Question:

The 2IC wandered into my office yesterday and noted that the 1IC was detained and wouldn’t be in for the rest of the day … I looked at my duffle bag (which contains accoutrements for annoying fish) looked back at the 2IC and said "I might make it to 3:30 this afternoon …" I didn’t – at 2:50 I teed up the pick-up and we were well on our way by 3:30.  How is it that roadwork crews unfailingly select peak hour to rip up roadways? Does it take them all day to find the road to be ripped up?  Is it their way of making sure the maximum number of rate payers "notice" them? If so, they do a mighty fine job of it. Bugger ‘em. I’d scoped out a pool and glide a few weeks ago that provided some terrific dry-fly fishing mid-morning and that’s where we were heading. It was a bit warm waiting to get through the council induced traffic snarl but the air-con worked well as always – we just opened the windows wider.  Actually the weather looked a bit stormy before we hit the Divide and the cool mountain air. A few spots of rain as we geared up was all the inclemency suffered and the clouds gradually dissipated as the afternoon wore on. As I said, I scoped this stream a few weeks ago, and you guessed it: nary a fish in places I found them previously.  We fished, peeked, snuck, and skulked around and through through some nice looking water only picking up the odd fish.  We weren’t moving fast enough for me though – I really wanted to see that pool and its tailout. Bugger – a couple of fish in side channels. We did our best … he to catch them, me to get a wriggle on.   Columns of midges a metre in diameter and some 3-5 metres high  were evident over some of the backwaters – how many insects in those columns?   They twisted and gyrated like huge schools of baitfish being rounded up by predators.  A combination of the fluky breeze and the midges’ urges drove the column to writhe, twist and seemingly eject adults at the base of the column. There lay a single predator waiting and sipping the evicted with unhurried confidence.  Those that escaped that vortex trickled out of the backwater and down stream past us and into a drop pool.  You have to get your rocks off quick if you’re a midge. At last! The pool. They rose. All of them.  They rose and we cast, and we cast and we cast.  Then the takes started – one, two, three – six or more  missed.  Bigger fly same pattern – its getting dark. _Somebody_ was fairing a little better and had one, the bounder was using a swing I noticed on his second.  Not an unreasonable tactic considering the number of caddis about.  Same dry fly, cast to the same fish, cast across and drawn as it approached a fishes position bought good solid takes and hook-ups.   Certainly my imaginings about the pool had more than been matched by the reality at least on this occasion. A  pleasant surprise and a lovely place to put a bend in a new rod. As for Caddis: to dead-drift or not: that is the question: Whether ’tis nobler to suffer the rings and splashes of short takes, or to take arms against a battery of upstream dry-fly men and, by opposing, offend?  Yet by a swing we end the heart-ache and catch. Steve (humblest apologies to Bill … and any who got this far

Response:

…….(humblest apologies to Bill … and any who got this far

Yeah, well, billy’s on his own.  Besides, he understood the groundlings.  Nice stuff, Steve. Not sure exactly where you’re at.  I was almost enticed into a backpacking trip in the Blue Mountains a couple of years ago.  Any fish there? Wolfgang

Response:

Not sure exactly where you’re at.  I was almost enticed into a backpacking trip in the Blue Mountains a couple of years ago.  Any fish there?

It’s not my neck of the woods, but yes there are.  Small stream’s that you’d be used to, with populations of small browns and rainbows. The Cox’s River is rather larger and had (I haven’t heard much of it in the last few years) a significant rainbow run each winter (at least I think its winter).   Steve

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Not sure exactly where you’re at.  I was almost enticed into a backpacking trip in the Blue Mountains a couple of years ago.  Any fish there? It’s not my neck of the woods, but yes there are.  Small stream’s that you’d be used to, with populations of small browns and rainbows. The Cox’s River is rather larger and had (I haven’t heard much of it in the last few years) a significant rainbow run each winter (at least I think its winter). Steve

Hm…….interesting.  One last questions then.  Ya’ll got any REAL beer down there?      :) Wolfgang

Response:

Hm…….interesting.  One last questions then.  Ya’ll got any REAL beer down there?      :)

Yep, you can also get Bud if you want it.   Steve

Response:

Question:

am thinking about purchasing either Pamlico Excel (adding the fishing opption)

I purchased a Pungo for fishing last spring, and spent quite a few summer evenings on small lakes in my area.  I am more than pleased with it.  It’s quite stable and easy to paddle.  It’s hull has hard chines, so you won’t be turning on a dime, but it tracks well. You have to be a bit careful where you position the rod holder.  That’s the one piece of equipment that could get in the way of your paddling.  E-mail me if you’d like more info. Chuck

Response:

Thanks for the reply, did you buy the your boat with the fishing package installed? I have never used a kayak and need to be able to also paddle upstream on slow flowing river, so you think this boat is still a good choice? thanks pjb – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – am thinking about purchasing either Pamlico Excel (adding the fishing opption) I purchased a Pungo for fishing last spring, and spent quite a few summer evenings on small lakes in my area.  I am more than pleased with it. It’s quite stable and easy to paddle.  It’s hull has hard chines, so you won’t be turning on a dime, but it tracks well. You have to be a bit careful where you position the rod holder. That’s the one piece of equipment that could get in the way of your paddling.  E- mail me if you’d like more info. Chuck

Response:

Thanks for the reply, did you buy the your boat with the fishing package installed? I have never used a kayak and need to be able to also paddle upstream on slow flowing river, so you think this boat is still a good choice? thanks pjb

Paul: I installed the the package myself.  Nothing to it.  As far as paddling upstream on a slow flowing river, that should be no problem.   What kind of fishing do you have in mind?  Also, do you live anywhere near Wisconsin by any chance.  There’ll be some good deals on Pungos at a kayak show there in the near future (no I’m not selling). Chuck

Response:

I HAVE THE PUNGO  WITH OUT THE FISHING OPTION I LOVE IT ITS STABLE AND IT HAS PLENTY OF ROOM FOR MY FLY FISHIG GEAR ITS A GOOD BOAT  EASY TO HANDLE AND CONTROLL AND YA GOTA LOVE THE LARGE OPENING IN IT I PERSONALY WOULD PICK THE COLOR YOU WANT AND ADD THE EXTRAS AS YOU SEE YOU NEED THEM BOU IF YOU WANT TO STAND UP TO CAST YOU MIGHT WANT TO CHECK OUT WWW.TRIBALANCE.COM BUT I CAST A 8 FT FLY ROD SITTING DOW OUT OF MY PUNGO GOOD UCK SIK

Response:

I am thinking about purchasing either Pamlico Excel (adding the fishing opption) or the Pungo Angler.  First does anyone have a used one they would like to sell? Second, what do you think of either of these boats? Third, how stable are they and are they good to fish out of? Fourth, does the added fishing hardware get in they way of paddling? Last, How difficult is the Pamlico Excel to paddle solo? Any Help? Thanks

Response:

I am thinking about purchasing either Pamlico Excel (adding the fishing opption) or the Pungo Angler.  First does anyone have a used one they would like to sell?

I have used them both before.  I used to sell these for a living. Second, what do you think of either of these boats?

I think you have made excellent choices in both boats.  The Pungo seems to have been the most popular with fisherman in my past seeling days. Third, how stable are they and are they good to fish out of?

Very stable and very good to fish out of.  They both have excellent initial and secondary stability. Fourth, does the added fishing hardware get in they way of paddling?

No.  Just don’t add it where you think it may get in the way.  You can add as much hardwear as you want to make the boat’s use exactly for what you want to use it for. Last, How difficult is the Pamlico Excel to paddle solo?

It’s not hard at all but turning it is a bit harder on your own just because of it’s length.  On top of that you can take another person or even a dog with you at anytime you want.  That’s the negative of the Pungo.  The positive is that it will turn easier than the Pamlico. Courtney

Response:

Question:

 I have some nice dries for $10 for a dozen. E-mial me your address and I’ll sednd a list of the flies out. If you like, snail mail me a dollar and I’ll send a sample pack of 2 flies for a dollar. Mike — Check out my on-line color catalog: web site: http://www.MWflytying.com

Response:

Can anyone direct me to a page or number of a company with excellent fly prices and customer service.  Thanks for your help

 Look here:   http://CO.NBCI.Net/FlyFishing/

Response:

Question:

There are two schools of thought on this: !.  Too many guides restrict the rod’s action. 2. Too few guides allow the line to drag against the rod when it flexes. Take your pick. — Ernie Harrison Remove NOSPAM to send E-mail GO TO http://users.ccnet.com/~emh FOR TRAVEL TIE BOX PLANS Hi there! I am building a 7 foot 2-3wt st.croix rod. The problem is that I have found 2 different guide spacing charts for 7 footers. One used 8 guides the other 9. Which one should I use? Jarkko —

—                                             |    Jarkko Karvinen                            |    Student of biochemistry                    |  E. coli happens  University of Turku, Finland               |    tel. +358 (0)2 3338059                        |

— – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I am building a 7 foot 2-3wt st.croix rod. The problem is that I have found 2 different guide spacing charts for 7 footers. One used 8 guides the other 9. Which one should I use?<BR The general rule of thumb is one guide for every foot plus the stripper, so 8 is the general rule of thumb.  One thing you might try is to tape the guides on with both the spacing for the 9 guides and the 8 guides and them string a line trhough them and see how the rod flexes.  Basically, the more guides the more friction.  But fewer is not better either – find a hapy medium by flexing the rod with line through the guides and make sure there are no dead spotsor places where the line touches the rod. Or – you might try calling St Croix.  I bet they would give you the guide spacing they use on the factory rod. Al Manchester, NH

      I know you are not the original poster but he may read this. I have an 8′ 8wt, a 7′6" 3wt and a 6′6" 5wt. The question gave me food for thought so I counted the guides on each, they all have 8, stripper included. with the exception of stripper and tip-top are all snake guides, all are factory. I also looked up the guide kits all are 8 guide.                                                              John Popp                                                           in Sanford Fl.

Response:

I know you are not the original poster but he may read this. Ihave an 8′

8wt, a 7′6" 3wt and a 6′6" 5wt. The question gave me food forthought so I counted the guides on each, they all have 8, stripperincluded. with the exception of stripper and tip-top are all snakeguides, all are factory. I also looked up the guide kits all are 8guide. I don’t doubt that all your rods in various lengths have the same amount of gudes.  This is a subjuect that is debated as much as anythng in fly fishing. As I said "the general rule of thumb" is one per foot plus a stripper guide. Many manufacturers leave a guide or two off to save money, some rods cast better with fewer or more guides. There are a couple of ways to determine guide spacing.  Clemens and Anglers Work Shop as well as some otheres I would guess sell a tool that will allow you to test the spacing of the guides with the rod under load.  There is a program that Cane rod builders use that was written by Wayne Catanach that calculates the spacing based on the number of guides you choose and the placement of the stripper guide.  Several books list guide placement charts as well, and Blue Ridge Rod Company includes a very good one in their catalog. I personally have always used the 1 guide per foot plus the stripper for my rods.   In Skip Morris’s book "The Custon Graphite Rod" and in Handcrafting Custom Graphite Fly Rods" by L.A. Garcia, this is the information that they provide, although the spacings are a bit different and Skip Morris provides some good insight as to the actuual placement of guides based on the rod and the fishermam it is intended for, as well as some general guide lines for placement of guides on soft and fast action rods.  It is interesting reading. The mark of a true custom rod may be going to the extra step of testing the guide placement with the rod under stress.  I have done this a few times but the standard guide placements on the graphite rods I have built have all been so close that I dont worry about it any more. It’s an interesting debate for rod builders.  Could you tell me where you looked up the guide kits for these rods?  Might just be a catalog I am missing:))))) Al Manchester, NH

Response:

Hi there! I am building a 7 foot 2-3wt st.croix rod. The problem is that I have found 2 different guide spacing charts for 7 footers. One used 8 guides the other 9. Which one should I use? Jarkko —                                             |    Jarkko Karvinen                            |    Student of biochemistry                    |  E. coli happens  University of Turku, Finland               |    tel. +358 (0)2 3338059                     |

Response:

I am building a 7 foot 2-3wt st.croix rod. The problem is that I have found 2

different guide spacing charts for 7 footers. One used 8 guides the other 9. Which one should I use?<BR The general rule of thumb is one guide for every foot plus the stripper, so 8 is the general rule of thumb.  One thing you might try is to tape the guides on with both the spacing for the 9 guides and the 8 guides and them string a line trhough them and see how the rod flexes.  Basically, the more guides the more friction.  But fewer is not better either – find a hapy medium by flexing the rod with line through the guides and make sure there are no dead spotsor places where the line touches the rod. Or – you might try calling St Croix.  I bet they would give you the guide spacing they use on the factory rod. Al Manchester, NH

Response:

Hi there! I am building a 7 foot 2-3wt st.croix rod. The problem is that I have found 2 different guide spacing charts for 7 footers. One used 8 guides the other 9. Which one should I use? Jarkko

I don’t know how prevelent St Croix rods are in Finland, but your best bet would probably be to find an assembled rod from the manufacturer and copy their guided size and placement. There are some rod shop owners on this group, maybe one of them can measure it for you if you can’t find the rod in your area. Good luck,      - Ken

Response:

Hi there! I am building a 7 foot 2-3wt st.croix rod. The problem is that I have found 2 different guide spacing charts for 7 footers. One used 8 guides the other 9. Which one should I use?

Jarkko, here’s the spacing (and 7 Fuji guides) that I use on a 7ft fly rod. Note that the last (8mm2) is a 2-footed guide, the rest are single foot guides, and the measurements are in inches starting from the tip. If I recall, I got these recommendations from L.G. Custom Tackle (G. Loomis dealer and custom rod builder) many years ago. IMHO I think 9 guides is way too many for anything under 8′. I prefer the single footed Hardloy or SIC Fuji’s to the traditional snake guides which allow the line to slap against the blank. 7′ – 4(6mm), 9(6mm), 15(6mm), 22(7mm), 30(7mm), 40(8mm), 52(8mm2) Now you have 3 choices David E. Malone All opinions expressed are my own.

Response:

Question:

A great knot.  I use it for building leaders and for joining tippets.  Easy to tie, and very strong.  I loop it three times on both pieces. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -One knot that you don’t see much of for line-to-line connections is the double or "back-to-back" uni-knot.  Has anybody tried this one besides me? Tinca

Response:

Not sure I recall uni-knots exactly, but I use what I was taught to call "double-grinners" (british term) which may be the same thing. Bulkier than blood-knot but against steelhead they help me.   Easy to tie – after the 600-th time.           -rork.

: A great knot.  I use it for building leaders and for joining tippets.  Easy : to tie, and very strong.  I loop it three times on both pieces. : One knot that you don’t see much of for line-to-line connections is the : double or "back-to-back" uni-knot.  Has anybody tried this one besides : me? : Tinca

Response:

Not sure I recall uni-knots exactly, but I use what I was taught to call "double-grinners" (british term) which may be the same thing. Bulkier than blood-knot but against steelhead they help me.   Easy to tie – after the 600-th time.

How bout some instructions for the colonists Lou B

Response:

Well give the bleeding unit-knot instructions first  :) Really, I was gonna describe it but it is hard to describe knots for me: Double Grinner:     wrap the tag end of strand a around b, about 3-5 times (not so important, just gets some twist set-up).  Bring the tag end back to the start of the wraps – this makes a loop which you now put the tag end through 3-5 times (smaller lines=more times).  You are making the second set of wraps in the same direction and handedness as the first set.    That makes one half of the knot, do the same for the other half as for any knot in the fisherman’s/blood-knot family.  Pull the two ends tight againt each other.  I partially tighted each side first – they "turn inside out" like lotsa other monofilament knots.  I think it’s mentioned in "The trout and the fly".  - also a colonist. Soon out in paper-back:     my decription of the modified Krey’s-improved bimini-twist……

Response:

One knot that you don’t see much of for line-to-line connections is the double or "back-to-back" uni-knot.  Has anybody tried this one besides me?

This is the knot I always use. I also use the Uni(Duncan Loop) for my terminal connection. I have rarely had any problems with breakage at the terminal connection and the only time I have had a break at the tippet/leader was in breaking off a snag. I can not imagine any weakening with the Uni-knot joining the two pieces of line. With the wraps snugging up it seems to be very secure. Also, it is easy! regards, jw        J. Webb (Preferred)    |    Atlanta Mac User Group         jwebb *AT* netdepot *DOT* com |joe_webb *AT* atlmug *DOT* org

Response:

nothing to beat the uni knot for any thing – greta knot for night fishingas you can tie it with your eyes closed. One knot that you don’t see much of for line-to-line connections is the double or "back-to-back" uni-knot.  Has anybody tried this one besides me?

– Tinca

Response:

I’ve done my own tests on several knots, and I really don’t know where this nonsense about the blood knot being stronger than surgeons comes from. None of my tests have ever shown this, and most books I’ve seen confirm this. One knot that you don’t see much of for line-to-line connections is the double or "back-to-back" uni-knot.  Has anybody tried this one besides me?

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -I’ve done my own tests on several knots, and I really don’t know where this nonsense about the blood knot being stronger than surgeons comes from. None of my tests have ever shown this, and most books I’ve seen confirm this. One knot that you don’t see much of for line-to-line connections is the double or "back-to-back" uni-knot.  Has anybody tried this one besides me? I’ve done my own tests on several knots, and I really don’t know where this nonsense about the blood knot being stronger than surgeons comes from. None of my tests have ever shown this, and most books I’ve seen confirm this. One knot that you don’t see much of for line-to-line connections is the double or "back-to-back" uni-knot.  Has anybody tried this one besides me?

Yeah, I use the uni-knot all the time Bryce

Response:

Mark asks: Hello, Does anyone have any suggestions for  a good strong relatively easy to tie knot for attaching a tippet to a leader.  I know the traditional barrel and double surgens knots.  The problem I’ve been having, which is quite irritating, is the knot that attaches the tippet is weaker than the one attaching the fly, so when I hang up the tippet breaks off  as well as the fly.  When I’m nymph fishing I feel like I spend a great amount of time standing in the creek attaching new tippets.  I switched to a Filson knot to attach the fly to the tippet since I found it was stronger than a clinch knot. I hate the idea of switching to a weaker terminal knot just to save having to retie the tippet each time I hang up, which as you know can be lot.    Has anynone else had this experience and what is the solution.   Thanks, Mark Watson

Mark, I feel there is another issue maybe, buried in here….. that is the *quality* of how one ties a knot….  A poorly tied knot is much weaker than it should be.   I feel several of the knots mentioned ought to get you out of your problem, yet from the post …. seems that doesn’t occur….. makes me think there is a "hidden variable"…. that is the quality of the knot itself and not the design of the knot…..   For "barrel" or blood knots a couple of things… never tie with more than one or 2 thousands difference in the diameters of the leader end and the tippet… otherwise use the loop or the surgeon’s knot…. make the starter set of windings of the blood knot even and unkinked with the two ends pointing in opposite directions.   Wet the total bundle (good ole spit)  and smoothly but firmly pull them taut.   clip excess ends. In teaching this knot to others I have found many who try to pull the knot taut without wetting it or with the preloops not neat and unkinked….   Pratice at home with light tippet and test with a scale until you achieve about 90 % consistently for several knots… Good luck, Alan Alan E. Hoover       to quote one of my favorite authors: "Fly fishing is such great fun, it really ought to be done in bed"  John Voelker, aka Robert Traver

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Mark asks: Hello, Does anyone have any suggestions for  a good strong relatively easy to tie knot for attaching a tippet to a leader.  I know the traditional barrel and double surgens knots.  The problem I’ve been having, which is quite irritating, is the knot that attaches the tippet is weaker than the one attaching the fly, so when I hang up the tippet breaks off  as well as the fly.  When I’m nymph fishing I feel like I spend a great amount of time standing in the creek attaching new tippets.  I switched to a Filson knot to attach the fly to the tippet since I found it was stronger than a clinch knot. I hate the idea of switching to a weaker terminal knot just to save having to retie the tippet each time I hang up, which as you know can be lot.    Has anynone else had this experience and what is the solution.   Thanks, Mark Watson

So much good information has come from this post that I hate to even introduce this, but does anyone else other than me use a little dab of Zap-A-Gap on the knots just to make sure? It’s a cyanoacrylate glue much like crazy glue and only takes a few seconds to dry. Maybe it’s a crude remedy but I got tired of losing the fly, tippet, and even more so the fish. — Frank Tosczak

Response:

  There are several terminal mono knots that are "100% strength" knots   (e.g. Trilene knot).     I’ve never seen a test of the trilene knot that rated it 100% – but   it maybe stronger than either a blood or double surgeon. the best you can get out of a blood knot (6 or more barrels) is around 75%.  Surgeon’s is better.  The trilene and I believe the double turle are supposed to be full strength.

FWIW I checked my copy of Lefty kreh/ Mark Sosin’s Pratical Knots II ; the improved clinch was reported to test out at no better than 95%, the Trilene was listed as ’stronger’ than an improved clinch. A Palomar knot was said to be near 100%. The double surgeon loop or it’s half brother the double surgeon were both reported to provide near 100%. The only full 100% knots listed were the doubled loops such as the Bimini twist and the snelled hooks beloved of bait fishers. Ralph H

Response:

  FWIW I checked my copy of Lefty kreh/ Mark Sosin’s Pratical Knots II ;   the improved clinch was reported to test out at no better than 95%, the   Trilene was listed as ’stronger’ than an improved clinch. A Palomar knot was   said to be near 100%. The double surgeon loop or it’s half brother the double   surgeon were both reported to provide near 100%.

Ok, so the trilene knot is 95% strength according to your source. My source says full-strength.  There is no difference between these claims.  Experimental uncertainty would easily cover such a trivial difference. As for the double surgeon’s knot, I really don’t think it is even close to 100%.  If it were, is that to say that the "triple surgeon’s" knot is redundant?  I can easily be wrong.  But the flyfisherman article I recall claimed that the best line-to-line knots are still <90% – including the double surgeons etc.  Again, I could easily be wrong.  My own experience with all these line-to-line knots confirms that they are weaker than terminal knots.  But who am I to argue with Lefty kreh eh? Anyway, I don’t get too worried about all this.  I use =8lb test and the only time I ever break my line is when I screw up and do something dumbassed on a fish or when I get snagged.  I don’t think that my 14′ 9wt rod is even capable of breaking 8lb test line. By the way, for anyone interested, the virtual flyshop (www.flyshop.com I think) has a nice set of drawings on how to tie any of the knots mentioned in this discussion. cheers,         -tgades (a good-old 6-barrel bloodknot aficionado) — Tony Gades. Seattle, WA.  USA http://weber.u.washington.edu/~tgades http://weber.u.washington.edu/~tgades/Fishing/fish_page.html email: replace the "this_address_is_wrong" with "tgades"

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –   the double surgeon should be stronger than the knot to the fly if tied   properly. Be sure to wet the knot tighten slowly and DO NOT tighten apply the   final tightening pull to the tag ends only to the main line. Tightening the   tag ends binds the main line and considerably weakens the knot.   Ralph H There are several terminal mono knots that are "100% strength" knots (e.g. Trilene knot).  While strong, I don’t think I’ve seen results of tests of any line-to-line knots (including the double surgeon) that can do 100%. cheers,        -tgades

I’ve never seen a test of the trilene knot that rated it 100% – but it maybe stronger than either a blood or double surgeon. By the way welcome back, how was your trip to the balmy south. Ralph H

Response:

I’ve used the barrel knot for years with a Turl (sp?) Knot for fly connection and it’s always worked well.  Is it that you don’t want to tie a barrel knot???  Or that your barrel knot is breaking?   Or that you are using a knot to connect the fly that is a stronger knot than the barrel knot?

The basic problem is that the knot the knot I’ve been using to attach the fly (a filson knot) is much stronger than any barrel or double surgeons I’ve been able to tie.  Previously I always used a clinch knot for the fly, but I found a stronger knot for the terminal end, so I was hoping to find one for the tippet/leader junction.    (I also dislike tying the barrell knot especially in the late evening when fish are rising all around and its hard to see) I could solve my problem by switching back to a weaker knot to attach the fly.  From the sound of some of the other posters that sounds like the way to go, but I was hoping that someone would have a better solution. Thanks again, Mark Watson

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’ve used the barrel knot for years with a Turl (sp?) Knot for fly connection and it’s always worked well.  Is it that you don’t want to tie a barrel knot???  Or that your barrel knot is breaking?   Or that you are using a knot to connect the fly that is a stronger knot than the barrel knot? Barry Hello, Does anyone have any suggestions for  a good strong relatively easy to tie knot for attaching a tippet to a leader.  I know the traditional barrel and double surgens knots.  The problem I’ve been having, which is quite irritating, is the knot that attaches the tippet is weaker than the one attaching the fly, so when I hang up the tippet breaks off  as well as the fly.  When I’m nymph fishing I feel like I spend a great amount of time standing in the creek attaching new tippets.  I switched to a Filson knot to attach the fly to the tippet since I found it was stronger than a clinch knot. I hate the idea of switching to a weaker terminal knot just to save having to retie the tippet each time I hang up, which as you know can be lot.    Has anynone else had this experience and what is the solution. Thanks, Mark Watson

I use a loop to loop connection, with a loop knot the name of which I can’t recall, but it’s in lefty kreh and mark sosin’s knot book.  I use a clinch knot for the fly connection, and that almost always breaks first.  Even if it doesn’t, the knot that breaks is the tippet side of the loop to loop, so I just make a new tippet, and attach it, with no overall leader length loss.  Works great, you should try it. — Andrew Brunette

Response:

   There are several terminal mono knots that are "100% strength" knots    (e.g. Trilene knot).  While strong, I don’t think I’ve seen results of    tests of any line-to-line knots (including the double surgeon) that    can do 100%.        cheers,                -tgades       I’ve never seen a test of the trilene knot that rated it 100% – but   it maybe stronger than either a blood or double surgeon.

the best you can get out of a blood knot (6 or more barrels) is around 75%.  Surgeon’s is better.  The trilene and I believe the double turle are supposed to be full strength.   By the way welcome back, how was your trip to the balmy south.

The Antarctic field season (nov,dec,jan) was very good and productive, though the weather was poor this year and we spent a total of 30+days waiting for flights in the field. The fishing in NZ (24Jan-5Mar) was excellent once again.  After 4 years in a row fishing for a month or more in NZ, it seems more and more fun.  I’ll likely be heading back once again next year.  I’ll let you know when I scan in a few pics from the 98 NZ season.  I caught some tremendous browns this year.  I still have a few pictures from last year:         http://weber.u.washington.edu/~tgades/Fishing/NZ/NZ_97.html Since I’ve been home I’ve hooked 2 steelhead, landed 1.  I scanned a picture of this beautiful native hen.  It is at the top of my fish page:         http://weber.u.washington.edu/~tgades/Fishing/fish_page.html cheers,         -tgades — Tony Gades. Seattle, WA.  USA http://weber.u.washington.edu/~tgades http://weber.u.washington.edu/~tgades/Fishing/fish_page.html email: replace the "this_address_is_wrong" with "tgades"

Response:

  the double surgeon should be stronger than the knot to the fly if tied   properly. Be sure to wet the knot tighten slowly and DO NOT tighten apply the   final tightening pull to the tag ends only to the main line. Tightening the   tag ends binds the main line and considerably weakens the knot.   Ralph H

There are several terminal mono knots that are "100% strength" knots (e.g. Trilene knot).  While strong, I don’t think I’ve seen results of tests of any line-to-line knots (including the double surgeon) that can do 100%. cheers,         -tgades — Tony Gades. Seattle, WA.  USA http://weber.u.washington.edu/~tgades http://weber.u.washington.edu/~tgades/Fishing/fish_page.html email: replace the "this_address_is_wrong" with "tgades"

Response:

Hello, Does anyone have any suggestions for  a good strong relatively easy to tie knot for attaching a tippet to a leader.  I know the traditional barrel and double surgens knots.  The problem I’ve been having, which is quite irritating, is the knot that attaches the tippet is weaker than the one attaching the fly, so when I hang up the tippet breaks off  

the double surgeon should be stronger than the knot to the fly if tied properly. Be sure to wet the knot tighten slowly and DO NOT tighten apply the final tightening pull to the tag ends only to the main line. Tightening the tag ends binds the main line and considerably weakens the knot. Ralph H

Response:

Hello, Does anyone have any suggestions for  a good strong relatively easy to tie knot for attaching a tippet to a leader.  I know the traditional barrel and double surgens knots.  The problem I’ve been having, which is quite irritating, is the knot that attaches the tippet is weaker than the one attaching the fly, so when I hang up the tippet breaks off  as well as the fly.  When I’m nymph fishing I feel like I spend a great amount of time standing in the creek attaching new tippets.  I switched to a Filson knot to attach the fly to the tippet since I found it was stronger than a clinch knot. I hate the idea of switching to a weaker terminal knot just to save having to retie the tippet each time I hang up, which as you know can be lot.    Has anynone else had this experience and what is the solution.   Thanks, Mark Watson

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -knot for attaching a tippet to a leader.  I know the traditional barrel and double surgens knots.  The problem I’ve been having, which is quite irritating, is the knot that attaches the tippet is weaker than the one attaching the fly, so when I hang up the tippet breaks off  as well as the fly.  When I’m nymph fishing I feel like I spend a great amount of time standing in the creek attaching new tippets.  I switched to a Filson knot to attach the fly to the tippet since I found it was stronger than a clinch knot. I hate the idea of switching to a weaker terminal knot just to save having to retie the tippet each time I hang up, which as you know can be lot.    Has anynone else had this experience and what is the solution.   Thanks, Mark Watson

Hi Mark. Depending on how much time I have, I’ll use the Blood Knot or the Double Surgeon’s Knot. The Blood Knot takes longer to tie, but is stronger, so I use it when I’m rigging before I go to the river. If I’m on the stream and I get a wind knot that I can’t untie very close to the tippet/leader knot, they I’ll cut off my existing tippet and use a Double Surgeon’s Knot to put a new one on. That’s just what I use. Bryce    

Response:

I’ve used the barrel knot for years with a Turl (sp?) Knot for fly connection and it’s always worked well.  Is it that you don’t want to tie a barrel knot???  Or that your barrel knot is breaking?   Or that you are using a knot to connect the fly that is a stronger knot than the barrel knot? Barry – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hello, Does anyone have any suggestions for  a good strong relatively easy to tie knot for attaching a tippet to a leader.  I know the traditional barrel and double surgens knots.  The problem I’ve been having, which is quite irritating, is the knot that attaches the tippet is weaker than the one attaching the fly, so when I hang up the tippet breaks off  as well as the fly.  When I’m nymph fishing I feel like I spend a great amount of time standing in the creek attaching new tippets.  I switched to a Filson knot to attach the fly to the tippet since I found it was stronger than a clinch knot. I hate the idea of switching to a weaker terminal knot just to save having to retie the tippet each time I hang up, which as you know can be lot.    Has anynone else had this experience and what is the solution. Thanks, Mark Watson

Response:

Question:

Hi, I will be going on a 6 day canoe trip into the Quetico Wilderness area in Canada in mid-July of this year.  Does anyone out there know what to expect?  I would be interested in any info about patterns, techniques for deep fish like walleye, or anything you think might help.  I will be doing the Cache Lake Loop out of Baptism Creek.  Should be loads of fun. Thanks. Chris

Response:

Hi, I will be going on a 6 day canoe trip into the Quetico Wilderness area in Canada in mid-July of this year.  Does anyone out there know what to expect?  I would be interested in any info about patterns, techniques for deep fish like walleye, or anything you think might help.  I will be doing the Cache Lake Loop out of Baptism Creek.  Should be loads of fun.

        Boy, I THINK it was in this newsgroup, but it was possibly in the GPS NG (sci.geo.satellite-nav) or the rec.backcountry newsgroup where I just responded to a very similar question about the Boundary Waters in August. Thus you might want to go to Dejanews and do a search there for same for my (tiny) pearls of wisdom. (And, beyond that, in the rec.backcountry newsgroup if not this flyfishing one if you go back even a little way you’ll find tons of stuff addressing your question. I tried to summarize in the post I referred to above, and damned if I can remember what NG it was in. I seem to recall trying to talk quite a bit about flyfishing so I suspect it was in this NG, but I can’t be sure.)         Basically though, my point was that you should start thinking about smallmouth early in the morning and evenings off rocky shelves in the shallows, and pike in the weeds. There’s lots of ways to check to see if the lakes you are going to are primarily smallmouth or walleye, though the bigger lakes will have both. As to walleye, I don’t know about you but trying to flyfish any further than about 3-4 feet down just ain’t my idea of fun. To each his own though….         Good luck. Tom Burczyk

Response:

I use deerhair poppers for smallmouth morning and evening. White gartside streamer weighed during day,also black woolyburger with a little red tinsel down the back. Try lead eyed woolyburgers with about 4 bass type hackles tied on as a tail fish it with long leader that has silicone on it you can detect the soft takes of walleye. have fun .. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi, I will be going on a 6 day canoe trip into the Quetico Wilderness area in Canada in mid-July of this year.  Does anyone out there know what to expect?  I would be interested in any info about patterns, techniques for deep fish like walleye, or anything you think might help.  I will be doing the Cache Lake Loop out of Baptism Creek.  Should be loads of fun. Thanks. Chris

Response:

<<<<<I will be going on a 6 day canoe trip into the Quetico Wilderness area in Canada in mid-July of this year.  Does anyone out there know what to expect?  I would be interested in any info about patterns, techniques for deep fish like walleye, or anything you think might help.  I will be doing the Cache Lake Loop out of Baptism Creek.  Should be loads of fun. Thanks. Chris Hi.  I’ll be there, too, and if I see you I’ll wave. I usually have excellent luck catching bass and northerns in that area with a huge orange shrimp pattern that is actually a steelhead fly. Leeches or deer hair mice twitched through the reed beds are dynamite for large northerns, but don’t try that on a 5 weight. On the Seine River near there, I’ve caught blue gills and gigantic lake whitefish on caddis and Adams towards evening. I always see lots of dragonfly nymph shucks around and inch-long brownish mayflies with white wings on the cabin screens each morning. Walleyes are usually down too deep, but you might pick the odd one up in the shallows. I usually paddle into back bays and cast tight to the bank, around brush, next to weeds. P.S. I’ll be doing a reading at the Atikokan Public Library on July 8, so drop in if you’re in the neighbourhood.

Response:

Ditto the last post–also– Keep your attention focused on points, especially ones near deep water. To catch walleyes or northerns in the summer heat you will have to fish like a spin guy.  I like a shooting head line with a "float tip" (if this gets famous then I get credit).  Take your nymph line and rig a loop-to-loop with about six feet of the head section of an old floating line.  Alternative:  fish a floating fly on a sinking line.  Go to leader (a flat butt of 40 and then 30/20 and maybe a 12 pound tippet; it’s a tossup:  catch more walleyes or get cut off by northerns.)  If you have a depth sounder you’re more likely to score.  Pick the windiest point you can find near big water, or near the flow where one lake has necked down into another.  Make your cast down wind and drift with your sinking line then strip back across the wind or with it.  Use clousers or strip leeches–color may matter, and it may vary from chartreuse to black.  A black strip leech with a fluorescent orange head is my favorite.  To move walleyes you will probably have to be at least 12′ deep, and maybe as deep as 18′.  A rocky or gravelly flat that extends in deep water will almost always hold fish.  Move shallower on the same structure for smallies; move out over deep water but near the dropoff for big northerns. In the evening, stake out a likely flat near camp.  Get about a gallon of pure DEET.  As the light falls, make casts across the flat parallel to the deep water or across the wind and scrape the bottom in the same fashion. In the early morning (early:  first light) do the same.  In low-light conditions (or rain or fog) you may find walleyes in 6 to 10 feet of water; you will collide with all three species in that zone.  Also–in bays, especially if it’s warm and especially if the water is clear, make some casts with large topwaters such as hair bugs, bob’s bangers or other poppers, and large dahlbergs.  This may bring on smallies and northerns. If you tie, make up a few really huge dahlberg divers (6 to 8" range) as these are the best bet for big northerns. I’ll be on Basswood lake this year–no time for a really deep penetration of the parks.  Good luck! Dave

Response:

Question:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Has anyone ever tried this? It occurred to me while watching Charlie West’s fly fishing show on the Outdoor Life Channel. They had such good photos of aquatic insects or their aquatic forms, I wondered how they were obtained. It occurred to me that it might be possible to collect a few nymphs from a local stream and "grow" them in a home aquarium. I could even design an aquarium in a devil’s food, cake-pan shape to allow some sort of stream flow imitation in case they need moving water. Any ideas? In a regular aquarium, the normal inhabitants wouldn’t even have to be evicted if I were to use caddis nymphs. No tetra in it’s right mind would attack something that size that is also covered in gravel Maybe I could thin out the fish population in the tank with dragonfly larvae. Fun to watch and I would have a biological model for fly tying! This could become an interesting thread! Thanks, David Buschhorn

Hi David-    We’ve been raising aquatic insects for over 15 years. Let me know exactly what kind of bugs you want to grow and hatch and I’m sure we can help you out.    -Ralph —

Response:

Has anyone ever tried this?

. . . Thanks, David Buschhorn

David, I know of at least two reference books on hatches in which the authors report having raised mayflies, stoneflies, and caddis in an aquarium. In both "Hatches II" by Caucci & Nastasi and "Western Hatches" by Hafele & Hughes the authors make several references to raising and observing mayflies in their home aquariums. I think there may be some pointers included on how to actually raise aquatic insects in an aquarium yourself, so I’d highly recommend these two sources as a starting point. Regards, Fred

Response:

David. Growing your own nymphs is a piece of cake. Clean water, a sandy or silt bottom to the tank, aeration, and some plant life from where you collected your nymphs are really all that is required. Your nymphs will feed off the plants or detritus, and you’ll even see the nymphs grazing from any algae that grows on the side of the tank. I’ve reared many species here in England. The principals would be the same where you are. Best of all is the ability to watch nymphs hatch just inches away from your face. So too is the feature of watching the sub imago change to imago. Caddisfly larvae and dragonfly larvae will eat anything else in your tank so be careful which species you stock with. If you are into photography you’ll also get great shots of the emerging nymphs and the various stages of adult fly life. You might find also that this side of your hobby will be as enjoyable as actually fishing. Good Luck. Dave. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Has anyone ever tried this? It occurred to me while watching Charlie West’s fly fishing show on the Outdoor Life Channel. They had such good photos of aquatic insects or their aquatic forms, I wondered how they were obtained. It occurred to me that it might be possible to collect a few nymphs from a local stream and "grow" them in a home aquarium. I could even design an aquarium in a devil’s food, cake-pan shape to allow some sort of stream flow imitation in case they need moving water. Any ideas? In a regular aquarium, the normal inhabitants wouldn’t even have to be evicted if I were to use caddis nymphs. No tetra in it’s right mind would attack something that size that is also covered in gravel Maybe I could thin out the fish population in the tank with dragonfly larvae. Fun to watch and I would have a biological model for fly tying! This could become an interesting thread! Thanks, David Buschhorn

– dave tait

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Has anyone ever tried this? It occurred to me while watching Charlie West’s fly fishing show on the Outdoor Life Channel. They had such good photos of aquatic insects or their aquatic forms, I wondered how they were obtained. It occurred to me that it might be possible to collect a few nymphs from a local stream and "grow" them in a home aquarium. I could even design an aquarium in a devil’s food, cake-pan shape to allow some sort of stream flow imitation in case they need moving water. Any ideas? In a regular aquarium, the normal inhabitants wouldn’t even have to be evicted if I were to use caddis nymphs. No tetra in it’s right mind would attack something that size that is also covered in gravel Maybe I could thin out the fish population in the tank with dragonfly larvae. Fun to watch and I would have a biological model for fly tying! This could become an interesting thread! Thanks, David Buschhorn

David, Grow enough of them and you can create your own hatches! Seriously, Swisher and Richard’s book:  "Selective Trout" goes into detail on this subject.  It’s a great book. Jack

Response:

Has anyone ever tried this? It occurred to me while watching Charlie West’s fly fishing show on the Outdoor Life Channel.

<snip It occurred to me that it might be possible to collect a few nymphs from a local stream and "grow" them in a home aquarium. <snip Any ideas?

<snip  Fun to watch and I would have a biological model for This could become an interesting thread! Thanks, David Buschhorn

Greetings, David, yes, this might get interesting.  I can’t help you much, however, I would suggest you cross-post this to the news groups:                                    sci.bio.fisheries or possibly the group:             sci. aquaria                 Someone in these groups should have some valuable information for you in this regard.  _Good luck on your project, and keep us informed on its progress!_ Cheers, and tight lines -Mark

Response:

Has anyone ever tried this? It occurred to me while watching Charlie West’s fly fishing show on the Outdoor Life Channel. They had such good photos of aquatic insects or their aquatic forms, I wondered how they were obtained. It occurred to me that it might be possible to collect a few nymphs from a local stream and "grow" them in a home aquarium. I could even design an aquarium in a devil’s food, cake-pan shape to allow some sort of stream flow imitation in case they need moving water. Any ideas? In a regular aquarium, the normal inhabitants wouldn’t even have to be evicted if I were to use caddis nymphs. No tetra in it’s right mind would attack something that size that is also covered in gravel Maybe I could thin out the fish population in the tank with dragonfly larvae. Fun to watch and I would have a biological model for fly tying! This could become an interesting thread! Thanks, David Buschhorn

Response:

Question:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – :  I have NEVER seen a woman hunt. NEVER !!! :  In fact, the only ones with guns have been the police. :  ( a seperate thread )  <– I mean this. Would it make any difference if you had seen a woman hunter? I know one who bagged two deer last year, She skinned, butchered and is in the process of eating them. She has been hunting for about 25 years. Bill & r Not really, I can show you nazi skinheads who happen to be black. BTW, we saw your buddy Newt on TV last night. I used to have some respect for conservatives.  Yeah, they are out to destroy the human race and all, but unlike liberals they stick to their agenda of genocide.  Liberals want to educate the poor one day, then " give them the stick on a cat " the next. Newt, like Clinton, started as an envronmentalist.  The polluters invited him to lunch, wrote him a check and the rest is history.

Out of curiousity, are you in High School or what?  Your immature hostility is really misplaced in rec.backcountry.  If you’ve never seen a woman hunt, then where have you been?  I’ve hunted for 25 years and there are plenty of women out there every year.  All of my hunting buddies are much more courteous and well-behaved towards those with other opinions than you are.  You’re the type I hope I don’t have to tolerate in the woods. Please keep your emotional politics to yourself.  You appear to have low self-esteem since you seem to need to lash out at others, rather than enjoying a civil issue-based discussion.  Before you get a life, get some manners, please!  Thank you.

Response:

:  I have NEVER seen a woman hunt. NEVER !!! :  In fact, the only ones with guns have been the police. :  ( a seperate thread )  <– I mean this. Would it make any difference if you had seen a woman hunter? I know one who bagged two deer last year, She skinned, butchered and is in the process of eating them. She has been hunting for about 25 years. Bill

& r Not really, I can show you nazi skinheads who happen to be black. BTW, we saw your buddy Newt on TV last night. I used to have some respect for conservatives.  Yeah, they are out to destroy the human race and all, but unlike liberals they stick to their agenda of genocide.  Liberals want to educate the poor one day, then " give them the stick on a cat " the next. Newt, like Clinton, started as an envronmentalist.  The polluters invited him to lunch, wrote him a check and the rest is history.

Response:

No, "we" aren’t agreed, if you include a number of hunters who have posted to this forum.  They seem to think that a hunter shooting someone (not an accidental discharge) is not an illegal act, if it was "an accident", ie a "misidentified" target. About as illegal as accidentally injuring someone with a car?  Is your hunters premium insurance paid?

Wow, I thought that I was done with this thread.  Ah well, guess not.         Scotty, let me clear up a misconception you seem to be having.  A car is a utilitarian object.  We all use them as a basic transportation device.  In today’s society we cannot get along without them.  we each agree to a basic social contract each time we get behind the wheel.  we each know the risks of driving.         Now, a gun is a weapon.  It’s sole purpose is destruction.  It will be used to destroy a target, a game animal, or a person.  Is the difference clear yet?  You *need* a car.  You do not *need* a gun.   The only social contract here is the responsibility of the person behind the trigger.  I do not choose to own a gun, therefor I have *NO* responsibilty for gun safety.  You choose to hunt?  You choos to take on the responsibility. period.         Now to elaborate further, I am not opposed to gun ownership.  My point in this thread has been to advocate for responsible gun ownership and use.  I have been appalled by reading repeated posts by folks to immature or to stupid to realize that guns are not toys.         I don’t give a damn if your fucking hunters insurance is paid up or not.  An insurance settlement is cold comfort to the family of a VICTIM of a hunting *accident*.  IMHO, your post clearly shows that you are one of those folks that seems unable to realize what a huge responsibility you have resting on your shoulders every time you sight down that gun and squeeze that trigger.           Once again, I will say that I hope that anyone guilty of killing or injuring another person in a hunting *accident* will never see the outside of a prison cell again. Shaun

Response:

[..] No, "we" aren’t agreed, if you include a number of hunters who have posted to this forum.  They seem to think that a hunter shooting someone (not an accidental discharge) is not an illegal act, if it was "an accident", ie a "misidentified" target.

*Ahem* If you can post instances of ‘a number’ of hunters stating, in this thread, that negligently shooting someone is not illegal, we’d *love* to see it. Take your time — we’ll wait. -TD

Response:

My $.02 I am loath to push unnecessary laws on anybody and strongly believe in the concept of traditional rights wich might include hunting, fishing, harvesting and sqatting ( read camping a’la Grapes-o-Wrath ). But several trips to London have convinced me that the one part of the Bill-o-Rights which is wearing thin is the guns part. I have lived in bad-ass neighborhoods all my life.  Here you also want to decide where you stand on the milita issue. I have met a good many hunters who are in fact harvesting, are funny when drunk and dont use the gun as a ppenis extension. They hunt because they are poor and taht has been a good way to put food on the table. On the other I hand, I saw a BMW in a hunting camp in the Catskills. This could only be owned by a Wall Street Trader of a crack dealer. Think about it.  Neither should be armed under any circumstances. Plus the average $30,000 price for a 4WD throws the traditional argument in the trash.  And for most, I can swear by the lack of women hunters, the bored rod is a penis extension.  So what to do ??  Simple:    a) Buy your meat or even better go veggie.    b) Use the fishing throw-back policy.      How? Control the breeding with birth control implants      shot from shot guns.  In this way, build families or      herds which can think for themselves and also be tracked      for driving, farming, and tick control purposes.    c) Get lyme tick disease under control with booster shots.  Most hunters ( and snow-mobilers ) do not love the woods.  They  go out to the great outdoors to control and destroy them.  We  go into the woods because it is simply the most beautiful thing  there is.  The "great outdoorsmen" are also storm trooper wanabes.  What the hell do you want that type around for.  Rehabilitate them,  the cold war is over.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – (Christian Jac obi) writes: [..] I agree, the woods is one of the safest places.  It would be even more safe if there were no hunters.  I know this may feel bad by reasonable hunters, but how can a hiker distinguish between reasonable hunters and not so reasonable ones? Well, lets just say that a small number of well-publicised cases of negligence are not grounds for outlawing a pursuit that has been part of human existence since god-knows-when. The human as predator IS a part of nature. To say that we have evolved beyond hunting because our claws and teeth and senses have dulled is like saying we should all stay indoors during cold weather because our fur no longer covers us.

In all fairness, I’ve got to jump back in and add something.  I no longer hunt during rifle deer and elk season.  I only hunt large game with a muzzle loader or bow.  If a hunter only has one shot, then he/she will generally be a little more careful.  I also find this more of a challenge.

Response:

Mike, Scotty, let me clear up a misconception you seem to be having. [and later..] IMHO, your post clearly shows that you are one of those folks that seems unable to realize what a huge responsibility you have resting on your shoulders every time you sight down that gun and squeeze that trigger.   You should check your attributions more carefully.  Scott Linn ("Scotty" to you) is arguing the same side you are.  The remarks you’ve attributed to him are from another poster.

 Scott Linn is on my side, if you can characterize this debate as having "sides".  In this you are correct.  However, I was not responding to Scott Linn, I was responding to Scotty um Davis?  I believe that was his last name, though I no longer have the post. therefore, please feel free to read all posts next time.       A car is a utilitarian object.  We all use them as a basic transportation device.  In today’s society we cannot get along without them.  we each agree to a basic social contract each time we get behind the wheel. we each know the risks of driving. How convenient of you to define the social contract only in terms of what you want and declare that your desires are necessities while others’ are conveniences..  Plenty of people get along just fine without cars;  in light of that fact I believe your statement that "we" cannot get along without them would be more accurate if it were to read "I" cannot get along without them.

It’s not convenient at all. It’s merely a reality.  The poster, Scotty Davis (?) equated hunting accidents with car accidents.  The CLEAR context of the post is that each of us knows the risks inherent in driving a car.  If we are involved in an accident while driving, we are involved in the same activity and are each bound by a clear social contract.         No such contract exists with regard to hunting.  I have no say in how a hunter behaves.  I am not engaged in hunting and should therefore be minimally impacted by it.  I should not be shot at again. Period.  Do you see the difference?  I’m not sure how much clearer I can make it.         I am not trying to say by this that hunting must be outlawed. I am saying, as I’ve said all along, that hunters have the sole responsibility for their actions.  Hunting "accident" victims have no responsibility regardless of the situation.  if a hunter discharges a weapon and harms or kills another individual not involved in a similar pursuit, the response should be swift and sure. I’m also curious by your reference to a "basic social contract" that we’ve all agreed to.  Ironically the "right" you argue in favor of (automobile ownership) *is not* explicitly protected by any official act of our society while the right you argue against (gun ownership) *is*.

        It’s not ironic at all.  I’m not challenging gun ownership as far as you know.  I’ve *never* expressed and opinion one way or another in this forum.  If you wish to construe advocacy for sane hunting practices as opposition to gun ownership, that is of course your priviledge.  You would be incorrect, but that would be nothing new here.           I don’t know where you find the term *right* with regard to automobile use.  I can accept a right of ownership certainly, but use is a priviledge bound by the basic tenets of prudent use of the vehicle.  This is the social contract I speak of. Once again, I will say that I hope that anyone guilty of killing or injuring another person in a hunting *accident* will never see the outside of a prison cell again. A pretty sweeping generalization that is far too draconian for my tastes. There are accidents, and there are Accidents.  I’m perfectly willing to believe that gun owners should be held to high standards of precaution but arguing that the penalty for any conceivable hunting accident which injures another person should be life imprisonment goes *way* too far.

        You’re right.  Read as a clear prescription, I have gone to far.  I did not actually mean life in prison, however.  I was speaking rather loosely.  I apologize.  OTOH punishments should be extremely stiff and should send a clear message that the sort of bullshit that frequently goes on in part of the hunting community is unacceptable and will *not* be tolerated. Shaun

Response:

Most hunters ( and snow-mobilers ) do not love the woods.  They go out to the great outdoors to control and destroy them.  We go into the woods because it is simply the most beautiful thing there is.  The "great outdoorsmen" are also storm trooper wanabes.

I just stumbled onto this thread, and generally hate getting into hunting discussions, but this is absurd.  I’ve hunted all my life, and virtually everyone I’ve hunted with (men and WOMEN) would agree with your third sentence above.  Very few would fail to laugh at the others. Hunters, as others have pointed out, are not a monolithic group.  There are poor ones and rich ones, slob hunters and game wardens, traditionalists and techno-freaks, just like there are in any other sport.  Some hunters follow ethical codes of conduct; others do not.  The "problem hunters" that make the woods unsafe at times should be trained by other hunters to be safer, or weeded out by some testing process (i.e. hunters safety course requirements).   My wife and I both hunt, as have all the men and women in my family for generations.  But I will not venture into the woods in Indiana during deer or turkey season, not because the hunters are necessarily unsafe, but because there are far too many of them for the limited public lands available.  In Oregon (where I am from) or Idaho (my wife’s home) the story is different; I would not hesitate to go mushrooming during deer season or XC skiing during elk season because there is simply more space.  The only other real source of trouble, IMHO, is when you get "city boys" (and girls) out in the woods with guns and 1)without proper safety training, 2) without proper guidance from an experienced hunter, and 3) without having an ethical tradition to guide them.  Hence the BMW in the Catskills camp referred to earlier.  If children do not learn hunting ethics from thier parents, they may grow up to be gun nuts and make the woods unsafe. But hunters in general are not the problem. — Derek R. Larson           Indiana University        Dept. of History                 "Nothing interesting occurred today…"         -Meriwether Lewis at Ft. Clatsop, Oregon, Jan.4th, 1806

Response:

yes, you are very right, in a pragmatic sense.  but environmentalists are necessarily idealists at heart, and in order to have a dreamn become reality, we must look ahead to perfection, and not necessarily deal with the problem as it exists.

The ONLY way to improve ANY situation is by dealing with the problem as it exists.  Blind idealism is just that…..blind.

Response:

Scotty, let me clear up a misconception you seem to be having. [and later..] IMHO, your post clearly shows that you are one of those folks that seems unable to realize what a huge responsibility you have resting on your shoulders every time you sight down that gun and squeeze that trigger.  

 You should check your attributions more carefully.  Scott Linn ("Scotty"  to you) is arguing the same side you are.  The remarks you’ve attributed  to him are from another poster. A car is a utilitarian object.  We all use them as a basic transportation device.  In today’s society we cannot get along without them.  we each agree to a basic social contract each time we get behind the wheel. we each know the risks of driving.

 How convenient of you to define the social contract only in terms of what  you want and declare that your desires are necessities while others’ are  conveniences..  Plenty of people get along just fine without cars;  in light  of that fact I believe your statement that "we" cannot get along without them  would be more accurate if it were to read "I" cannot get along without them.  I’m also curious by your reference to a "basic social contract" that we’ve  all agreed to.  Ironically the "right" you argue in favor of (automobile  ownership) *is not* explicitly protected by any official act of our society  while the right you argue against (gun ownership) *is*. Once again, I will say that I hope that anyone guilty of killing or injuring another person in a hunting *accident* will never see the outside of a prison cell again.

 A pretty sweeping generalization that is far too draconian for my tastes.  There are accidents, and there are Accidents.  I’m perfectly willing to  believe that gun owners should be held to high standards of precaution  but arguing that the penalty for any conceivable hunting accident which  injures another person should be life imprisonment goes *way* too far.

Response:

[..] No, "we" aren’t agreed, if you include a number of hunters who have posted to this forum.  They seem to think that a hunter shooting someone (not an accidental discharge) is not an illegal act, if it was "an accident", ie a "misidentified" target. *Ahem* If you can post instances of ‘a number’ of hunters stating, in this thread, that negligently shooting someone is not illegal, we’d *love* to see it. Take your time — we’ll wait. -TD

Tom,         Try reading all of the posts in the thread if your site archives back that far.  Unfortunately mine do not or I would repost several just such responses.  You may be interested in one person in particular by the name of David Paul.  Frankly the only reason I remember even his name is a rather heated exchange of e-mail that we engaged in.         You are correct, at least, in your view that most hunters have come down in favor of sensible hunting practices.  I regret that I can’t say all have done so.         I will search my cache and see if I have any of the original posts saved.  If I do, I will repost them over the next couple of days. Shaun

Response:

I’m just getting into hiking, and one thing I can say is that I feel MUCH safer in the woods than I do driving on a crowded highway. I agree, the woods is one of the safest places.  It would be even more safe if there were no hunters.  I know this may feel bad by reasonable hunters, but how can a hiker distinguish between reasonable hunters and not so reasonable ones? Chris

The same way you can distinguish between safe drivers and unsafe drivers.  You can’t.  But we all get on the roads anyway, don’t we?

Response:

My $.02 I am loath to push unnecessary laws on anybody and strongly believe in the concept of traditional rights wich might include hunting, fishing, harvesting and sqatting ( read camping a’la Grapes-o-Wrath ). But several trips to London have convinced me that the one part of the Bill-o-Rights which is wearing thin is the guns part. I have lived in bad-ass neighborhoods all my life.  Here you also want to decide where you stand on the milita issue.

Here is where you may get shot, and not because you were mistaken for a deer either.   I have met a good many hunters who are in fact harvesting, are funny when drunk and dont use the gun as a ppenis extension. They hunt because they are poor and taht has been a good way to put food on the table. On the other I hand, I saw a BMW in a hunting camp in the Catskills. This could only be owned by a Wall Street Trader of a crack dealer. Think about it.  Neither should be armed under any circumstances. Plus the average $30,000 price for a 4WD throws the traditional argument in the trash.  And for most, I can swear by the lack of women hunters, the bored rod is a penis extension.

Got mine for under $6,000.00.  Of course, it’s an ‘87 model. So what to do ?? Simple:   a) Buy your meat or even better go veggie.

Do you think THIS meat volunterers to be slaughtered?       b) Use the fishing throw-back policy.     How? Control the breeding with birth control implants     shot from shot guns.  In this way, build families or     herds which can think for themselves and also be tracked     for driving, farming, and tick control purposes.   c) Get lyme tick disease under control with booster shots. Most hunters ( and snow-mobilers ) do not love the woods.  They go out to the great outdoors to control and destroy them.  We go into the woods because it is simply the most beautiful thing there is.  The "great outdoorsmen" are also storm trooper wanabes. What the hell do you want that type around for.  Rehabilitate them, the cold war is over.

I hunt AND backpack, and occassionally combine the two.  I never drink while doing either, and if hunting is an activity which promotes pride in being of the male gender, then so be it.  I don’t bitch at a woman if she wants to knit or crochet.  Hunters support the wildlife as much (or more) than anyone, and while there are exceptions, most are responsible people.  

Response:

<Big Diatribe Snipped   Get with the program.  If you don’t know what you’re screaming about then, shut up and listen.

Wow Larry,         Don’t I feel small and pathetic now.  I just have a couple of comments for you. 1.  Feel free to read the posts and gain a clear understanding of the thread and the previous posts before embarrassing yourself again with a similar post. 2.  I’ll "shut up" when I’m damn good and ready to, who the hell do you think you are? 3.  Take a prozac. Happy New Year Shaun    

Response:

Sad.  Sad commentary.  You classify all hunters with the jackboot skinheads with no business in the woods.  How open minded! Yes, there are slob hunters.  There are slobs in every form of activity known to man.  It’s the good ones that turn in the bad ones.  What do you care if the hunter is in a BMW or a WWII Jeep?  Does a really expensive bowling shirt make a guy better or worse than the bowler wearing a T-shirt?  You are extremely materialistic and by all accounts equally as shallow. You obviously know little of hunting and are happy to let thousands know it.  If you let go of that tree you’re hugging long enough to check it out you might actually see some merit in it.  Who do you suppose maintains the health of the deer, antelope and elk herds.  You?  Try again.  It’s the hunters and their contributions to state and federal Fish & Game coffers through tag fees. Where do you think all those fish come from in the stocking trucks?  You.  No, all you can contribute is mouth and criticism.  Those fish are provided by the funds genrated by fishing and hunting licenses by those nasty hunters and fishermen.  Who do you suppose goes out in the winter to feed the deer that are starving from lack of food?  You?  No.  That alfalfa hay is bought by the fees from hunting and fishing tags. Herds are maintained for a reason.  To improve the quality of life for the animal.  A common cry from the ignorant is "Well, they were doing Ok before WE got here so, why shoot ‘em?"  A legitimate question if you don’t know anything about wildlife. Have you ever tasted elk or, deer or, antelope?  No.  You satisfied with slaughtering cow and sheep.  Oh, and cutting a few tuna and chickens along the way is Ok, too.  You are as hypocritical as they come.  Those poor little defenseless furbearing creatures!  While you and the rest of your clowns are busy throwing ink and paint on expensive fur coats you happen to be wearing your Nike and Reebok tennies with leather belts and wallets.   Last year, Idaho lost more acreage than covers the entire state of Rhode Island to lightning fires.  Now that all of the under brush and grasses have been obliterated, all of the wintering grazing lost and virtually all of the weather cover burnt to the ground what do you do with thousands of deer, elk, bear and another hundred species with no food or cover?  I know.  Let’s let them die a slow agonizing death from starvation!  Let’s let them migrate into the towns and eat everything from the ground up!  Let’s let them migrate into the ‘burbs and get killed by the dozens daily by car and truck.  With any luck maybe they can kill a few baby humans along the way in the wreckage! You know, we could issue some permits to go into the affected areas and thin out the herds so the available forage can support what’s left in their natural habitat.  We can try to truck and helicopter some food into the backcountry for what herds can’t be reached by hunters or, vehicle.  No.  Makes too much sense. Let’s let those treehuggers fly over and see hundreds of dead deer huddled up in the nooks and crannies of the mountains.   Next year, we’ll have maybe 5 or 10% survive and it’ll take them 7 to 10 years to get back to normal herd size unless we have two bad winters in a row.  Then, it’s over.  That’s what bad game management buys you.  Get with the program.  If you don’t know what you’re screaming about then, shut up and listen.

Response:

Hunting accidents are no different than any other accident

You can classify accidents in lots of ways.  Accidents can always happen, but it makes a difference whether it just happens, or the person which caused the accident did something dangerous.  It also makes a difference whether the person causing the accident endangers himself or other people. One of the bad things of a hunting accident is that the endangered person has no legal way of preventing the hunter shooting at him before the hunter actually does it.  (Speeding drivers get fined even without accident) I’m just getting into hiking, and one thing I can say is that I feel MUCH safer in the woods than I do driving on a crowded highway.

I agree, the woods is one of the safest places.  It would be even more safe if there were no hunters.  I know this may feel bad by reasonable hunters, but how can a hiker distinguish between reasonable hunters and not so reasonable ones? Chris

Response:

It still appears that hunters think pointing a weapon at an unidentified object and shooting it is the same as someone accidentally killing someone with a car.

I am beginning to wonder if you actually believe this, or if you believe that repetition will make others believe it. Hunters, like ic design engineers, are not of a single mind. A gun/rifle is a *weapon*.  It’s primary purpose is to kill.  A car is not. Why is that so hard to grasp?

Negligent homicide is negligent homicide regardless of the agent of death. Not all fatal car accidents involve negligence, nor do all fatal gun accidents. Why is *that* so hard to grasp? cheers, scott smay /Everything I know is wrong./

Response:

yes, you are very right, in a pragmatic sense.  but environmentalists are necessarily idealists at heart, and in order to have a dreamn become reality, we must look ahead to perfection, and not necessarily deal with the problem as it exists. this issue is really too complex to say whether hunting should be allowed or not. one simply can not hunt if it so displeases them. otoh, hunters do need to improve their track records with respect to accidental shootings and such. ‘enjoy our wild america’  (marty stouffer) evan – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Sad.  Sad commentary.  You classify all hunters with the jackboot skinheads with no business in the woods.  How open minded! Yes, there are slob hunters.  There are slobs in every form of activity known to man.  It’s the good ones that turn in the bad ones.  What do you care if the hunter is in a BMW or a WWII Jeep?  Does a really expensive bowling shirt make a guy better or worse than the bowler wearing a T-shirt?  You are extremely materialistic and by all accounts equally as shallow. You obviously know little of hunting and are happy to let thousands know it.  If you let go of that tree you’re hugging long enough to check it out you might actually see some merit in it.  Who do you suppose maintains the health of the deer, antelope and elk herds.  You?  Try again.  It’s the hunters and their contributions to state and federal Fish & Game coffers through tag fees. Where do you think all those fish come from in the stocking trucks?  You.  No, all you can contribute is mouth and criticism.  Those fish are provided by the funds genrated by fishing and hunting licenses by those nasty hunters and fishermen.  Who do you suppose goes out in the winter to feed the deer that are starving from lack of food?  You?  No.  That alfalfa hay is bought by the fees from hunting and fishing tags. Herds are maintained for a reason.  To improve the quality of life for the animal.  A common cry from the ignorant is "Well, they were doing Ok before WE got here so, why shoot ‘em?"  A legitimate question if you don’t know anything about wildlife. Have you ever tasted elk or, deer or, antelope?  No.  You satisfied with slaughtering cow and sheep.  Oh, and cutting a few tuna and chickens along the way is Ok, too.  You are as hypocritical as they come.  Those poor little defenseless furbearing creatures!  While you and the rest of your clowns are busy throwing ink and paint on expensive fur coats you happen to be wearing your Nike and Reebok tennies with leather belts and wallets. Last year, Idaho lost more acreage than covers the entire state of Rhode Island to lightning fires.  Now that all of the under brush and grasses have been obliterated, all of the wintering grazing lost and virtually all of the weather cover burnt to the ground what do you do with thousands of deer, elk, bear and another hundred species with no food or cover?  I know.  Let’s let them die a slow agonizing death from starvation!  Let’s let them migrate into the towns and eat everything from the ground up!  Let’s let them migrate into the ‘burbs and get killed by the dozens daily by car and truck.  With any luck maybe they can kill a few baby humans along the way in the wreckage! You know, we could issue some permits to go into the affected areas and thin out the herds so the available forage can support what’s left in their natural habitat.  We can try to truck and helicopter some food into the backcountry for what herds can’t be reached by hunters or, vehicle.  No.  Makes too much sense. Let’s let those treehuggers fly over and see hundreds of dead deer huddled up in the nooks and crannies of the mountains. Next year, we’ll have maybe 5 or 10% survive and it’ll take them 7 to 10 years to get back to normal herd size unless we have two bad winters in a row.  Then, it’s over.  That’s what bad game management buys you.  Get with the program.  If you don’t know what you’re screaming about then, shut up and listen. . .

Response:

   Scotty, let me clear up a misconception you seem to be having.  A car is a utilitarian object.  We all use them as a basic transportation device.  In today’s society we cannot get along without them.  we each agree to a basic social contract each time we get behind the wheel.  we each know the risks of driving…

As evidence by the number of "accidents"….    Now, a gun is a weapon.  It’s sole purpose is destruction.  It will be used to destroy a target, a game animal, or a person.  Is the difference clear yet? You *need* a car.  You do not *need* a gun.   The only social contract here is the responsibility of the person behind the trigger.  I do not choose to own a gun, therefor I have *NO* responsibilty for gun safety.  You choose to hunt?  You choos to take on the responsibility. period.

As for whether or not you *need* a gun, how about looking at the location of the person. Is he/she in an urban cesspool or a rural area? I know of many people who live in more remote areas that do NOT have vehicles ( one in particular has never had one! He lives in Northern BC, by a river. A canoe is his trans. His rifle is important to him. It is by it that he eats.    Now to elaborate further, I am not opposed to gun ownership.  My point in this thread has been to advocate for responsible gun ownership and use.  I have been appalled by reading repeated posts by folks to immature or to stupid to realize that guns are not toys.

I have always agreed with this. The same applies to automobiles. Like firearms, they are quite placid when left alone, but when in irresponsible hands, can be quite the opposite.    I don’t give a damn if your fucking hunters insurance is paid up or not.  An insurance settlement is cold comfort to the family of a VICTIM of a hunting *accident*.  IMHO, your post clearly shows that you are one of those folks that seems unable to realize what a huge responsibility you have resting on your shoulders every time you sight down that gun and squeeze that trigger.  

All too common, I am afraid. I have been taught that you must take responsibility for your actions. Kinda like the first law of physics (I think): For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.    Once again, I will say that I hope that anyone guilty of killing or injuring another person in a hunting *accident* will never see the outside of a prison cell again.

I would like to see that extended to auto accidents also!! Mike – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Shaun

Response:

snip A gun/rifle is a *weapon*.  It’s primary purpose is to kill.  A car is not.  Why is that so hard to grasp? snip

   Why is the primary purpose of the item important?  If a car is used to kill somebody it’s ‘less bad’ than a gun?  Dead is dead!  I’ll remember to use my car next time I want to kill somebody, maybe I’ll get off easier. Hopefully everybody knows this last part is tongue in cheek. — Kirk Mueller Hughes Aircraft Co., Radar and Communications Sector El Segundo, CA  USA —  All comments are strictly my own. —

Response:

: : 3.  As to taking a poorly planned shot.  Define that!  Unless you are at the scene and behind the shooter, how can you tell? : You have to be kidding. : I’ll take a stab:  When a hunter shoots a person. : Well, that’s a workable definition. But it’s also rather : pointless. I think we are agreed that accidentally : shooting someone should be illegal. No, "we" aren’t agreed, if you include a number of hunters who have posted to this forum.  They seem to think that a hunter shooting someone (not an accidental discharge) is not an illegal act, if it was "an accident", ie a "misidentified" target.

About as illegal as accidentally injuring someone with a car?  Is your hunters premium insurance paid? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text — Scott Linn CMOS IC Design Engineer Hewlett-Packard Integrated Circuits Business Division – Corvallis, OR

Response:

: : 3.  As to taking a poorly planned shot.  Define that!  Unless you are at the scene and behind the shooter, how can you tell? : You have to be kidding. : I’ll take a stab:  When a hunter shoots a person. : Well, that’s a workable definition. But it’s also rather : pointless. I think we are agreed that accidentally : shooting someone should be illegal. No, "we" aren’t agreed, if you include a number of hunters who have posted to this forum.  They seem to think that a hunter shooting someone (not an accidental discharge) is not an illegal act, if it was "an accident", ie a "misidentified" target. — Scott Linn CMOS IC Design Engineer Hewlett-Packard Integrated Circuits Business Division – Corvallis, OR

Response:

: 3.  As to taking a poorly planned shot.  Define that!  Unless you are at the scene and behind the shooter, how can you tell? You have to be kidding. I’ll take a stab:  When a hunter shoots a person.

Well, that’s a workable definition. But it’s also rather pointless. I think we are agreed that accidentally shooting someone should be illegal. By your definition, all this suggestion would do, is make that two crimes rather than one (and one, making a poorly planned shot, fairly minor compared to the other.) Do you really mean that poorly planned shots should be illegal, but only if someone were accidentally hit? If you do, I think it’s pointless, but I wouldn’t object. If you mean something more by "poorly planned shots", then I’d like to hear what, and how you plan to determine this and prosecute cases.                                            Frank Crary                                            CU Boulder

Response:

1.  "Marking" bullets is ludicrous as any decent hunting round deforms drastical I believe this certainly possible in the same manner explosives can be marked, with less risk of performance lost.  I will admit it maybe too costly.

Explosives are not marked in the way that you think. It’s possible to identify the manufacturer and, I think, the lot number. The specific buyer can not be identified. But, given the small number of buyers, even that limited information is useful in investigating a crime. You could, in principle, "mark" ammunition in the same way. But it would be pointless. Tens of millions of people buy ammunition. You’d learn that the ammunition used in a given crime was made by, say, Winchester on the first week of March, 1995. Since a huge number of people possess ammunition made by the same company, during that period, you haven’t really narrowed down the list of suspects. More to the point, most states don’t require records of ammunition sales. So all you’d learn is that the criminal purchased the ammunition from any one of hundreds of stores. Somehow this doesn’t strike me as a viable way of investigating a crime. 2.  As to making the wounding of an animal a crime, that is absolutely stupid.   What if a person lines up perfectly but as he pulls the t rigger, his perfect shot is now just a wounding shot because the animal moved ? predicting when a animal will move is the hunter’s responsiblity.

I’m afraid you are assuming absolutely perfect skill. You might as well say, "never, ever, missing is the hunter’s responsibility." _No_ one _never_ misses. What you suggest would make it a crime to hunt and be less than inhumanly perfect. …Every book I have read on Hunting by ‘expert" hunters seemed to think that wounding an animal was a very bad thing.

Sure. No one is questioning that. That’s why hunters _try_ to avoid simply wounding an animal. But that’s try to the best of their ability. It doesn’t mean hunters are always perfect. I never said this should be a felony, illegal hunting yes, dangerous shots yes, but not wounding.  I would suggest a rapidly escalating fine: 1st $80 bucks, 2nd $200, 3rd 10,000 4th go to jail.

Again, you have an enforcement problem. How, exactly, would the police or forest service find out who had wounded the animal? Have one officer per hunter following them around? If not, how do you plan to prove "beyond any reasonable doubt" who was at fault? …Though without marked bullets I doubt they will ever catch the idiots who shot all the wounded animals.

See above. They type of "marking" that is possible, isn’t useful for identifying the person who fired the bullet. 4. Hunters do have a very big liability to carry when they hunt.  I believe that thorough hunters education classes should be MANDATORY and not grand-fathered as they currently are for people over a certain I agree, a good class would solve many problems esp. if it had a mandatory demostration of shooting proficiency.

The ones here in Colorado do, and are mandatory for most people. (There is a grandfather clause, exempting people who were over 18 at the time the law was passed. I think that means anyone born before 1955 or so.) BTW I have nothing against hunters of over populated species.  My only concern would be if the percentage of successful trophy hunters was high enough to affect deer breeding patterns by killing only the largest animals.

It doesn’t quite work that way. Here in Colorado, the effects of hunting have been seen on the "breeding patterns" (evolution, really) of elk. (Or at least, this is what the forest service guy at the hunter’s safety class said.) But the effect hasn’t been to reduce the size of the animals, what you’d expect from "killing only the largest animals." It’s been to reduce the average size of antlers, and increase the frequency of stunted ones (i.e. ones that aren’t just small, but which never developed fully.) I’m afraid I don’t see how that adversely affects the elk.                                                   Frank Crary                                                   CU Boulder

Response:

1.  "Marking" bullets is ludicrous as any decent hunting round deforms drastical

I believe this certainly possible in the same manner explosives can be marked, with less risk of performance lost.  I will admit it maybe too costly. 2.  As to making the wounding of an animal a crime, that is absolutely stupid.   Has the person who suggested this EVER fired a firearm?

Yes,   What if a person lines up perfectly but as he pulls the t rigger, his perfect shot is now just a wounding shot because the animal moved ?

predicting when a animal will move is the hunter’s responsiblity.  Every book I have read on Hunting by ‘expert" hunters seemed to think that wounding an animal was a very bad thing.  I will admit, most of them had done it which is why.  Has this person committed a felony? I never said this should be a felony, illegal hunting yes, dangerous shots yes, but not wounding.  I would suggest a rapidly escalating fine: 1st $80 bucks, 2nd $200, 3rd 10,000 4th go to jail.  Though without marked bullets I doubt they will ever catch the idiots who shot all the wounded animals. 3.  As to taking a poorly planned shot.  Define that!  Unless you are at the sce

Dead Cows, broken windows, bullet ending up near a human, dog ect would all be proof positive if the gulity party could be found. 4. Hunters do have a very big liability to carry when they hunt.  I believe that thorough hunters education classes should be MANDATORY and not grand-fathered as they currently are for people over a

certain I agree, a good class would solve many problems esp. if it had a mandatory demostration of shooting proficiency.  This is even more important in Bow hunting since in most hunting conditions the required skills are more difficult to obtain. it was the last weekend of hunting season.  I did not have any orange on me but one of the gentlemen took me and my partner to his cabin to GIVE us some extra orange clothing to place on our packs to

help That is not a reasonable requirement, not because it is too much to ask, but because anyone who takes a shot a human while hunting deer should be charged with reckless endangerment. BTW I have nothing against hunters of over populated species.  My only concern would be if the percentage of successful trophy hunters was high enough to affect deer breeding patterns by killing only the largest animals.  I think most hunters would agree that this is very unlikely. Robert Posey – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Scott Olds

Response:

: 3.  As to taking a poorly planned shot.  Define that!  Unless you are at the scene and behind the shooter, how can you tell? You have to be kidding. I’ll take a stab:  When a hunter shoots a person. — Scott Linn CMOS IC Design Engineer Hewlett-Packard Integrated Circuits Business Division – Corvallis, OR

Response:

I am getting so tired of seeing this us versus them attitude between the mountain bikers, backpackers, and hunters.  I hunt, backpack, and mountain bike.  NO ONE GROUP IS PERFECT!  I can point out numerous "backpackers" who leave scarred ground from open groundfires.  I can point out mountain bikers who are rude.  Hunters that are careless (admittedly more dangerous).  The key thing is that no one group owns the wilderness areas.  Everyone needs to realize this and that the key thing is that people act RESPONSIBLY.  Also, keep in mind that unless you are knowledgable about something, do not offer "solutions" to problems. 1.  "Marking" bullets is ludicrous as any decent hunting round deforms drastically upon impact.  This HELPS to ensure that animals are wounded less and killed more.  This is in effect more humane.   2.  As to making the wounding of an animal a crime, that is absolutely stupid.  Has the person who suggested this EVER fired a firearm?  What if a person lines up perfectly but as he pulls the trigger, his perfect shot is now just a wounding shot because the animal moved ?  Has this person committed a felony?  What a pile of garbage.   We have better things for the courts to do. 3.  As to taking a poorly planned shot.  Define that!  Unless you are at the scene and behind the shooter, how can you tell? 4. Hunters do have a very big liability to carry when they hunt.  I believe that thorough hunters education classes should be MANDATORY and not grand-fathered as they currently are for people over a certain age.  Also, any activity, be it mountain biking or hunting should be severly penalized if the person is under the influence. 5.  Yes, I have been on the other side and worried about hunting season.  I was going into the Pecos Wilderness in NM and as I arrived at the trailhead I talked with a couple of gentlemen who happened to be hunters who told me that it was the last weekend of hunting season.  I did not have any orange on me but one of the gentlemen took me and my partner to his cabin to GIVE us some extra orange clothing to place on our packs to help us.  He even offered us room in his cabin to stay the night.  The point is that we all have responsibilities to take reasonable efforts to protect ourselves. Anyway, that’s enough for right now.  I’m sure that this will stir things up even more. Scott Olds

Response:

Question:

To All: I have an oppoutunity to go fly fishinh in Venezuela this coming spring. Would appreciate any information. I can’t seem to find anyone who has ever been there fishing.

Response:

Mason) writes: I have an oppoutunity to go fly fishinh in Venezuela this coming spring. Would appreciate any information. I can’t seem to find anyone who has ever been there fishing.

Where are you going in Venezuela?  There’s everything from big-game saltwater to the Amazon basin to trout, but you must have some sort of destination in mind. If you’ll post your intentions I’ll try to give you some specific answers.  I’ve fished all over Venezuela (even met my wife in the jungle there). Marshall Cutchin

Response: