nboucher

Okay, here's a specific case to focus on. I went out to my neighborhood pond (30-40 acres) for about an hour last Saturday. I'm in southeastern Mass., where it's been unseasonably warm, so I thought the bass might have wandered into the shallower places. Water temp was in the low forties, and I concentrated in areas 5-6 feet deep near water 15-25 feet deep. I used jigs, at first 3/8 oz, then downsized 3/16 oz. I worked them as slowly as I could stand, which means I let them sit for 30 seconds before moving them almost imperceptibly and letting them sit again. Nothing. This can be a finicky pond, but I never get skunked and I've caught some 5 & 6 pounders out of it. After leaving on Saturday, I decided I'd try deeper next time (this weekend?), but the trouble is that my depth finder shows zero cover deep. Looks to be fairly flat muddy bottom. Now, this pond is small enough that I should be able to find the bass in an afternoon of fishing, but I had no luck in all the submerged cover I could find in the shallower parts. Could the bass be just suspended deep, away from any cover? I've never fished in January before, mostly because there really hasn't been much open water in Jan. here before!

You guys didn't read my post. Yes, we are at the end of the last ice age. Yes, water is the critical offsetting factor. Yes, I monitor my kid's TV viewing, etc. But, sorry, if you're suggesting I should only worry about what's in my backyard, that's just ain't how I was raised. The RATE of change was not seen at the end of any other ice age. The RATE does not allow biological adaptation to keep up; that's the danger. Your points are valid if you can show me another period in geologic time when the RATE of change was as rapid or even on the same temporal scale. The cars are part of it; coal-based power-generation is another big factor (which is why nuclear should get another look, IMHO). Fin, you make my point by describing the more or less constant volume of water. What if the production rises to a point where the constant volume of water can't keep up? Gore who?? Politicians will grab whatever issues they can to get elected; that doesn't mean the issues aren't worth serious discussion or the problems don't exist. I gotta get back to work!

Wow, I just discovered this thread, and am struck by the cynicism of so many of you, who seem to believe that science is motivated entirely by self-interest and greed. Many of the issues raised here are not about global warming. Yes, the geological record shows large swings in temps, ice ages, etc., but that doesn't disprove what is meant by global warming: an unprecedented RATE of temperature change that perfectly coincides with the onset of industrialization. I am not a scientist, but from what I understand, the core samples that present a pretty detailed map of climate change through eons have not shown any such RAPID rise in average global temps. Previous changes happened at a rate that more or less allowed most species of animals to adapt, or at least to go extinct over hundreds or thousands of yearsnot 20. The original topic here was the effect of global warming on fishing: there is a paper in the latest Science that examined some saltwater fish species and found that rapid warming of the water causes oxygen levels to drop precipitously, killing fish before they can adapt. As this suggests, the effects of global warming show up first at the coldest and warmest extremes: some hot bodies of water will not have the oxygen to support many fish, and already arctic ice is melting so quickly now that the average weight of polar bears is dropping because they no longer have enough time on the ice to fatten up sufficiently. (The Bush Interior Dept is considering listing polar bears as a threatened species as a result.) Again, what suggests that this is not a "natural" occurrence is the suddenness of the weight drop. If we were alive as an ice age approached, we wouldn't be able to observe these changes during a generation, as we are observing them now. The other piece of the global warming picture is that, given the ever-increasing amount of carbon being put into the atmosphere as the world becomes increasingly industrial, there is not going to be any cooling until that changes. In other words, this isn't part of a cycle because a cycle suggests it's going to come down again at some point. If this warming is triggered by industrialization, it ain't going to cool down again unless we lower the amount of carbon we add to the atmosphereand that's not likely to happen until we either (1) get off a carbon-based economy or (2) humans go extinct. My money says neither of those things is going to happen soon in part because so many people don't "believe" in global warming. I totally agree that environmentalists and others have scared us in the past with all kinds of false or passing threatsthus the cynicism. They've cried wolf so often that we've lost the ability to recognize a true wolf when it shows up. But there are two real environmental wolves skulking around these days: the increasingly rapid rate of species extinction and the unprecedented rate of what appears to be a permanent warming of the planet.

Dan, those are fine looking fish, and, sir, you have got one fine fishing wardrobe. 8-)

I'm toast.

I have a database log I created in FileMaker Pro. Because it's a database, you can search individual items, asking it, for example, to show you the entries for all fish caught in stained water. You can also add photos, maps, and any other images to an entry. I will sometimes photograph my biggest fish of the day and add the image to that day's entry. It's fun to go back and browse over an entire season this way. Anyway, if anyone wants this, send me a PM. You will need FileMaker to use it, however.

Not sure what you mean by not having accomplished much in two years. What are you trying to accomplish? It's important for someone starting out not to make bass fishing (or any kind of fishing, for that matter) overly complicated. Yes, read and absorb alll the fishing articles on this site, but you can drive yourself bonkers reading all the threads about subtle differences in lures, lines, rods, etc., on the forums. KEEP IT SIMPLE! You're in no rush, or shouldn't be. Remember to keep it fun. The goals, the big fish, will come with experience. Those big ones have a way of coming along when you least expect them. Every time you catch a fish, think about where and why. That fish just taught you something about fishing. Every time you have a slow day, think about why. Was it your technique? Were the fish not in the locations you tried? Why? That's where the knowledge you get here comes into play. People here can help you figure it out what went right or what went wrong. But experience is always the best teacher. And welcome to Bass Resource!

Got a hernia taking that BPS catalog out of the mailbox . . . Man, it's bigger than my local phone book!

I'm on good terms with my UPS and FedEx drivers both at home and at the office. What I really appreciate from them this time of year is not so much the Christmas stuffwhich comes on timebut that there is no delay in the packages that are a routine part of doing business. The real strength of these carriers is that they keep the regular stuff on schedule despite the incredible spike in volume. So thanks, Russ and your fellow UPSers, and, yes, thanks to the FedEx guys, too.

Great discussion. Here's my .02: When I was starting out as a reporter (before the dinosaurs went extinct), a colleague of mine reviewed some whale books and titled the review "Cetacean Chic." Whales, eagles, bears, lions, tigers, etc. are all big, dramatic animals that the average person naturally feels more snuggly toward. They're cool because they capture people's imaginations better than sparrows or eels, say. This is not rational or scientific, but it's human nature, and politicians, who make funding decisions, know that saving the whales gets votes. Biologists who are charged with trying to save endangered plants and animals have long been frustrated by this. Back in 1980, I reported for the NY Times Mag on a bird called the dusky seaside sparrow, which is now extinct, and which was in fact the first vertebrate to go extinct since the endangered species act was passed in 1973 to prevent such a thing. At the time of my article there were about 13 individuals left, all males. Scientist after scientist told me that saving that bird would have been very inexpensive (I'll spare you the details), but no one outside the scientific and conservation community cared about saving a sparrow; all the money was committed to falcons, eagles, grizzly bears, etc. Is saving endangered grizzly bears more important than saving dusky seaside sparrows? I don't know. The problem is that there isn't enough money to save everything, so we're left playing God. We have to make decisions about what to save, and they should be as rational as possible. The endangered plants and animals that get funding to buy habitat, etc., are the ones that have a future; the ones that get insufficient funding will probably perish at some point. These are decisions we can't afford to make based solely on sentiment and cuddliness. As for whales specifically, it happens to be a species where reproduction is slow, so any major hit on the species takes a long time to recover from. If you come close wiping out bass or other species with speedier reproduction, you have a much better chance at recovery than in species like whales or grizzlies. Reasonable people can argue about when a species becomes truly endangered, but whales are part of an ocean ecosystem that is getting hammered, mostly through overfishing. The danger to whales is not primarily hunting but the distortion and threat of collapse that ocean ecosystems face. If taking individuals won't seriously diminish a species, there's no scientific argument for preventing it. That's where our individual sentiments and moral codes should guide usand that's much trickier.

A lot of ignorance there. It's one thing to harvest a few whales for food (though I have a hard time with that even) but to export them purely for commercial gain? That really makes no sense.

The James Gang was a great, underappreciated group!

Oh, boy, how many times have I heard, "Dad, how do you know the words to this song?" I recently watched "The Last Waltz," Martin Scorsese's documentary about the The Band's last concert, for the third or fourth time. It really brings back that whole period, as well as the way it was passing by. So many stories: My first concert was The Who's Tommy tour; a few weeks later I was at a Doors concert just after Jim Morrison had exposed himself during a Miami concert. There was a curfew in Boston then, and Morrison refused to stop playing. The Boston Tactical Police Force slowly poured in and stood facing the audience in front of the stage. Finally, they shut the power off to the stage, but Morrison wouldn't stop. They finally had to turn the power back on to avert a riot. He played a while longer then staggered off, six-pack in hand. Obligatory Old Fart Comment: I hope our kids don't do what some us did back then!! :-/

I sent ReelMech a couple of reels right after Thanksgiving. I thought to myself, "I'm in Massachusetts; why the heck am I sending my reels to be serviced in Kansas, for heaven's sake, when I can get them serviced right around here?" Well, I'm a convert. The reels were back before I realized they were gone, and they work smooth as silk and as silent as a bass lurking in cover. A first-class gentleman and craftsman.

I was fortunate enough to be in Churchill, Manitoba, a few years ago during the weeks when the polar bears were gathering to wait for the winter ice to form on Hudson Bay, ice that they could walk out on to get to the seals that form the basis of their winter diet. I can't tell you how thrilling it was to see them up close--their size, their whitish-yellowish fur, their lumbering gait, and their sheer bulk and strength. I'll never forget it. Their biggest enemy is warmth, warmth that restricts their winter ice and that, thanks to all their fat layers, literally causes them to overheat. I remember being out there in layers and layers of clothing, a balaclava covering the skin of my face, the icy falling snow hitting my eyes, and seeing bears playing and leisurely napping in the ice and snow, as if it were a day at the beach. Yes, global warming is killing them while we appoint committee after committee to do yet another study before taking action. It's incredible to me. And sickening.

Getting pork on a hook is okay, but getting it off can be really frustrating. The axiom I've heard is pork is most effective in water below 50 degrees, but above that plastic is the way to go.

Russ, that's definitely an escapee from somehere. I had a similar experience several years ago, when I was bushwacking with a buddy of mine in New Hampshire near a pond in late winter. We came across an area that was all rooted up. We kept going, and suddenly from behind some boulders a huge wild boar came charging toward us. As you know, there are no boars in NH. We figure it had escaped from a huge private game preserve in Croydon, NH, even though it was over a 100 miles away. I sometimes wonder whatever happened to that boar.

Is that a border collie?

How are you at asking for directions? ;D

I use Firefox and its cousin, Camino, mostly Camino, which I love. I'm on a Mac, though.

You could be right, Val. I will admit to wishful thinking when it comes to the Yankees. You're of course right about the fearsome Yankees lineup. As I recall about the coaching staff, though, hasn't it turned over since Pettitte was in NYC? He'll also be facing a tough division than the once he faced last time he was the Yanks. Toronto in particular is a better team. Besides, the Red Sox will keep that E.R.A. from coming down too much. Actually, it's remarkable how the Red Sox and Yankees have switched positions this offseason. The Sox are overpaying for players, and the Yankees are increasingly relying on young players, many of them from the their farm system. One of the underappreciated moves the Yankees made in the offseason was the Sheffield move. They got some really good young talent in that one.

Pettitte hasn't been the same since he's been hurt. I could be wrong, but he doesn't look like the same pitcher the Yankees had a few years ago. Clemens will sign to pitch only games played in Texas.

And what does he really do when he decides to go in the green monster??????? Gets an update on the latest Yankee score. Yankees winning, he knows he can let his mind wander. Yankees losing, he says, "Darn, now I've got to concentrate."

You can't really compare Manny with T.O. T.O.'s all about ego and me, me, me; Manny's more like Pigpen in the Charlie Brown cartoon. He just kind of gets distracted and stops paying attention every once in a while.

Where do you get them, Russ?