eric1978

I'm selling a pair of Arc'Teryx Gamma LT pants, men's size medium (30-34 waist, 32" inseam). They're top-of-the-line backpacking/hiking pants. Like new except for one little burnhole on the right calf area about the size of a pea from a runaway campfire ember...easily repairable. These retail for $170. I'll sell them for $55, shipped. They're just a little too long for me. Probably not a ton of people here looking for something like this, but I figured I'd put them up anyway in case any of you guys would want them...I know a few of you do some hiking. The Men's Gamma LT Pant by Arcteryx. Our lightest softshell pants are designed for mobility and breathability while hiking, climbing, guiding and backpacking. The Gamma LT by Arcteryx features articulated patterning for superior range of motion, and laminated construction enhances durability and comfort. Made with lightweight Fortius, a highly durable and weather resistant four-way stretch textile. FEATURES of the Arcteryx Men's Gamma LT Pant Weather resistant Moisture-resistant outer face fabric Lightweight Durable Quick-drying Wind resistant DWR finish (Durable Water Repellent) helps bead water from fabric surface Gender specific patterning Articulated patterning for unrestricted mobility Gusseted crotch Thigh pocket with laminated zip Elasticized waist Adjustable webbing belt Reflective logo

I deciphered it for you.

If you guys are gonna argue, at least make it political wouldja? That's the thing...seems like half the threads on ANY topic turn into some kind of dispute over semantics or other excrutiating minutiae. What's the difference what the subject matter is at that point?

I've been messing with the Costas a little bit. I've tried a bunch of different lenses, and honestly, I can't really tell the difference between the glass 400s and the glass 580s. I think the 580s just provide superior UV protection, but unless we're fishing on planet Krypton, I'm not sure I can justify the extra expense. Both lenses are crystal clear and soothing to the eyes. I haven't had them on a river, so maybe it would make a difference there...maybe not. There is a noticable difference between the CR-39 poly lenses and the glass, though.

I don't think we do...we've tried. We either treat this forum as a free-for-all for opinions, and get sent to our rooms without dinner, or realize that it's a privately owned forum and since Phil makes the rules we can follow them or leave. I've been doing my best to keep the latter in mind, though I'll admit it's tough for me. I think conservation and the relevant political issues pertaining to our fisheries are more important than all of the rest of the topics combined, and I do wish there was some kind of "mosh pit" sub-forum where the controversial threads could go to get hashed out...and people could choose to go there or choose not to. Just sayin'.

I applaud your optimism, Tim, but discussing conservation without discussing government is impossible, and discussing government without discussing politics is impossible...they go hand in hand in hand and they're inherently linked. I for one don't get offended by political debate, as fiercely as I may disagree with some folks, but there are many who can't handle it and think the sky is falling when we engage in spirited debate. I'm like you, I can completely do without the "best color crankbaits," or "what size jig do you throw" threads...they leave me aching with boredom. I find the conservation issues far more interesting and accessible to conversation. But I'll continue to remain as absent from the god/guns/gays/gov't threads as my impulsive fingers will allow, and cheer for the truth silently from the sidelines.

A ranger told a buddy of mine that sleeping/camping in your car at Tan Vat and Baptist is a no-no and that they'd be cracking down. I'm not saying I wouldn't try it, but just a heads up.

Wow. Incredible fish. Nice job with the C&R.

The glasses are sold so all of you dillweeds, jackwagons, jackmonkeys and pickle-pusses can relax.

Right on.

Inside hinge measurement is a hair bigger than 4.75 inches. If you think you have a kiwi head, these would probably work for you.

It's not about fixing, it's about mitigating. The moment the COE broke ground for the White River Dams, they assumed responsibility forever for maintaining the artificial fisheries to replace the natural ones they destroyed. It's their obligation to keep the tailwaters stocked for economical and recreational purposes. It would be like taking someone's property for eminent domain and not paying them the amount promised. It's basically stealing when they refuse to offer restitution for the natural resources they snatched away from the public.

Monday morning bump. You want these things CWF?

The subject is federal funding of hatcheries...and it's inherently and blatantly political. There's no way of discussing it without discussing it.

Eh, we've already had that argument. The trout don't do much if any damage to the smallmouth populations in the areas you mentioned...it's just not ideal smallie habitat. Yeah, there are some resident smallmouth there, and more probably migrate toward the springs in the winter, but generally they're not that interested in water that cold and infertile. Besides, they don't really compete for forage, especially with rainbows...and if some big ol' browns are eating up some smallmouth food, that's alright with me, because they're super-cool fish, albeit non-native. I, for one, since I started fly fishing, really appreciate the diversity of species you can catch in the Ozarks. If it was up to me, I'd put the White River back the way it should be, but I see no need to eliminate the trout programs in the upper freestones. They ain't hurtin' nothin'.

That smallmouth habitat isn't coming back unless the dams come down...and that ain't happenin'. The tailwaters would mostly be a waste of space without trout in them. I would hope, if the federal hatcheries were shut down, that MDC would pick up the slack at least a little bit, and continue to stock...and they could stock way fewer fish if they implemented C&R only regs. What makes you think that's Obama's website? Because it's called "change.org?" It's not. It's just a liberal advocacy group that fights for social, economic, and ecological progress. I'm really disappointed in the President blindly slashing puny bits of pork here and there just to grease the squeeky wheel...but what do you expect him to do when all everyone from one side of the political spectrum does is throw tantrums about government spending and federal programs? He's darn if he does and darn if he doesn't. I sure wish it wasn't one of MY main interests in life that might be affected, but someone's gonna lose when federal funds are cut anywhere...just happens to be us this time.

HPF is right on. There would be no benefit to cutting the program except to save some budget pocket-change, and that's not a cut that would make any significant difference with our deficit problems. And Trav, there are NO native trout in MO...the populations in the wild trout streams are "wild," but they're not native. Any trout swimming in Ozark water was either put there directly by man, or is an ancestor of a trout put there by man. And privatizing hatcheries would make fishing unaffordable for lots of people. Let's stick with what we got...it works. Where do I sign?

Yessir, Mr. Dallas. I'll run up to Walgreens and put the pics on a disc...some time today.

30K plus, huh? Busch Stadium holds 47k...that's one hell of a tent.

I haven't fished there, but I've hiked the Smokies (those were my pre-fly fishing days, unfortunately). You'll feel like you're in paradise, and you'll love fishing those streams even if you don't catch anything. The setting alone is so beautiful and serene it'll be worth the trip. We crawled out of the woods halfway through our week there and drove into Gatlinburg to clean up. It was a fine place to have a few beers and a burger...and a great reminder of why we went into the woods in the first place.

You can be the one on the left if you want.

Yeah, yeah, I know. I think a lot of people check the "general fishing" forum more than the others. Dillweed...

Just sayin'.

I have a brand new pair of Smith Optics Riptide polarized sunglasses for sale. I bought them online without trying them on, and of course they don't fit my melon-head right. Tortoise frames Polarized GLASS lenses in the photochromic copper tint Lens size: 59 mm They retail for $160, I paid $95, and I'd like to get $80 for them, and I'll include shipping in that price. Glasses are brand new and flawless. They come with a Smith leather case and the original box with price tag. They're beautiful glasses, wish they fit me. I had to use a stock photo because I'm having trouble with my memory stick port, but I'll get actual pictures if you really want them. Glasses are identical to the ones pictured.