JDPgator

garry77, are you using jigs with craws or just craws?

What color were you throwing? I have caught most fish on the olive. That is my most successful color as well.

I have various craws and on their own I have not much luck with them to date, but I have just started fishing a jig and that has been pretty good on the local ponds I hit. FWIW, I have only been fishing 3 years and each year pick a bait/lure to learn about so my earlier lack of success with t-rigged craw could be "user error" as I am just trying this approach this summer. I voted "Knew we had crawfish but don't use", because that is the closest.

My one and only 8lb bass came just 4 months after I started fishing and I can only tell you what I caught it on, because it was absolute blur with me thinking, don't screw this up. Hopefully my next go round will I will be in the moment just a bit more.

It is a Lucky Craft® Rick Clunn Wake Action Crankbait. I just picked up one from the Bass Pro store in Oklahoma City last week on a visit, but have not had a chance to try it out yet. http://www.basspro.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?storeId=10151&catalogId=10001&langId=-1&partNumber=100927&hvarTarget=search&cmCat=SearchResults

It could be that it 's not available in the US, Rapala has colors that are only sold in certain countries but not in others. I have several DTs in GFR ( Gold Fluorescent Red ) and I know for shure that color is not available in the US, have never seen it advertized in any US site, yet still, it 's available in Mexico. Just a FWIW, but I have picked this color up at both Gander Mountain and Dick's Sporting Goods in Jax, FL so they are available at some locations.

Another email sent and as it was previously mentioned your support for this site is greatly appreciated. JP

I have to say this is a very interesting topic, but a couple of things stand out to me. First it's very interesting to hear things from a guides perspective because in reality it's a their job. Just as each of us have our frustrations with our own jobs it is easy to see the human side of it for guides. It's not just playing on the water all day. Second, it could just be how I am reading these posts but I am a bit surprised at how I perceive some of the guides as coming across a bit heavy handed - especially since you are talking to potential customers. Case in point I have considered hiring a guide to fish in SoFLa and did some research on a saltwater flats guide I saw on TV. Well a customer detailed his experience on another forum and one issue was that the guide fished so much. To a novice like me that seems like a reasonable opinion. Now I would absolutely have asked if a guide planned to fish. If the potential guide said "you sit where I tell you, you fish where I say, and you use the baits that I recommend", then it'll be cold day in hell before I would be giving him my money. As a married man of 10 years I ain't paying nobody else to boss me around when I get it for free at home. ;D That said if the potential guide were to explain why they would fish some and how it could benefit me - then I think two things are accomplished: I understand part of the guides job because he taught me what his job entails and the guide understands that I am not paying for his day of fishing, which was the customer's perspective in the earlier story. JMHO.

In my opinion they two are not related. A fisherman can and many times is an athlete, but just because you fish doesn't necessarily make a person an athlete. FWIW, I would say the same thing about golfers, just because you have a select set of skills that fit into a particular activity does not in my opinion automatically make a person an athlete. Just my two cents.

Just my opinion, but I would agree that the now nixed idea would be a bit much, mainly because I would find a way to screw up the shirt the first day I got it. ;D I do like the long sleeve t-shirt idea and would definitely be in the buyer group. Just my 2 cents that the interest is there.

Found another link: http://www.sicb.org/divisions/DEE/singleresearcher.php3?resid=45 " The upper image is a fully articulated skeleton of a 10-pound largemouth bass used in modelling the feeding mechanism. "

Try this link:http://www.artbyevolution.com/fish.htm

My comments and questions were meant singularly to learn more. I hope no one took offense, as none was intended. I just took this up to spend time with my dad and this place has been a great resource for a novice that doesn't know much of anything relating to fishing. I love a good debate with valid points on both sides of the fence so I had to ask since I didn't know.

Saturday I stopped in to the Orlando store, as payback for a family day at disney with the wife's family, and I picked up a Shimano Stradic 2500FH/Extreme XPS Combo that is listed for $159.98 on sale for $129.98. Since I just recently purchased the same reel as a gift for my father at $119, I thought I got a pretty good deal. I also got a Tilley hat, no price deal here, at my wife's request, but I think it's because it reminds her of someone on TV. ;D

So is that in sync with the trout stocking or is the stocking just a side note that gets attached to the CA bass?

That is where what you read & heard is wrong. California does NOT stock rainbow trout to increase the size of bass. Rainbow trout are stocked because people fish for them and the state makes more $$$ from those anglers. There would be no trout stocking if no one fished for them. When we call the stocked trout "bass food" or thank the DFG for feeding our bass it's a joke. While we do appreciate our trout planting program it's not in place to increase the size of bass. If that were the case we'd be dumping trout into lakes year round. Let me repeat this once again... California does NOT stock rainbow trout to increase the size of bass. I would be curious to know when CA starting getting these 20lbs. Has it always been such or was it a period of time after the introduction of stock rainbow trout? I ask because even if the intent is not to increase the size of the bass, could a case be made for it being an "un-natural" contributing factor.

So if I understand this: The pro side of the argument says he met the criteria at the time of the catch with valid scales and eyewitness accounts. The con side of the argument is that 1 there are not any other fish close to that size in GA and 2 there is no picture of the catch. Is that the basic jist of this arguement? I just wanted to make sure I fully understand what both sides using as the foundation of their opinion before I made one myself. Thanks. JP