eric1978

It's not. Length limits All goggle-eye less than 8" in total length must be returned to the water unharmed immediately after being caught on these waters: Big Piney River from Highway 17 bridge (in Texas County) to its confluence with the Gasconade River Courtois Creek from Highway 8 bridge (in Crawford County) to its confluence with Huzzah Creek Eleven Point River from Thomasville access to the Arkansas line Huzzah Creek from Willhite Road (in Crawford County) to its confluence with the Meramec River Meramec River from Highway 19 bridge (in Dent County) to Pacific Palisades Conservation Area The Osage Fork of the Gasconade River from Skyline Drive bridge (near Orla in Laclede County) to its confluence with the Gasconade River

Detailed finishes on crankbaits are over-rated. Get one that has a similiar color to the 'dads, or like Al says, match the bottom of the stream, and call it good enough. I'm done buying $20 crankbaits because I think they're pretty...the fish don't care.

I noticed that in one of the pics! Looked like a boat seat? Comfy...probably wouldn't be great for a solo where you're trying to keep the weight down, but you can't beat a nice cushiony seat to sit on all day. Nice job Wheat.

It'll take much more than that to rock my boat, my friend...pun intended...corny, I know. Anyway, Cricket's just bitter because he found out his Ugly Stick is a piece of junk, and he's lashing out at the bearer of the bad news.

With all the money they save putting in junk transmissions and power window motors, no wonder they didn't need a bailout. (I drive an FX4, and it's a heap...so I'm allowed to say it.) I'm going back to GM after this one, government owned or not.

To me, fishing glasses are one of those "point of diminished returns" kind of deals. The difference between a $20 pair of glasses and a pair of $100 glasses can be night and day, but I haven't found much difference between the $100 glasses and the $200 glasses. The quality of the lenses DOES make a huge difference. I don't have any high-quality fishing glasses, but I have a cheap-o pair of polarized, and a really nice pair of regular polarized Ray-Bans...not for fishing. I find myself taking the gamble and wearing the Ray-Bans on the river more often than the cheap-o's because the lenses are just so much better...I'm on my second pair because of that, too. Someone mentioned ebay...you can find some great deals there on glasses, but I'm always afraid of buying them sight unseen because I worry they won't fit my fat head right. Guess I need to find some in the store first, then go to ebay. I'd go with glass lenses given the option.

Ditto. The faster the better for me. I get bored with slow presentations, and anything you work on the bottom that isn't T-rigged you're gonna leave in the rocks. I also like faster baits in super-clear water because they don't have the time to examine and reject it. Don't forget your spinnerbaits and buzzbaits.

I guess that's what happens when the river's in your backyard. You better watch it SB, you're next with all the time you spend out there.

Out on bigger water like the Glaize arm, you'd be better off just dangling a stringer in the water and hooking it to your yak if you had a big pile of whites or crappie. Doing that might not be as convenient on a skinny stream, but a stringer of goggles and sunfish wouldn't be too much trouble. Either way, I don't think I'd want to fill my yak up with water.

And layer your legs, too. Use layers of wicking synthetics, and as long as your waders are breathable, you shouldn't get too moist in there. I wouldn't recommend jeans. Cotton loses all insulating properties when wet and if you sweat they will only make you colder. All the big box fishing stores, as well as stores like REI and Alpine Shop, have synthetic underlayers. The good ones may actually cost you as much as neoprene waders would, but you'll be much more comfortable.

I marked my paddle in inches with a sharpie and put a light coat of polyurethane over it so it wouldn't wash off. This is more so I can take a quick measurement than to show the size in pics...the paddle itself is a good enough reference for me. You can slightly see the "15" under the fish's tail in this pic. You can also see how a hand will dwarf the size of a fish. This one is really closer to 16", but if you had no other reference than my hand, you'd think it was more like 12".

Yeah, the quality of the seat isn't the greatest...I expect to replace it ocassionally. I'd consider building an entirely wood seat just for the fun of it if not for the extra weight that would come with it. I didn't have the thousand dollars to fork over for a Royalex canoe, so every ounce counts. Plus I wonder how comfortable your back would be after a day of sitting on it.

It is higher than the factory setting, which was essentially on the floor. On the first mod, I moved the seat forward about six inches, and I raised it to where the seat was about even with the gunwales, and it did feel a little wobbly at first, but I got used to it quickly. The current seat is lower than the last one, about two inches or so below the gunwales. Should feel plenty stable, especially considering what I'm used to. I've seen guys bolt a 1X10 directly under the gunwales and put a sitbacker on top of it on the same canoe. My setup is a few inches lower than theirs.

I finally decided that I could do better than that molded plastic piece of junk that came with the 119, so I got a sitbacker and went to work making a new seat. This one is much lighter, has some padding which makes it way more comfortable, and won't burn the hell out of me after sitting in the sun. Also, I did a float with some buddies this spring where I needed to car-top the canoe, and I realized that I have to take the seat-back off in order for it to lay flat on the gunwales. The sitbacker folds down nicely and eliminates that problem as well. I used 5/4 ash this time. I decided to remove some unnecessary weight with this design by cutting out a little excess wood. Softened the edges, a little sanding, and a few coats of the good stuff.

Interesting post. I've been tinkering with the idea of getting a higher quality camera and learning to be a better photographer. But I'm really not interested in spending big bucks for a camera that's not water-friendly, and it seems most waterproof cameras produce mediocre shots in general, at least no better than your run-of-the-mill digital. I haven't looked that deep into what's available, though. There doesn't really seem to be a good solution to taking pics of your fish when you're alone. Invariably, you are going to have a hand in the photo, or you can take pictures of parts of a fish with your hand out of the shot, both options being less than ideal. Your underwater shot with the Sammy in the fish's mouth was a good one, but it was a total crap shoot and there was a lot of luck involved getting that pic. When I'm in my canoe I like taking the shots on the paddle, since it's a nice looking wooden one and it gives it some size reference and a decent background, though not the most natural. But you still have to have your hand in it. When taking pics with a rod as a reference, I usually try to make sure the rod is farther from the camera than the fish...hey, if you're gonna skew the perception, it might as well be in your favor, right? In my experience, if I leave a smallie in an inch or two of water and remove my hand to take the shot, they almost always start flopping, which means they'll either swim away or possibly injure themselves. I also won't lay a fish on the gravel for a shot (although I irresponsibly have in the past), so my hands-free picture options are pretty limited...actually there are no other options that I can think of.

Statewide limit on goggle-eye is 15 daily, no length limit. Remember JF is a smallmouth management area, where you can only keep one smallmouth per day, and it must be over 18". Of course you should let all the smallies go anyway, and chow down on the goggles. Have fun!

Yeah, and I'll point out that 2.5 pounds is far less than what the average daily stringer of any meat angler would weigh. So if you have a problem with otters, you have to have a problem with catch and keep anglers, too.

I waded Joachim last summer. Yikes! Of course any croc or alligator left by someone will be dead meat daddio by October.

I've read that they'll eat up to 2.5 pounds per day. Fish makes up about half their diet, crayfish and frogs making up most of the rest of it.

Yeah, if they covered every creek in the state, the book would be about 500 pages (that's the book I'd like to have). Plus I think they only did the streams that have MDC accesses. Where are you in St. Pete?

It's a good general reference to the larger streams in MO. If I'm going to an unfamiliar river or stretch of river, often I'll go to the MDC website and print off the page I need and stick it in my Pelican...it's all online and you can get it for free. But I bucked up the $5.95 for the book, too, just so I could have it in handy book form. Definitely worth the money.

Unfortunately you can't take a stereo system out of the vehicle every time you park at an access. I expect it to be stolen eventually, but I'm not gonna stop fishing over it. Oh, and for you meth-head lurkers, I drive an orange VW Beetle with big pink flowers on it.

A relevant story...notice who represents who...go figure. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128619563

http://www.wenonah.c...tail.php?IID=34

It's not, though. Property lines generally run to halfway across the stream to meet the adjoining property, unless of course you own land on both sides. The gray area is still what is considered navigable and what is not, and of the navigable streams, are you allowed to wade as well? Our old property on the Huzzah was shaped like a piece of pie, and the tip of it ran along and across the stream for about 200 yards. It was ours. We paid taxes on it. But the Huzzah is a navigable stream and folks had the right to float through our property. I wouldn't care if they were wading or swimming, either, as long as they weren't doing anything untoward...which they usually didn't. Most people who saw us atop our bluff watching them go by gave us a wave and moved on. We weren't on the busiest part of the river, so passersby weren't all that common, and I'm sure the more river users a property owner encounters, the more leary he becomes. Anyway, the point is, the streambed technically is not public land...technically. But I do think that if you access a stream legally through a public access or a private one you have permission to use, you should be able to wade it regardless of its size...as long as you stay within the banks. Too bad my opinion isn't law. Very clever. That's how I felt about it, too. A hot, steaming pile of yesturday.