river zander

[jeepster]

Same reason I can't be asked to contibute any further.

 

...........I'll carry on fluking a few on sea deads.....

 

 

interesting to see that the post to which you reply to here slodger is the posters (grahamHD) first and only post. what an auspicious start to a forum

 

glad to see he's contributed to other threads he feels more in touch with............

[slodger]

interesting to see that the post to which you reply to here slodger is the posters (grahamHD) first and only post. what an auspicious start to a forum

 

glad to see he's contributed to other threads he feels more in touch with............

 

I hadn't realised that Jeepster, but I've got a feeling I know who he is, and if it's who I think it is he's more than qualified to post on this thread. I'm interested as to why you felt the need to check the number of postings this member has made, and indeed how you did so?

 

What is your second comment supposed to signify?

[jeepster]

I hadn't realised that Jeepster, but I've got a feeling I know who he is, and if it's who I think it is he's more than qualified to post on this thread. I'm interested as to why you felt the need to check the number of postings this member has made, and indeed how you did so?

 

What is your second comment supposed to signify?

 

i've PM'd you slodger, for the record, no offence was meant to you.........

 

i didn't 'feel the need' to check how many posts grahamHD has made, it just tells me under his user name. my point was that it's an odd first post on a forum.

 

my second comment signifies that since declaring he can't be bothered to have any input in this thread, he's had no input on any other threads................. makes me wonder why he posted in the first place.

[slodger]

i didn't 'feel the need' to check how many posts grahamHD has made, it just tells me under his user name. my point was that it's an odd first post on a forum.

 

D'oh!! Okay, so I'm a computer Noddy.....

 

I've no idea why Graham hasn't contributed further. Perhaps he's a man of few words?

 

(Ps PM replied to.)

[steven27]

i didn't 'feel the need' to check how many posts grahamHD has made, it just tells me under his user name. my point was that it's an odd first post on a forum.

 

D'oh!! Okay, so I'm a computer Noddy.....

 

I've no idea why Graham hasn't contributed further. Perhaps he's a man of few words?

 

(Ps PM replied to.)

Excuse me for interrupting, this is my first time on a forum of any kind and I know little of internet etiquette. I'm hoping to fish the River Dove this weekend for the first time and to make matters worse i haven't fished a river for over 6 years. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

[jeepster]

where are you fishing the dove? and what are you after? i know AN has it's own resident dove guru (eh dan?)

 

actually for the best response you're probably better starting a new thread entitled something like 'i'm fishing the dove for the first time, help!'

[Dick Dastardly]

Sorry Slodge just re read my post and it reads like a bit of an attack on you but it isnt meant as such,far from it as yours are often veiws I find interesting on predator issues.

 

How ever (for example) if it was a debate on using braid for pike traces (also been done quite a lot) dont you think it would be good to "once again" register your views in the hope that some one reading the thread who knew no better was correctly informed?

[slodger]

Sorry Slodge just re read my post and it reads like a bit of an attack on you but it isnt meant as such,far from it as yours are often veiws I find interesting on predator issues.

 

Sorry Budgie, but I hadn't even noticed your post to be honest. It's a perfectly valid point, and one I'd agree with wholeheartedly. I also find it annoying when someone takes the trouble to post, only to state that the subject bores them. I didn't mean to imply that the subject of Zeds on sea deads bored me, in fact far from it. It's something of a pet subject of mine. I merely meant that I've chased the subject around enough times that I no longer felt it worth pursuing. In particular Mark and I have debated it countless times on another predator site. To be fair, the original thread topic has little to do with the sea dead debate, although I'm also of the opinion that 'spin off' discussions within threads are not only to be expected, but also quite interesting.

 

For the record, I caught my first Zander by design around 30 years ago, and while they have seldom been my number one target, I have fished quite hard for them in past seasons. My best session ever yielded 17 Zeds in a day, and all in daylight. I do consider myself to be experienced with the species. I've caught several hundred of them over the years. I generally manage a few sessions each year.

 

I'll ask just one very pertinent question of the doubters, regarding Zeds and sea baits. What earthly reason would make a fish, that CLEARLY feeds on carrion a significant amount of the time, dismiss a dead sea fish in favour of a coarse bait?

 

If my intentional captures on sea deads are fairly described as 'flukes' then c'est la vie...... bring on the flukes!!

[Mr Nice]

Same reason I can't be asked to contibute any further.

 

...........I'll carry on fluking a few on sea deads.....

 

 

 

Chris!!!! When are you coming 'home'?

[GrahamHD]

Apologies for any offence given, I certainly didn't mean to. I had intended to give my views on the seabait side of things but realised I'd done it before and would only be repeating myself. It's been on this site, I changed my username due to having to get a new computer and couldn't retrieve my old password on the new email but I have been on here before.

 

What I will say about zander and seabaits is that in my experience I've found that on occasion they have outfished coarse baits and during the winter months I've had many fish on them, this is fishing in daylight, being mobile with floats. I fully agree that overall a coarse live or dead will give more consistant results but seabaits do work. I've now had fifteen doubles on them with fish to within a couple of ounces of fifteen pounds and many others up to doubles, surely they can't all be flukes? It's nice to see Chris Hammond has had fish on them, it seemed like it was only myself and a couple of people I know that rate them.

 

Apologies again for the previous post.

Edited January 28, 2006 by GrahamHD