All you fishing dudes and dudettes...
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
Stumbled into something on Saturday and tried 'em out last night.

WHOO HOO!!!

http://tinyurl.com/f3hpy

In Pearl/Gray, they are very attractive to stripers - big stripers. I
was totally surprised.

Boated and released a ton of blue too.

Good times.

Those things are delicious with dijon mustard.

Somewhat related: I'm reading more and more info lately (and not from anyone
even remotely involved with PETA) that catch & release does not work. The
mortality rate may be MUCH higher than we've thought for many years. It has
no relationship, either, to whether you use barbless hooks.

All you fishing dudes and dudettes...
 

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
Stumbled into something on Saturday and tried 'em out last night.

WHOO HOO!!!

http://tinyurl.com/f3hpy

In Pearl/Gray, they are very attractive to stripers - big stripers. I
was totally surprised.

Boated and released a ton of blue too.

Good times.

Those things are delicious with dijon mustard.

Somewhat related: I'm reading more and more info lately (and not from anyone
even remotely involved with PETA) that catch & release does not work. The
mortality rate may be MUCH higher than we've thought for many years. It has
no relationship, either, to whether you use barbless hooks.


It seems the stress of the fight is too much for the fish. I have seen
many more dead fish floating around the lake in the past few years,
especially in the coves, as catch and release has become more popular.
I have actually seen a "catch and release" fish kill a fish that was not
caught. a 12" large mouth bass tried to eat a 24" large mouth that had
died (my assumption was caught and released) and the smaller fish died
because his eyes were bigger than his stomach.

As the popularity of fishing with light weight tackle increases, the
mortality rate among the catch and release increases substantially. It
seems if you can pull them in very quickly they stand a greater chance
of surviving, but who wants to catch a 5 lb fish with 50 lb tackle.
Fisherman need to start fishing with a chum line and then snapping
photos of their "catch".

I try to stay out of the "hunting" and "fishing" debate, but the Shark
tournament TV show makes me sick.

All you fishing dudes and dudettes...
 

"Reginal P. Smithers III" wrote in message
. ..
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
Stumbled into something on Saturday and tried 'em out last night.

WHOO HOO!!!

http://tinyurl.com/f3hpy

In Pearl/Gray, they are very attractive to stripers - big stripers. I
was totally surprised.

Boated and released a ton of blue too.

Good times.

Those things are delicious with dijon mustard.

Somewhat related: I'm reading more and more info lately (and not from
anyone even remotely involved with PETA) that catch & release does not
work. The mortality rate may be MUCH higher than we've thought for many
years. It has no relationship, either, to whether you use barbless hooks.
It seems the stress of the fight is too much for the fish. I have seen
many more dead fish floating around the lake in the past few years,
especially in the coves, as catch and release has become more popular. I
have actually seen a "catch and release" fish kill a fish that was not
caught. a 12" large mouth bass tried to eat a 24" large mouth that had
died (my assumption was caught and released) and the smaller fish died
because his eyes were bigger than his stomach.

As the popularity of fishing with light weight tackle increases, the
mortality rate among the catch and release increases substantially. It
seems if you can pull them in very quickly they stand a greater chance of
surviving, but who wants to catch a 5 lb fish with 50 lb tackle. Fisherman
need to start fishing with a chum line and then snapping photos of their
"catch".

I try to stay out of the "hunting" and "fishing" debate, but the Shark
tournament TV show makes me sick.

Frankly, I don't see the attraction of light tackle for big fish. I mean, I
unexpectedly caught a huge pike on 4 lb test once. What did that prove? It
certainly was not a personal achievment of MINE. It illustrated only two
things:
-Berkley makes great 4 lb line (which I had nothing to do with)
-The line didn't get near any sharp fish parts and get cut, which is a
matter of chance. You could say "You did a great job of keeping it away from
the gill covers", but the water was muddy. I couldn't see the fish at all.

So, why risk having the line break, leaving a fish with a treble hook in its
throat? And that bull**** about "The hooks will rust away - the fish will be
fine" - it's a crock. Yeah, the hooks will rust eventually, but meanwhile,
that fish won't be able to eat with a 6" Rapala and two sets of treble hooks
in its face.

I've reached the point where I won't fish for anything that I have no
intention of eating. And, if I catch enough, I stop and read a book. If I
had a live well and could make sure the fish were recovered enough to move
(so enough water will pass through their gills), I might do things
differently.

All you fishing dudes and dudettes...
 

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Reginal P. Smithers III" wrote in message
. ..
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
Stumbled into something on Saturday and tried 'em out last night.

WHOO HOO!!!

http://tinyurl.com/f3hpy

In Pearl/Gray, they are very attractive to stripers - big stripers. I
was totally surprised.

Boated and released a ton of blue too.

Good times.
Those things are delicious with dijon mustard.

Somewhat related: I'm reading more and more info lately (and not from
anyone even remotely involved with PETA) that catch & release does not
work. The mortality rate may be MUCH higher than we've thought for many
years. It has no relationship, either, to whether you use barbless hooks.
It seems the stress of the fight is too much for the fish. I have seen
many more dead fish floating around the lake in the past few years,
especially in the coves, as catch and release has become more popular. I
have actually seen a "catch and release" fish kill a fish that was not
caught. a 12" large mouth bass tried to eat a 24" large mouth that had
died (my assumption was caught and released) and the smaller fish died
because his eyes were bigger than his stomach.

As the popularity of fishing with light weight tackle increases, the
mortality rate among the catch and release increases substantially. It
seems if you can pull them in very quickly they stand a greater chance of
surviving, but who wants to catch a 5 lb fish with 50 lb tackle. Fisherman
need to start fishing with a chum line and then snapping photos of their
"catch".

I try to stay out of the "hunting" and "fishing" debate, but the Shark
tournament TV show makes me sick.

Frankly, I don't see the attraction of light tackle for big fish. I mean, I
unexpectedly caught a huge pike on 4 lb test once. What did that prove? It
certainly was not a personal achievment of MINE. It illustrated only two
things:
-Berkley makes great 4 lb line (which I had nothing to do with)
-The line didn't get near any sharp fish parts and get cut, which is a
matter of chance. You could say "You did a great job of keeping it away from
the gill covers", but the water was muddy. I couldn't see the fish at all.

So, why risk having the line break, leaving a fish with a treble hook in its
throat? And that bull**** about "The hooks will rust away - the fish will be
fine" - it's a crock. Yeah, the hooks will rust eventually, but meanwhile,
that fish won't be able to eat with a 6" Rapala and two sets of treble hooks
in its face.

I've reached the point where I won't fish for anything that I have no
intention of eating. And, if I catch enough, I stop and read a book. If I
had a live well and could make sure the fish were recovered enough to move
(so enough water will pass through their gills), I might do things
differently.


I really do enjoy just being outside. My favorite time of the year is
early spring and late fall, when the lake is quiet. I can go up with a
book. I used to enjoy beer, now I just go up with bottled water and
enjoy mother nature. Now that I have a new Photographer hobby, I can
take some photos of the birds flying south for the winter. I do enjoy
eating fish and meat, so i have always steered cleared of the guns
debates and hunting and fishing debates, but I wish people would catch
what they wanted to eat, and then sat back and just enjoyed the sights,
sounds and smells of mother nature.

Since no on in my family listens to me, I really don't expect anyone in
this NG to listen either.

All you fishing dudes and dudettes...
 

Reginal P. Smithers III wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

"Reginal P. Smithers III" wrote in message
. ..

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...

Stumbled into something on Saturday and tried 'em out last night.

WHOO HOO!!!

http://tinyurl.com/f3hpy

In Pearl/Gray, they are very attractive to stripers - big stripers. I
was totally surprised.

Boated and released a ton of blue too.

Good times.

Those things are delicious with dijon mustard.

Somewhat related: I'm reading more and more info lately (and not
from anyone even remotely involved with PETA) that catch & release
does not work. The mortality rate may be MUCH higher than we've
thought for many years. It has no relationship, either, to whether
you use barbless hooks.

It seems the stress of the fight is too much for the fish. I have
seen many more dead fish floating around the lake in the past few
years, especially in the coves, as catch and release has become more
popular. I have actually seen a "catch and release" fish kill a fish
that was not caught. a 12" large mouth bass tried to eat a 24" large
mouth that had died (my assumption was caught and released) and the
smaller fish died because his eyes were bigger than his stomach.

As the popularity of fishing with light weight tackle increases, the
mortality rate among the catch and release increases substantially.
It seems if you can pull them in very quickly they stand a greater
chance of surviving, but who wants to catch a 5 lb fish with 50 lb
tackle. Fisherman need to start fishing with a chum line and then
snapping photos of their "catch".

I try to stay out of the "hunting" and "fishing" debate, but the
Shark tournament TV show makes me sick.


Frankly, I don't see the attraction of light tackle for big fish. I
mean, I unexpectedly caught a huge pike on 4 lb test once. What did
that prove? It certainly was not a personal achievment of MINE. It
illustrated only two things:
-Berkley makes great 4 lb line (which I had nothing to do with)
-The line didn't get near any sharp fish parts and get cut, which is a
matter of chance. You could say "You did a great job of keeping it
away from the gill covers", but the water was muddy. I couldn't see
the fish at all.

So, why risk having the line break, leaving a fish with a treble hook
in its throat? And that bull**** about "The hooks will rust away - the
fish will be fine" - it's a crock. Yeah, the hooks will rust
eventually, but meanwhile, that fish won't be able to eat with a 6"
Rapala and two sets of treble hooks in its face.

I've reached the point where I won't fish for anything that I have no
intention of eating. And, if I catch enough, I stop and read a book.
If I had a live well and could make sure the fish were recovered
enough to move (so enough water will pass through their gills), I
might do things differently.

I really do enjoy just being outside. My favorite time of the year is
early spring and late fall, when the lake is quiet. I can go up with a
book. I used to enjoy beer, now I just go up with bottled water and
enjoy mother nature. Now that I have a new Photographer hobby, I can
take some photos of the birds flying south for the winter. I do enjoy
eating fish and meat, so i have always steered cleared of the guns
debates and hunting and fishing debates, but I wish people would catch
what they wanted to eat, and then sat back and just enjoyed the sights,
sounds and smells of mother nature.

Since no on in my family listens to me, I really don't expect anyone in
this NG to listen either.


We listen... we just don't pay any attention...........

All you fishing dudes and dudettes...
 

Don White wrote:
Reginal P. Smithers III wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

"Reginal P. Smithers III" wrote in message
. ..

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...

Stumbled into something on Saturday and tried 'em out last night.

WHOO HOO!!!

http://tinyurl.com/f3hpy

In Pearl/Gray, they are very attractive to stripers - big
stripers. I
was totally surprised.

Boated and released a ton of blue too.

Good times.

Those things are delicious with dijon mustard.

Somewhat related: I'm reading more and more info lately (and not
from anyone even remotely involved with PETA) that catch & release
does not work. The mortality rate may be MUCH higher than we've
thought for many years. It has no relationship, either, to whether
you use barbless hooks.

It seems the stress of the fight is too much for the fish. I have
seen many more dead fish floating around the lake in the past few
years, especially in the coves, as catch and release has become more
popular. I have actually seen a "catch and release" fish kill a fish
that was not caught. a 12" large mouth bass tried to eat a 24"
large mouth that had died (my assumption was caught and released)
and the smaller fish died because his eyes were bigger than his
stomach.

As the popularity of fishing with light weight tackle increases, the
mortality rate among the catch and release increases substantially.
It seems if you can pull them in very quickly they stand a greater
chance of surviving, but who wants to catch a 5 lb fish with 50 lb
tackle. Fisherman need to start fishing with a chum line and then
snapping photos of their "catch".

I try to stay out of the "hunting" and "fishing" debate, but the
Shark tournament TV show makes me sick.


Frankly, I don't see the attraction of light tackle for big fish. I
mean, I unexpectedly caught a huge pike on 4 lb test once. What did
that prove? It certainly was not a personal achievment of MINE. It
illustrated only two things:
-Berkley makes great 4 lb line (which I had nothing to do with)
-The line didn't get near any sharp fish parts and get cut, which is
a matter of chance. You could say "You did a great job of keeping it
away from the gill covers", but the water was muddy. I couldn't see
the fish at all.

So, why risk having the line break, leaving a fish with a treble hook
in its throat? And that bull**** about "The hooks will rust away -
the fish will be fine" - it's a crock. Yeah, the hooks will rust
eventually, but meanwhile, that fish won't be able to eat with a 6"
Rapala and two sets of treble hooks in its face.

I've reached the point where I won't fish for anything that I have no
intention of eating. And, if I catch enough, I stop and read a book.
If I had a live well and could make sure the fish were recovered
enough to move (so enough water will pass through their gills), I
might do things differently.

I really do enjoy just being outside. My favorite time of the year is
early spring and late fall, when the lake is quiet. I can go up with
a book. I used to enjoy beer, now I just go up with bottled water and
enjoy mother nature. Now that I have a new Photographer hobby, I can
take some photos of the birds flying south for the winter. I do
enjoy eating fish and meat, so i have always steered cleared of the
guns debates and hunting and fishing debates, but I wish people would
catch what they wanted to eat, and then sat back and just enjoyed the
sights, sounds and smells of mother nature.

Since no on in my family listens to me, I really don't expect anyone
in this NG to listen either.


We listen... we just don't pay any attention...........


Just like everyone in my family.

I hope I don't have to pay for anyone else to go to college.

All you fishing dudes and dudettes...
 

On Mon, 07 Aug 2006 12:49:08 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Reginal P. Smithers III" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
Stumbled into something on Saturday and tried 'em out last night.

WHOO HOO!!!

http://tinyurl.com/f3hpy

In Pearl/Gray, they are very attractive to stripers - big stripers. I
was totally surprised.

Boated and released a ton of blue too.

Good times.

Those things are delicious with dijon mustard.

Somewhat related: I'm reading more and more info lately (and not from
anyone even remotely involved with PETA) that catch & release does not
work. The mortality rate may be MUCH higher than we've thought for many
years. It has no relationship, either, to whether you use barbless hooks.
It seems the stress of the fight is too much for the fish. I have seen
many more dead fish floating around the lake in the past few years,
especially in the coves, as catch and release has become more popular. I
have actually seen a "catch and release" fish kill a fish that was not
caught. a 12" large mouth bass tried to eat a 24" large mouth that had
died (my assumption was caught and released) and the smaller fish died
because his eyes were bigger than his stomach.

As the popularity of fishing with light weight tackle increases, the
mortality rate among the catch and release increases substantially. It
seems if you can pull them in very quickly they stand a greater chance of
surviving, but who wants to catch a 5 lb fish with 50 lb tackle. Fisherman
need to start fishing with a chum line and then snapping photos of their
"catch".

I try to stay out of the "hunting" and "fishing" debate, but the Shark
tournament TV show makes me sick.

Frankly, I don't see the attraction of light tackle for big fish. I mean, I
unexpectedly caught a huge pike on 4 lb test once. What did that prove? It
certainly was not a personal achievment of MINE. It illustrated only two
things:
-Berkley makes great 4 lb line (which I had nothing to do with)
-The line didn't get near any sharp fish parts and get cut, which is a
matter of chance. You could say "You did a great job of keeping it away from
the gill covers", but the water was muddy. I couldn't see the fish at all.

So, why risk having the line break, leaving a fish with a treble hook in its
throat? And that bull**** about "The hooks will rust away - the fish will be
fine" - it's a crock. Yeah, the hooks will rust eventually, but meanwhile,
that fish won't be able to eat with a 6" Rapala and two sets of treble hooks
in its face.

I've reached the point where I won't fish for anything that I have no
intention of eating. And, if I catch enough, I stop and read a book. If I
had a live well and could make sure the fish were recovered enough to move
(so enough water will pass through their gills), I might do things
differently.


My thoughts exactly. Catch what you'll eat, and go home.
--
******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

John

All you fishing dudes and dudettes...
 

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
Stumbled into something on Saturday and tried 'em out last night.

WHOO HOO!!!

http://tinyurl.com/f3hpy

In Pearl/Gray, they are very attractive to stripers - big stripers. I
was totally surprised.

Boated and released a ton of blue too.

Good times.

Those things are delicious with dijon mustard.

Somewhat related: I'm reading more and more info lately (and not from
anyone even remotely involved with PETA) that catch & release does not
work. The mortality rate may be MUCH higher than we've thought for many
years. It has no relationship, either, to whether you use barbless hooks.


Mortality rate is lots less than catch and release into 350 degree oil.
Sure there is a mortality from C&R, and lots do not do a good release. They
abuse the fish when ripping the hook from the fish. The California F&G has
done a lot of C&R testing, and they do not see an excess amount of loss.

All you fishing dudes and dudettes...
 

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
k.net...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
Stumbled into something on Saturday and tried 'em out last night.

WHOO HOO!!!

http://tinyurl.com/f3hpy

In Pearl/Gray, they are very attractive to stripers - big stripers. I
was totally surprised.

Boated and released a ton of blue too.

Good times.

Those things are delicious with dijon mustard.

Somewhat related: I'm reading more and more info lately (and not from
anyone even remotely involved with PETA) that catch & release does not
work. The mortality rate may be MUCH higher than we've thought for many
years. It has no relationship, either, to whether you use barbless hooks.


Mortality rate is lots less than catch and release into 350 degree oil.
Sure there is a mortality from C&R, and lots do not do a good release.
They abuse the fish when ripping the hook from the fish. The California
F&G has done a lot of C&R testing, and they do not see an excess amount of
loss.

I wonder how they tested.

All you fishing dudes and dudettes...
 

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
k.net...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
Stumbled into something on Saturday and tried 'em out last night.

WHOO HOO!!!

http://tinyurl.com/f3hpy

In Pearl/Gray, they are very attractive to stripers - big stripers. I
was totally surprised.

Boated and released a ton of blue too.

Good times.

Those things are delicious with dijon mustard.

Somewhat related: I'm reading more and more info lately (and not from
anyone even remotely involved with PETA) that catch & release does not
work. The mortality rate may be MUCH higher than we've thought for many
years. It has no relationship, either, to whether you use barbless
hooks.


Mortality rate is lots less than catch and release into 350 degree oil.
Sure there is a mortality from C&R, and lots do not do a good release.
They abuse the fish when ripping the hook from the fish. The California
F&G has done a lot of C&R testing, and they do not see an excess amount
of loss.

I wonder how they tested.


Couple of different ways. one with tagged fish and another with salmon in
pens.

All you fishing dudes and dudettes...
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 07 Aug 2006 19:26:07 GMT, "Calif Bill"
wrote:


"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
Stumbled into something on Saturday and tried 'em out last night.

WHOO HOO!!!

http://tinyurl.com/f3hpy

In Pearl/Gray, they are very attractive to stripers - big stripers. I
was totally surprised.

Boated and released a ton of blue too.

Good times.

Those things are delicious with dijon mustard.

Somewhat related: I'm reading more and more info lately (and not from
anyone even remotely involved with PETA) that catch & release does not
work. The mortality rate may be MUCH higher than we've thought for many
years. It has no relationship, either, to whether you use barbless
hooks.


Mortality rate is lots less than catch and release into 350 degree oil.
Sure there is a mortality from C&R, and lots do not do a good release.
They
abuse the fish when ripping the hook from the fish. The California F&G
has
done a lot of C&R testing, and they do not see an excess amount of loss.

Part of it is barbless fishing hooks.

I swear, if they went and made barbless hook mandatory, you'd see that
drop too.

Friend of mine manufactures these. Donates a lot to the kids fishing ponds
at sport shows, etc. Work well. It is making some for the salt. So the
advantage of a J hook that you can release.
http://www.sheltonproducts.com/sheltonrelease.html

All you fishing dudes and dudettes...
 

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 05:52:41 GMT, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 07 Aug 2006 19:26:07 GMT, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
Stumbled into something on Saturday and tried 'em out last night.

WHOO HOO!!!

http://tinyurl.com/f3hpy

In Pearl/Gray, they are very attractive to stripers - big stripers. I
was totally surprised.

Boated and released a ton of blue too.

Good times.
Those things are delicious with dijon mustard.

Somewhat related: I'm reading more and more info lately (and not from
anyone even remotely involved with PETA) that catch & release does not
work. The mortality rate may be MUCH higher than we've thought for many
years. It has no relationship, either, to whether you use barbless
hooks.

Mortality rate is lots less than catch and release into 350 degree oil.
Sure there is a mortality from C&R, and lots do not do a good release.
They
abuse the fish when ripping the hook from the fish. The California F&G
has
done a lot of C&R testing, and they do not see an excess amount of loss.
Part of it is barbless fishing hooks.

I swear, if they went and made barbless hook mandatory, you'd see that
drop too.
Friend of mine manufactures these. Donates a lot to the kids fishing ponds
at sport shows, etc. Work well. It is making some for the salt. So the
advantage of a J hook that you can release.
http://www.sheltonproducts.com/sheltonrelease.html

I just sent him an email - if he does make a sal****er version, I want
some - I think that's a great idea.

I'm going to try some of the larger hooks for testing.
Tom,
That will solve the problem of damaging the fish the fish by touching
and removing the hook. I have heard a problem with real "fighting" fish
is the die from all the stress and the lactic acid they produce while
fighting. By the time you get the them to the boat, they are completely
spent and don't even have enough energy to swim to keep the water
flowing past their gills. Someone posted something about keeping fish
in an live well until they have recovered, I have never heard of that
before, but it does make sense if it is at all possible.

Smithers
 

On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 07:51:26 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:


Friend of mine recently ordered two 18-200 Nikkors and is expecting UPS
delivery today or tomorrow. I believe he paid around $700 each. For fun,
I checked the supplier he used but at the moment it is out of inventory.

I'm going to have to borrow one of these lenses.

What are you going to put it on?
--
******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

John

All you fishing dudes and dudettes...
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 07 Aug 2006 12:24:00 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
. ..
Stumbled into something on Saturday and tried 'em out last night.

WHOO HOO!!!

http://tinyurl.com/f3hpy

In Pearl/Gray, they are very attractive to stripers - big stripers. I
was totally surprised.

Boated and released a ton of blue too.

Good times.

Those things are delicious with dijon mustard.

Somewhat related: I'm reading more and more info lately (and not from
anyone
even remotely involved with PETA) that catch & release does not work. The
mortality rate may be MUCH higher than we've thought for many years. It
has
no relationship, either, to whether you use barbless hooks.

I've seen some of those studies and they are a concern, no doubt about
it.

On the other hand, I fish a lot of lakes and rivers with catch/release
for trout and I don't see evidence of a large amount of over kill in
those - quite the contrary in fact.


Tom, think about that paragraph, beginnning with "On the other hand". :-)
You seem like a guy who knows something about stats and research methods.



I think a lot of it is how you treat the fish after catching it.
Personally, if I'm bass fishing, I keep them in a live well with
highly oxygenated water and leave it that way for a couple of hours. I
don't chuck 'em back into the water and I don't hold them by the jaw
with their mouths open. As a result, I personally don't see the same
mortality they have been reporting.

With stripers, it's a tad more difficult, but I always try to release
the fish in the water rather than remove it from the water to remove
the hook. Drag it along side the boat for a minute or two and release
it - they seem like they are ok - I've never been back to an area and
seen a dead striper that way. I took that idea from a billfish guide
I fished with ten or so years ago.

Blue fish - you can't kill them things - they will eat your face off
even if they are half dead.

Yeah...it's a whole combination of things. I start fondling the handgun when
I see guys wearing a thick garden glove so they can safely (for them) hoist
a large fish by the gill cover, and then swing it all over the boat while
they hunt for the camera.

Smithers
 

On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 08:05:03 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

JohnH wrote:
On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 07:51:26 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

Friend of mine recently ordered two 18-200 Nikkors and is expecting UPS
delivery today or tomorrow. I believe he paid around $700 each. For fun,
I checked the supplier he used but at the moment it is out of inventory.

I'm going to have to borrow one of these lenses.

What are you going to put it on?
--
******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

John


A camera, John.

Which one, Harry?
--
******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

John

Smithers
 

On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 08:14:20 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

JohnH wrote:
On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 08:05:03 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

JohnH wrote:
On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 07:51:26 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

Friend of mine recently ordered two 18-200 Nikkors and is expecting UPS
delivery today or tomorrow. I believe he paid around $700 each. For fun,
I checked the supplier he used but at the moment it is out of inventory.

I'm going to have to borrow one of these lenses.
What are you going to put it on?
--
******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

John

A camera, John.

Which one, Harry?
--
******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

John

A nikon camera, john. Why?

D200, Harry?
--
******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

John

Smithers
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
. ..
JohnH wrote:
On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 07:51:26 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

Friend of mine recently ordered two 18-200 Nikkors and is expecting UPS
delivery today or tomorrow. I believe he paid around $700 each. For fun,
I checked the supplier he used but at the moment it is out of inventory.

I'm going to have to borrow one of these lenses.

What are you going to put it on?
--
******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

John


A camera, John.


I spent the night on the boat and just came home. When I got here, Mrs.E.
was in the backyard playing with her camera, trying out a new lens that she
bought yesterday. It's a 18-200mm Nikon or Nikkor, but I am not sure if
it's the VR lens under discussion. She said the camera shop called it a
"beach lens" - kind of a universal use, lightweight zoom lens. She took off
to go horse-back riding before it dawned on me and she took the camera with
her, so I can't verify what it is.
Does Nikon or Nikkor make a non-VR 18-200mm lens?

Eisboch

Smithers
 

On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 08:16:08 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
JohnH wrote:
On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 07:51:26 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

Friend of mine recently ordered two 18-200 Nikkors and is expecting UPS
delivery today or tomorrow. I believe he paid around $700 each. For fun,
I checked the supplier he used but at the moment it is out of inventory.

I'm going to have to borrow one of these lenses.

What are you going to put it on?
--
******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

John


A camera, John.


I spent the night on the boat and just came home. When I got here, Mrs.E.
was in the backyard playing with her camera, trying out a new lens that she
bought yesterday. It's a 18-200mm Nikon or Nikkor, but I am not sure if
it's the VR lens under discussion. She said the camera shop called it a
"beach lens" - kind of a universal use, lightweight zoom lens. She took off
to go horse-back riding before it dawned on me and she took the camera with
her, so I can't verify what it is.
Does Nikon or Nikkor make a non-VR 18-200mm lens?

Eisboch


Are you sure it was 18-200 and not 28-200?

This one perhaps?

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/28200af.htm
--
******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

John

All you fishing dudes and dudettes...
 

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:


Somewhat related: I'm reading more and more info lately (and not from anyone
even remotely involved with PETA) that catch & release does not work. The
mortality rate may be MUCH higher than we've thought for many years.


Bull****. People have been catching and releasing you for years and
you're still around. And biting.

Tick tock tick tock

-- Charlie

Smithers
 

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 08:16:08 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:




I spent the night on the boat and just came home. When I got here, Mrs.E.
was in the backyard playing with her camera, trying out a new lens that
she
bought yesterday. It's a 18-200mm Nikon or Nikkor, but I am not sure if
it's the VR lens under discussion. She said the camera shop called it a
"beach lens" - kind of a universal use, lightweight zoom lens. She took
off
to go horse-back riding before it dawned on me and she took the camera
with
her, so I can't verify what it is.
Does Nikon or Nikkor make a non-VR 18-200mm lens?

Eisboch


Are you sure it was 18-200 and not 28-200?

This one perhaps?

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/28200af.htm

Nope. She briefly told me about it before she left and said it also had a
macro setting that the 28-200 apparently does not. Also, I got the
impression that the 28-200mm is for film cameras.

I am pretty sure she said 18-200mm. (using it on Harry's D70 that she
bought).
Now I am really curious.

Eisboch

Smithers
 

On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 08:33:29 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:


"JohnH" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 08:16:08 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:




I spent the night on the boat and just came home. When I got here, Mrs.E.
was in the backyard playing with her camera, trying out a new lens that
she
bought yesterday. It's a 18-200mm Nikon or Nikkor, but I am not sure if
it's the VR lens under discussion. She said the camera shop called it a
"beach lens" - kind of a universal use, lightweight zoom lens. She took
off
to go horse-back riding before it dawned on me and she took the camera
with
her, so I can't verify what it is.
Does Nikon or Nikkor make a non-VR 18-200mm lens?

Eisboch


Are you sure it was 18-200 and not 28-200?

This one perhaps?

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/28200af.htm

Nope. She briefly told me about it before she left and said it also had a
macro setting that the 28-200 apparently does not. Also, I got the
impression that the 28-200mm is for film cameras.

I am pretty sure she said 18-200mm. (using it on Harry's D70 that she
bought).
Now I am really curious.

Eisboch


Well, if it's a Nikon lens, then it's probably on Rockwell's site
somewhere.

I'm surprised Harry bought a new Nikon. When I mentioned buying my D200, he
seemed pretty certain there was no significant difference between the two
cameras. My daughter, to whom I gave my D70, is absolutely thrilled with
it.
--
******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

John

Smithers
 

"JohnH" wrote in message
...

I'm surprised Harry bought a new Nikon. When I mentioned buying my D200,
he
seemed pretty certain there was no significant difference between the two
cameras. My daughter, to whom I gave my D70, is absolutely thrilled with
it.


I don't recall Harry saying that he bought a new anything. Maybe he did, I
just don't remember.

Eisboch

Smithers
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
. ..
Eisboch wrote:
"JohnH" wrote in message
...
I'm surprised Harry bought a new Nikon. When I mentioned buying my D200,
he
seemed pretty certain there was no significant difference between the
two
cameras. My daughter, to whom I gave my D70, is absolutely thrilled with
it.


I don't recall Harry saying that he bought a new anything. Maybe he did,
I just don't remember.

Eisboch


I didn't say.

I didn't think so. Funny how people assume.

Eisboch

All you fishing dudes and dudettes...
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...

What is the direct cause and effect. Is it the fight, is it the
stress of handling, is it.......

You and I both know how to handle fish the right way. There's another factor
we probably can't exercise a lot of control over. This is from "The Founding
Fish", by John McPhee. The book's about shad. He's a fisherman, and sounds a
lot like you. There's a chapter about catch & release, and he gives fair
treatment to all sides of the discussion.


Anglers who release fish are not releasing the same fish they hooked.
"Prolonged playing of fish, particularly when they are returned to the water
subsequently, is to be depricated," Gathorne Midway wrote in 1977, reporting
to the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals on the
findings of a Panel of Enquiry into Shooting and Angling. "When teleost fish
are severely stressed and exercised to exhaustion, they make extensive use
of their 'white' muscle system," he said. "This differs from the red
skeletal muscle of higher vertebrates, in that it is anaerobic and, although
very efficient in the short term, when exhausted contains a great
accumulation of lactic acid during the elimination of which the muscle
system remains in prolonged fatigue. A completely exhausted fish will thus
be almost unable to move for several hours after capture. During this time
it will be at risk to attack by predators or injury from its inanimate
environment." Medway holds a doctorate in zoology.

All you fishing dudes and dudettes...
 

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...

Oops - in the middle of the quote from the book - wrong year. Should be
1997.

Smithers
 

On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 08:57:01 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

They don't have "Vibration Reduction," but if you learn
how to hold a camera and lens and don't shoot at really slow shutter
speeds, it's not necessary. Also, a tripod or even a monopod obviates
the need for vibration reduction.

What about for boating? It seems to me that on a moving boat,
anything you can do to minimize vibration/motion is a good thing.

Smithers
 

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 08:57:01 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

They don't have "Vibration Reduction," but if you learn
how to hold a camera and lens and don't shoot at really slow shutter
speeds, it's not necessary. Also, a tripod or even a monopod obviates
the need for vibration reduction.

What about for boating? It seems to me that on a moving boat,
anything you can do to minimize vibration/motion is a good thing.



BTW, turns out that the lens Mrs.E. bought *is* a 28-200mm Nikon ED. I
was trying to figure out how the heck she managed to find the other VR
(18-200mm) one, if she had.

Eisboch

Smithers
 

They don't have "Vibration Reduction," but if you learn how to hold a
camera and lens and don't shoot at really slow shutter speeds, it's
not necessary.

Great advice. Now tell us how to hold a camera on a boat.

... Also, a tripod or even a monopod obviates the need for
vibration reduction.


Not so useful on a boat, really. A monopod is occasionally
helpful.

Wayne.B wrote:
What about for boating? It seems to me that on a moving boat,
anything you can do to minimize vibration/motion is a good thing.


Yes it is. We bought a digital camera with a built-in 12X
optical zoon, with VR that noticably improves the pictures.
On the water, it is rare to get a shot that doesn't require
at least that much zoom, which of course magnifies any
jiggle or shakiness.

Harry Krause wrote:
I have no idea how well VR might work to quell major motion.

I do.

One of the problems of shooting pics from a boat is that the
boat is moving, especially if it is under power. The engine
vibration seems to annoy the camera if you try to get a
steadier shot by resting the camera on a solid part of the
boat. One way I get around this is to use my forearm as a
rest, or set the camera on the back of one fist with elbow
braced on deck or railing.

All we do is take tourist type snapshots, but we like the
results. We often take hundreds of shots over the course of
a couple days cruise... most recently we didn't take any at
all, I have to admit, which is a shame because it was
lovely. Lots of opportunities to take wildlife shots, one of
my goals is get a set of stills of a great blue heron taking
off.

Fair Skies
Doug King

Smithers
 

On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 09:00:44 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

Eisboch wrote:
"JohnH" wrote in message
...
I'm surprised Harry bought a new Nikon. When I mentioned buying my D200,
he
seemed pretty certain there was no significant difference between the two
cameras. My daughter, to whom I gave my D70, is absolutely thrilled with
it.


I don't recall Harry saying that he bought a new anything. Maybe he did, I
just don't remember.

Eisboch




I didn't say.

Well, tell us then! Let's see, you sold your D70 and you are going to try
out the 18-200mm VR lens. If you didn't get a new camera, you should. Then
you could give that VR lens a real workout and see the value of VR.
--
******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

John

Smithers
 

Harry Krause wrote:

Friend of mine recently ordered two 18-200 Nikkors and is expecting UPS
delivery today or tomorrow. I believe he paid around $700 each. For fun,
I checked the supplier he used but at the moment it is out of inventory.

I'm going to have to borrow one of these lenses.

Harry,
Do some A/B comparisons with some of your other lens and see how they
compare. It looks to me that is it one hell of a tourist lens, but
really isn't meant to compete against a prime lens or a some of the pro
zoom lens with much smaller range.

My Ultra wide 12-24 is expected on Thursday.

Smithers
 

AND...


--
******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

John

Smithers
 

On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 14:37:23 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

JohnH wrote:
AND...


--
******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

John


And my buddy just dropped off one of the lenses for me to mess with, but
not mess up.

So, I'm reading the directions and I come across this gem:

Setting the vibration reduction mode switch (Fig. C)

NORMAL: The vibration reduction mechanism primarily reduces camera
shake, making smooth panning shots possible.

ACTIVE: The vibration reduction mechanism reduces camera shake when
taking pictures and those from a moving vehicle. In this mode, the lens
does not automatically distinguish panning from camera shake.


Well, that's some bit of writing. So, if you are standing still, do you
use NORMAL or ACTIVE? ACTIVE is for "taking pictures and those from a
moving vehicle." NORMAL is for "panning." But not for just taking a
photo if are not panning?


Then there is this gem:

If you set the AF start (AF-ON) button to ON on the camera, vibration
reduction will not operate.

So, if you use autofocus on the camera, VR does not work? Huh?


Fun stuff.

If I were you I'd send it to me. I agree, it's too much trouble for you.

On what camera are you using it? Hee, hee.
--
******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

John

Smithers
 

Harry Krause wrote:
JohnH wrote:
On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 14:37:23 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

JohnH wrote:
AND...


--
******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

John

And my buddy just dropped off one of the lenses for me to mess with,
but not mess up.

So, I'm reading the directions and I come across this gem:

Setting the vibration reduction mode switch (Fig. C)

NORMAL: The vibration reduction mechanism primarily reduces camera
shake, making smooth panning shots possible.

ACTIVE: The vibration reduction mechanism reduces camera shake when
taking pictures and those from a moving vehicle. In this mode, the
lens does not automatically distinguish panning from camera shake.


Well, that's some bit of writing. So, if you are standing still, do
you use NORMAL or ACTIVE? ACTIVE is for "taking pictures and those
from a moving vehicle." NORMAL is for "panning." But not for just
taking a photo if are not panning?


Then there is this gem:

If you set the AF start (AF-ON) button to ON on the camera, vibration
reduction will not operate.

So, if you use autofocus on the camera, VR does not work? Huh?


Fun stuff.

If I were you I'd send it to me. I agree, it's too much trouble for you.

On what camera are you using it? Hee, hee.
--
******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

John


A Brownie Starflash.
Will you be able to post some A and B photos taken with the lens and a
prime lens?