hawgenvy

You probably ought to specify whether you mean soft or hard swimbaits.

Fishing is a great mixture of sport, art, technology and experience. Most scientists don't have the time, funding, or inclination to study things that help recreational anglers catch bass. And that's okay with me. I just can't resist trying to debunk pseudoscience when I see it. Because folks might rely on it.

In modern English the term "theory" can have different meanings. In common usage it may mean a supposition, nearly the opposite of proven fact. But in modern science, "Scientific theories are the most reliable, rigorous, and comprehensive form of scientific knowledge."[1] In angling, however, and Catt I think you just might agree with me here, it's more like informal reckoning: "My theory is, if I pitch this bigass worm to the shady side of yonder cypress stump, it's gonna be walloped by a big old mama in less than half a second."[2] Now when you formalize your informal reckoning and put it in fancy tables and such, where you need a calculator and a magnifier to read it, some folks are liable to think you've got some proved science to back up that hogwash. But as we've seen, you don't.[3][4] References 1) Schafersman, Steven D. "An Introduction to Science". 2) Me, after 1 1/2 beers 3) Me again, in cynical mode 4) member Paul Roberts, above (thanks again, Paul) Disclaimer: angling being what it is, a meld of science, technology, art, and the shared experience of incredible anglers who made the sport what it is today, I have great respect for the skillful anglers of the world, both past and present. And from what I've read and seen how Catt has graciously shared his wealth of experience with those who read this site, Catt is one of those greats.

Thank you, Paul. If there is no scientific evidence for the validity of the scientific-looking tables of solunar theory, there is insufficient reason in my opinion to pay any attention to it at all. It becomes the angling equivalent of astrology. Some people really believe in astrology, but most scientists regard it as baloney.

I think bank fishing guys would like having their own forum, and there are probably enough bank-specific topics to keep it relevant and beneficial. Fishing from shore and finding and navigating those shores has it's unique challenges and opportunities. Agree there would be a lot of overlap. But personally, I'd like to see it.

Gorgeous!

Hey, Florida anglers: DINKS (<12") will be KEEPERS starting July. Per the State.

I've seen it. If the rim of the spool is not moving when you pull line off, the line is slipping on the spool. Doesn't anyone thread the beginning end of the braid through those little holes in the spool before tying it on the spool?

Agree with that. I use SDJ for tying any line to hook or lure. Also, check out the really good site: http://www.animatedknots.com

We all agree that the solunar tables are not very reliable, that other factors like weather are more important. I think the question is whether the tables have any value at all. Anything that gives an edge, even a tiny one, could be of some value to some anglers. So, does solunar theory have any validity? If it does, how would we know? What's the evidence?

Okay, so they have these solunar tables that are supposed to predict peak feeding times on any given day. Now, they are either statistically significant, or they're not. If they are lets see the statistical data and the analysis. If the data doesn't support their validity, solunar theory is like astrology or fortune cookies. Don't use them. I am not interested in anecdotal testimony, in claims of improved "confidence" by using the tables, or anything short of analysis by the scientific method.

That's a convincing scenario. In my case I got a little help from my friend S. in purchasing. She agreed that one of the hospital's existing models was a bit scratched and maybe warped a tad. "Sure, go ahead and take the old one," she said. Easy, right. But when I lost that one, S was a bit less effective in recruiting a new clamp. S. became hard to find. I ended up buying one on Ebay but they sent the wrong thing (a d**n Kocher). I went back to S. with some chocolates, down on my knees, and she eventually came thru. Love you S. -- tough love. I grovelled for you, S. because you have the power. And you threw me a bone.

Still love my Horny Toads. They cover a lot of water, they slide nicely over cover, and you can let them drop into holes in the cover.

FYI: http://myfwc.com/news/news-releases/2016/february/11/bass-management/

Of course someone else caught it somehow, if it had a tag! Did you report the tag info? Are you supposed to? Anyway, congrats on taming a monster. She'll be okay with a damaged eye -- i think. Bass are tough critters.

The Dalai Lama, if he agrees.

I prefer the glorious sounds of nature, which in my case is largely the mosquitoes buzzing my ears, and the smacking sound when I instinctively smash and miss one on my neck. Sometimes nature blesses us with a lengthy melodious flatus, occasionally heard on quiet mornings from as far away as the next boat. It often ensues from a good hook set, and so is truly the music of angling success. One sadly misses these gems when the boater turns on real music. Anyway, I have a question for those who believe music can attract fish: What sort of music do bass enjoy most, and what genre whets their appetites, or makes them more aggressive? I once heard they adore John Denver (for some reason) but it is rumored to make them passive and less hungry, so I wouldn't risk it if I were you.

You know, here in Florida I complain all summer long about the stifling heat, and pretty much won't go outside from 10 AM to 5 PM, between July 1 and October 1. But when I think about serious anglers in the north reduced to fishing in the kitchen sink, I start to feel a whole lot better about my wacky state.

8 to12 pound FC would probably be a better match. But the 14 (since you have it) ought to work and might be nice to have if you're bit by a 4+ pounder. It'll still be invisible but might slightly affect the naturalness of the fall and wiggle of the bait.

Hurricanes

Thanks guys! Pretty much everyone keeps it simple, except for Bass newb who fishes from a paddleboard yet takes along half a grocery store, and Catt, who brings boudin, which is Cajun magic. Tight lines folks -- er, after the ice melts.

Been fishing in some local club tournaments lately, and after I finally organize brilliantly my bait choices for the trip, I do have some difficulty deciding on the ideal lunch or snack. I fish hard and have to force myself to sit down and eat some lunch on the boat. I want something quick, satisfying, not messy, not soggy, and healthy enough. Actually, I was thinking of a chocolate bar sandwich on a baguette -- like they do in France -- for next time. (Or sardines? Might attract bass better than Bang.) I realize this is a cheesy topic, but I really am interested in what you guys bring along to eat for a long day on the water. Hoping to get some new ideas. (My last co-angler said he eats the same soggy ham sandwich on white bread every fishing trip for the past 20 years. Yuck.) Thanks!

Sunrise on Lake Okeechobee. iPhone photo.

If your reel comes with (or you can order it with) two spools, that would be a particularly great way to do it. Well that ought to work. Well that ought to work.

Treatment of localized prostate cancer can be at times unpleasant but not terrible, and is usually not painful or debilitating. And it is usually successful. On the other hand, treatment of non-localized (already spread) prostate cancer is debilitating and often entails significant pain and other forms of suffering, and generally ends in death due to the cancer. This is why urologists and the American Urological Association advocate screening for early cancer. Unfortunately, the "US Preventive Services Task Force" recommended against PSA screening, based on mortality statistics, treatment costs, and treatment side effects in a seven year [short] study. It must be emphasized that urologists, the recognized experts and leaders in virtually all aspects of prostate cancer research and treatment, were NOT members of that panel and are not in agreement with its conclusions. I believe the USPSTF was, in fact, headed by a pediatrician.