

And G's back :) hope you are doing better my friend. I'm not a big fan of "meat fuzz" myself, but each to their own.

but it is the drivers fault..... who can blame anyone else but the drivers?

the deseronto launch at Quinte can be a pain in the arse. flat and long without much depth. that pier 4/ bay front park launch pictured above is super easy...but i guess when its filled with slime, it becomes 1000x's tougher. there are "use at your own risk" signs at the ramp...however signs don't automatically absolve a party of negligence.

well, that is a good thing...stimulus to the local economy. however, with all things considered, once they are built and running, the work force reduced 90%....so not many long term jobs... but while under construction, great stimulus to the local economy....and depending on the municipal tax structure, it can also be a good tax generator.

holy whoa. http://www.nugget.ca/2015/07/27/estimated-19760-walleye-caught-during-moratorium#.VbalCZWYrIY.facebook

Rice. Or do some serious legwork and find the northern gems.

GB is beautiful..certainly.... honey harbour is a nice area.

I'm not sure what you mean? If you mean the limits of Insurance I referenced above, $500K, or $1M, that limit is for both bodily injury, and property damage. But that limit is not independent. Ie, if you were negligent in a loss that caused $500K of Bodily Injury (you hurt someone) and $500K of Property Damage (part of you hurting someone also caused damage to someone property), you would need $1M of Liability insurance to cover the loss. Liability Insurance includes both property damage and bodily injury, not just one or the other.

doubt anyone is getting banned when it appears the wrong doer is a relative (or closer) of the chief. i hope a solution can be found so things can start to rehabilitate....

The minimum legal requirement for liability insurance in the province of ontario (auto insurance I'm referring to) is $500K. However, $1M is the minimum any broker would offer. Either way, if he is Insured, legally, you will have $500K of insurance available. You can PM me if you require any assistance with this. Again, I'm not in claims, but understand the process quite well, and am a policy wordings guru. There is a little more of a process when your getting a settlement from a 3rd parties Liability policy, as opposed to making a claim on your own policy (making a claim on your own policy, from a 1st party standpoint, is much easier). Your buddies broker should be able to help him through this process (I hope he isn't insured with a bank).

I remember that photo FF didn't you guys rock a canoe that trip?

a legal reason from occurrences back in the day (at least I believe).

Oldest I can get a board image is March 26, 2001 http://web.archive.org/web/20010406141728/http://www.ontariofishing.net/cgi/messageboard/view.pl

a major blast from the past.....you will see some members here back then there. https://web.archive.org/web/19980212161632/http://www.zoo.utoronto.ca/FUN/fish.html

with further digging I'm getting the date of August 6, 1999?

October 13, 1999 web capture http://web.archive.org/web/19991013024359/http://ontariofishing.net/

I think I came from the Zoo U Toronto Fishing board (anyone remember that one, late 90's, lol) to OF"N" in 2001 I believe. I think the OF"N" site started a year earlier? 2000? or was it 1999?

You are correct Sir.

broke two lips so far.... tackle shop gave me new ones.... maybe a bad early run?

Bill, I hate saying the same crap you say...it makes me feel funny inside. :) Yes, his insurance payments didn't increase, because his insured value didn't increase.... Chances are, if he was insured by a Marine Insurance company, that company would have known (or suggested) to increase the Insured value...if he used a broker, the broker SHOULD have asked for a new valuation to insure against... BUT if a bank insurer was used, or a generalist property/casualty insurer who "offers" boat insurance was used, it is possible they simply did what they were told....they changed the insurance over from one boat to another...and didn't request to see if the value should be increased.....

sometimes agreed value works better on claims settlements....no need to determine the value of replacement cost... with agreed value you know exactly what you are getting... that can be better in most cases, unless your boat increases value, over and above the agreed value. then the replacement cost valuation is better... depends on the individual circumstance. i know from a claims adjuster's perspective (which I am not one of), agreed value is better, as all parties know exactly what is being paid out....no questions.

the "at fault" drivers auto Liability policy will respond to all the property damage....the car, the boat, the house, and even the ripped up lawn. as for the boat owners insurance company being "in the wrong"....your buddy didn't pay for higher premiums, as the Insured value wasn't increased....so he wasn't paying for more insurance, but wants more insurance now? gotta love our society!!

apparently not..at least accordingly to work...... we were allowed virtually any phone on the market .... and the company would buy them (or put money towards them, depending on how much they cost) ... all except a BB edit: so I went back and pulled my cell phone papers from when I got my new phone and the reason we can't use Blackberries is because BB doesn't support the Good Enterprise Application (or at least at the time of purchase - November 2014). I just did a quick search, and it appears BB still does not support the Good application.

I would pay cash to go back to a blackberry. (I would die for a keyboard again). our company will not support blackberry software right now. Many ap's we use, and require, aren't available on the BB platform (I guess the enterprise BB server isn't worth it anymore either). sad days.