Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
I picked up a striker 7 dv last year on clearance for around $250. I used it pretty much as you describe and it was nice fishing with it  this year. Having a 2nd breadcrumb dropping GPS is also nice. I would curb your expectations on the side view as it is best for shallow freshwater.  These are lower end units that only do thing.
2
Arima Group Activities / Re: Portland Sportsman Show
« Last post by StreamFixer on Today at 02:00:29 PM »
A Feb. 9 reminder

In past years many of us have gathered at the Cafeteria in the East end of Building D for a bite to eat and a brew.  This has occurred at 6PM, Thursday night of the show.

This year Thursday evening during the show will fall on Feb. 9.  I plan to be at the cafeteria at 6 pm that day.  If any of you would care to join me I would certainly welcome the company and to meet  old and new friends.

StreamFixer
3
Does anyone have experience with the Garmin STRIKER 7sv Fishfinder with CHIRP ClearVu/SideVu
https://www.thegpsstore.com/Garmin-STRIKER-7sv-Fishfinder-with-CHIRP-ClearVuSideVu-P5088.aspx

Two years ago I installed a new Rayamarine a78 MFD.  I'm happy with it and use it primarily for Navigation.  It is sideview imaging capable however I would have to add the SI module and transducer which is another $600+ which never seems to happen.  I also find it somewhat annoying to switch between Charting and the fishfinder screen.  Always thought it would be nice to have a second screen. 
I was browsing the the internet the other day and came across the Striker 7sv.  For $380 I can get a second (standalone) screen for fish finding with side imaging.
Does anyone have experience with this unit, and what do you think of it?

Thanks
4
Arima Group Activities / Re: Seattle Boat Show
« Last post by Markshoreline on Today at 01:29:23 PM »
Russ you guessed it’s not post war....  :applause:
Thanks Diablo for identifying a date, now anyone else?
5
The Plan document calls for radical harvest reductions then repeatedly turns around in the next breath and says the real culprit is habitat degradation and harvest reduction won't change a thing unless the habitat is restored.

There are more than 1.5 million more people in the Puget Sound region now than there were in 1990. Proportionally that's 50% growth over the period. 4.6 million up from 3.1 million. All those extra people want to eat and drink and bathe and piss and poop and drive and build houses and work at jobs and shop in malls etc. etc. etc. That affects the watersheds. The controls you reference have improved some of the historical cesspools but sprawl has spread the impacts much more broadly. We are not keeping pace much less reversing the trend. While correlation doesn't always mean causation sometimes it does and a habitat degradation hypothesis fits the available data much better than one based on harvest reduction.

How much are you willing to bet that you're right and the studies are all wrong? NOAA puts the economic value of recreational saltwater fishing in Washington State at 6500 jobs and $775M a year. Not huge compared to say Amazon or Boeing but still important especially to the people working those jobs. Those numbers are going to be a lot smaller if the Sound is closed. Small businesses can't afford to sit out a season or two much less a decade of closures and will close up shop.

Draw your own conclusions and support what makes sense to you but when even the authors of the Plan don't believe more cuts will make a discernible difference my vote is we try something different instead of doubling down on the pattern of harvest cutting that hasn't changed the population decline trends for the last 30 years.
I agree we have more people now than 30 years ago and that cutting sportfishing isn't going to bring back huge numbers of fish.What I do know is in any fishery where nets and commercial harvest is banned fish populations incresae dramatically.This is true worldwide.I also know that habitat can be completely destroyed and fish will return.Remember Mt.St.Helens?The Toutle River was a mudflow,blast zone.There are fish there now.Nature has a way of healing itself.I know that in Lake Washington 100,000 fish can be counted entering the lake at the locks yet only 30,000 make it to the Cedar River.Guess who was in there with nets?I know there are Halibut in the Straight before the longlines go in but are far and few between after they come out.I know there are shrimp and crab in Puget Sound before commercial harvest and far fewer when they are done.I know that far fewer fish raised in a tribal hatchery get marked as opposed to a state run hatchery.Why?Because that puts those fish off limits to the sportsman.None of this has anything to do with loss of habitat.The problem is 43 years old and it's called the Boldt Decision.

 :yeahthat:
6
Draw your own conclusions and support what makes sense to you but when even the authors of the Plan don't believe more cuts will make a discernible difference my vote is we try something different instead of doubling down on the pattern of harvest cutting that hasn't changed the population decline trends for the last 30 years.

I could be mistaken as it's been several days since I read the article and might've missed or forgotten but weren't they mainly trying to say that in regards to just the Stilly?  I mean if they wanted a real argument shouldn't they have included all of the other rivers that are for all intents and purposes, bigger players in terms of fishing?  I guess what I'm saying is that I've heard that the Stilly is basically not a river worth fishing at this point because there are very few fish in it.  Wouldn't this be an apples to oranges argument?  If say the Sno or Sky or a different river for example, that was a larger contributor was having the same issues?  Well that would be a different story, imo.
7
I don't buy the habitat baloney.There are more restrictions now than ever.Logging has increased buffers.Shoreline restrictions have increased.Anyone try to build a house near the water lately?Land trust holdings are at all time highs.Water quality is better now than in the 70's when our ports were toxic soup.The Nisqually's reclaimed an entire delta.The Great Lakes have a great population of Chinook that were started from zero from our brood stock.Do you think they have better habitat than we do.?The habitat argument is a crock,same as the people that say we are cutting all the trees down.There is plenty of good habitat left that is not being used for fish production.

I agree...  I think this is just another excuse given by those in charge to try and make it look like it's the fault of the fish not being able to get it on.  There are pictures of this Sno County and the Everett area from over a hundred years ago where they clear cut almost every single tree in the forest to where it looked like a barren wasteland.  Yet it wasn't at all uncommon for them to catch 50-60lb salmon right out in front here.  I think a large part of the problem has to do with the tribes netting and that has been the problem for the past 30 years or more, ever since the Judge Boldt decision, and the numbers show as much with the population declination.  Clearly, we as sports-fishermen, have no way of being able to over-fish or almost wipe out the species just being able to fish hook and line for a couple weeks out of the year and only in a few areas, if we even get a fishing season at all.
8
Arima Life / Re: It can be dangerous on the Columbia River apparently
« Last post by Diablo on Today at 12:38:34 PM »
If two boats are approaching each other nearly head on, similar to two cars approaching each other on a two-lane road (fine for cars, but too close for comfort/safety on the water) which boat would be considered the “starboard boat”? What about if the situation were a little different, as if both were driving on the “wrong” side of the road?

I haven’t read this section in my Chapman book quite yet... That thing is pretty dense reading...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There is no “starboard boat”, that applies as a guide for crossing boats, maneuverability matters more. You don’t want to assume you have the right of way over a tug towing a log boom. Generally boats passing head on pass port to port. That only matters when you close to the other boat or in a narrow channel. In a wide channel boats can, and do, pass on either side without breaking any rule.
It is best to know the rules so you don’t confuse other boaters with your actions.  When in a crowded fishing fleet I tell rookies “show your bow”, in other words show your intentions. When someone in not familiar with the rules and are turning one way then the other other boaters don’t know what their intentions are.
9
Open Forum / Re: Cool boat
« Last post by Fisherdv on Today at 11:25:34 AM »
Kinda similar look to a Stabicraft
10
Arima Life / Re: Buying a used outboard
« Last post by Dbobby23 on Today at 10:41:17 AM »
Be very flexible with cash in hand. I was lucky enough to be 1 of the first 5 callers of 50 on the 2007 f60 Efi
 mint condition motor I purchased. When I showed up for a test run with the motor still on his boat he had the motor hooked up via a special Yamaha cable to his laptop. I could see the hours broke down by rpms and any codes the computer was throwing. I then test drove the motor on his boat at a local lake then went back to his house. I pulled the motor off his boat using a cherry picker he had and mounted on mine in about an hour an a half. It took me watching Craigslist 4-5 times a day for 6 months and making calls daily to boat repair places to see if they had any trade ins.  What put me first in line for this motor was telling the seller I have cash in hand, I can leave right this second to come take a look and if everything checks out I will give you full price no problem. I should add the previous owner just did a full service and had 
A meticulous folder full of past services with receipts.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10