Jump to content


we are 'the leading edge' I Share on HSO
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About minnducker

  • Rank
    Jr HSOList.com Family
  • Birthday 04/05/1948
  1. To those who asked - the best way to stop the spread of invasive species would be to eliminate/close public landings, or at least 98% of them and require a wash station and inspection for any that remain open. The MN/DNR policy/goal of having a public access on every lake in the state is clearly the main reason we have an AIS problem in the first place. That's reality and a fact. But the stickers make the populace feel good as it gives the appearance that the DNR and the legislature really care about this issue. Plus, in the future if a$$'s need to be covered, the DNR/Legislature can say "look at all the money we spent on stuff; decals, wash stations, extra CO's, studies, public meetings, etc..it's not like we weren't trying.
  2. Interesting --- but back to the original question, where does this stand? Is the opener early ??? Out of state right now and need to know. Also, I checked the DNR web site news releases and headlines and they have NO information there one way or the other. WTH? Incredible.
  3. To all you wannabe game wardens/snitches/rats, stick the TIP number where the sun don’t shine. I obey the game and fish laws and require my fishing and hunting companions to do the same. Period. Anything beyond that doesn’t sit right with the way I was brought up and try to live. It’s not my job, it’s none of my business, and I can only guess why someone might need more fish or game than the law allows; maybe they’re unemployed and trying to feed their kids. I hope all you folks that use TIP are not hypocrites and are also turning in all your acquaintances who drink too much before they operate their boat, drive home, or cheat on their taxes, or drive faster than the speed limit, or maybe enjoy a “smoke” or two.
  4. Must be some serious confusion/misinformation here. "Thru Hull" means just that. If you actually were to cut a hole your boat (very bad idea), you wouldn't be going "thru the hull". You mount a "thru hull" trandsducer on a fiberglass boat without cutting any holes in the bottom. You can't shoot through wood or aluminum, but in no case would I ever cut a hole in any boat to mount a transducer, and nether would anyone else. BTW when mounting a thru hull transducer on a glass boat, you do need to use some type of liquid epoxy to imbed and fasten the transducer to the bottom so there are no air pockets or bubbles between the face of the transducer and the bottom. Check with an experienced marine outfitter or look on the web for details. Have one on my new glass boat, works perfect at any speed with no loss of sensitivity.
  5. Down south for the winter. Watching weather in MN it looks like an early ice-out this year. Can return any time, but would like to be back shortly after ice goes out in Brainerd area. ("Normal" is April 20 something around Brainerd). Weather/temps look about 3 weeks ahead of normal this spring. Any ice out observations/guesses around the state ?
  6. If you just want to fish, and not party in Cabo, and save about 50% on your trip, search on the WEB for Van Wormer resorts in Los Barilles B.C.S. Package costs for 4 nights and 3 full days charter fishing including food and lodging is around a grand per person. More if you're in a beachside condo with kitchen, living room patio and TV, less if in a motel type room. Both are good. Los Barilles is a small town about 50 miles north of Cabo. Van Wormer has 3 hotels on the beach with pools, bars etc.. 95% of the clients are fisherman. Packages are VERY reasonable and include food, lodging and charters. Extras are bar bill, bait ($20/day), tips and fish processing. (Do the processing at the "Smokehouse", reps are at the dock when you come in, processing at the hotel is only cleaning and freezing, but it's nice to get some smoked.) Been going there for years for big yellow-fin and dorado in September. No complaints and bargain pricing. They have daily several shuttles daily back and forth to SJD airport, just arrange with them for your group's flight times..
  7. Both methods described here will work well, freezing in zip-loc bags after filling with water, and vacuum sealing. The advantage of vacuum sealing is that each package is flatter and takes less room. Also, I've found that if you put the filets or fish on a cookie sheet, and freeze overnight, and THEN seal in a vacuum sealer, the filets won't deform and you'll save space and be able to see size and species easily in the freezer. I do the same thing with ducks and pheasants, freeze first overnight and then seal and put back in freezer. They retain shape and are easy to identify.
  8. IMPORTANT-PLEASE READ. Unless you add MORE VENTILATION holes/screens/mesh to this crate, it could be a death trap. I know this from personal experience, a hard lesson learned with my first Lab 30 years ago. The crate I built was almost identical to yours as near as I can tell from the pictures. My dog died in this crate after an afternoon of pheasant hunting. The outside temp was in the upper 50's to low 60's, the dog was heated up from working and it's body heat was trapped inside the box with him. The crate was in the back of my pickup under an alumninum topper, so there was no breeze hitting the crate. The temperature under the topper and outside was not the problem, the problem was his own body heat could not dispate while in this crate. Wood is a good insulator compared to plastic or metal like manufactured crates. It will work fine of you add some large openings to the back and the divider, and I'd remove the hinged covers so the sides are always open, (plus I'd make them larger to be safe). You could cover these openings with hardware cloth, wire mesh, or expanded metal (this is best and most durable). If it would work for you, some openings in the top would be good too. The more ventilation the better. This is a nice crate that looks like it will work fine, just don't want to see anyone loose their dog like I did.
  9. I believe all boaters and fisherman in Minnesota should strongly resist any effort by the DNR to impose dock size restrictions on the people of this state. This is just one more seemingly small effort to take away more rights from law abiding private citizens, without justification based on scientific studies or empirical data/information that can show a particular dock size causes any harm. The real agenda is to impose the will of a few while taking away individual rights and privileges. If this sounds paranoid/black-helicopter to you, fine, but think about the following facts before final judgement. A couple years back, the DNR established a committee of "stakeholders", and sanctioned a "pilot program" which targeted 5 north-central Minnesota counties. This was done under the umbrella of the governor’s clean water initiative. (I think Cass, Crow Wing, Itasca and Hubbard plus 1 more county were involved). Unfortunately, the "committee of stakeholders" was heavily populated by DNR staff and environmental activists. The idea was that the committee's recommendations were to be presented to the county commissioners in each of the 5 targeted counties in the "pilot program", and hopefully be accepted by them. Some of the committee’s recommendations increased structure setbacks, reduced the amount (%) of allowable impervious coverage, and would have reclassified virtually all remaining undeveloped shoreline as “environmental”. One major effect of adopting these new regulations would have been that almost ALL LAKESHORE PROPERTY IN THESE 5 COUNTIES WOULD HAVE BECOME NON-CONFORMING INSTANTLY. Owners of NON-CONFORMING lakeshore property are subject to various additional constraints and scrutiny. As a result, it significantly reduces the value of property. In other cases, (vacant land), it would make the property worthless. This is why individual property right protection is important. Fortunately, the county commissioners in all 5 counties understood this, and rightfully felt an obligation to protect the rights of their constituents, and they rejected the stringent, unrealistic restrictions in total. To be accurate, a few individual changes were considered and I believe, adopted by 1 or 2 counties. Later, as evidenced by editorials distributed to out-state newspapers in the 5 counties after the rejection, the membership of the “committee” were irate, and vowed to keep fighting and to use the whatever means and authority possible, within the DNR to further their agenda. This despite the FACT that the county commissioners rejected their proposals. Remember, the county commissioners are elected by the people of the county to represent them (democracy), while the "committee" was made up of DNR staff and environmental activists. As this committee was working on the rules, they provided web access to their work-in-progress document. For quite a while, DOCK RESTRICTIONS were included in the recommendations. This issue was the most volatile of the items in their WIP documents at the time. At public hearings in the 5 county courthouses targeted, attendance was standing room only because of the dock restrictions being recommended. GENE MERRIAM, then DNR commissioner, was asked to attend these sessions to “quell the outcry” (my words). I heard him say, at the Crow Wing County Public hearing, “..the DNR has no business restricting dock sizes. This matter should be left to local and county governments to regulate.” This of course, satisfied the attendees, so the rest of the agenda could go forward for a time. You can decide for yourself, but it looks like the “committee” is moving forward on dock restrictions despite the commissioner’s word, and the county commissioner’s rejection. They are following through on their promise to use whatever power and authority they can OUTSIDE OF ANY REPRESENTATIVE/DEMOCRATIC process to further their agenda. Later on, at the DNR hearing on proposed dock restrictions in Nisswa, I had chat with a DNR staffer in attendance. I asked him to be candid, and I think he was. I pointed out that he certainly could agree that large boats with large motors (150-300 hp), disturbed vegetation, caused significant lakeshore erosion etc./ etc, and in overall are much more damaging than large docks. So I asked him why the DNR wasn’t focusing efforts in that direction. His answer was that they think they can “get away with restricting docks”, but that there “would be too much resistance to restricting boat size or boat horsepower TODAY”. He indicated however, that in the “not too distant future”, he anticipated an “effort to restrict boat size and horsepower, probably only on specified lakes to start with”. If you’ve taken the DNR survey, it’s obvious that the target is not just dock size. Several of the questions are about boatlifts and canopies. Restricting those would effectively be a good start at boat/motor size restrictions. The bottom line is, the DNR is staffed today with many people who want the lakes in the state reverted back to conditions in the 1700’s. It’s a FACT that DNR people involved in the dock issue have stated to a representative for the Minnesota Lakeshore Property Owners Association that they would like ALL LAKES IN THE STATE OF MINNESOTA to be under the SAME RESTRICTIONS AS THE BOUNDARY WATERS CANOE AREA. Again, the remaining members of the lakeshore regulations “Pilot Project” are at work, fulfilling their promise to further their agenda however they can. The only way they can accomplish this is 1) if no one speaks out and fights against them – and – 2) using the bureaucracy and power of the DNR, with no public scrutiny by elected representatives or the voting public. If you are OK with that, fine. But remember, no power boats, no access, no roads. Finally, in these economic times of supposed tight budgets, are dock size restriction and enforcement what we should be spending money on? Remember, there is no evidence of any potential environmental benefit to reducing dock sizes according to DNR representatives at the various public hearings. That’s because it isn’t clear that the absence of a dock or its presence is better for fish. As they also stated, dock size restrictions are for only aesthetic reasons, and is an issue being raised by an increasing number of very vocal activists. Do we need to spend DNR $’s (your $’s) to regulate docks??? Think it through. Speak out against this and don’t let it continue.
  10. In response to last message - I use a double uni knot to attach a mono or flourocarbon leader to braided line. There are instructions across the internet on how to tie, plus they came with my braided line - Power pro. The main thing is you need fewer loops (5) on the braided side and 6-8 on the mon/flourcarbon side. Holds great, slips though guides and isn;t as hard to tie as a blood knot.
  11. Just saw this thread, and I'm curious if anyone else has experienced what I did with braided lines. I pretty much only fish for walleyes, jigging, trolling and lindy rigging. When I tried braided lines for Lindy rigging a couple years ago, the ratio of hookups to bites dropped way off compared to mono. Thought at first it was just that day's bite, but through one whole summer, this was the case. Switching back and forth between mono and braided showed the difference quite dramtically. When using jigs (with immediate hook set), the opposite is the case; the no-stretch characteristics give a faster, harder hook set. I theorized that becasue the braided line has no stretch or "give", that the fish feel the pull immediately, and drop the bait, where with mono, the inherent stretch allows me time to feel the bite and open the bail so fish keeps on eating the live bait. Please comment and explain if you have similar experience.
  12. Dear "take-em": Hope this helps- Three of us fished Waubay 4/23-25 (Sun-Tue). Great weather except Monday. No problem getting 2 fish limits each day. Caught 6 -10 fish per hour, no 100 fish day type bite, but consistent and fish seem a little larger than previous years. We put in at Kanago landing. Action in 8-12 ft. of water in several spots near this landing. Used 1/4 oz. white jigheads and fatheads.
  • Create New...