Ugly4Life

Good to see you're still getting stuck in Alex. Always a pleasure reading your reports.

Cracker. Haven't seen a mullet like that in a while. Well done lads.

That's my wet dream.   

They're good reels, but we had a hell of a lot of trouble getting parts for them when people brought them in for repairs. Just be aware of that, I guess.

I exclusively use raiders, gyro jigs and a metal called mariba, or Maria? I'm not sure if that's what it's called? But a great lure!

 

Anyway, does anyone on here use anything apart from metals at waitpinga? I find the dumping waves too big to throw plastics

Maria's. And yeah they're a great little metal lure and not too pricey either.

Witnessed a guy lugging what had to be a mully back across the rocks from the inner breakwater when I first started working there, and have nailed 2 decent flatties in there on plastics plus lots of trouties. Just stay out of the way of the boaties, they always have priority over fishing in all parts of the marina.

 

Congrats southie! I love fly fishing but haven't done it for years. One day I'll get back into it.My first was a little Tommy Ruff in Coffins Bay many many years ago.

Went and had a little fish off the rocks out the front of the shop this morning as it's pretty slow here.Bam, bam, bam troutie after troutie all decent size, all released. Even got a double header on the one lure! One on the front treb and one on the back! Using a Duo Toto and just cranking it in fast. Good, quick session and some nice fish to get me back in the game.

Cheers.Bummer pauly.

Okay, I'll admit it I am yet to have a fish in 2014. No, not catch a fish, have a fish. At all. Haven't even looked at my fishing gear yet! :woohoo: It's been a reasonably busy summer both at work and at home so now that it's starting to wind down I am hoping the Salmon start showing up and I can get my first fish in. Over the last few years I've decided that Salmon are by far my favourite fish to catch. Most of my quality gear was bought with chasing Salmon around 1kg for sport in mind. I heard some good reports at the shop of fish over 45cm being caught by guys out in the boats within the last few weeks, so hopefully that means a few will be showing up landbased soon.Anyone cracking into these beauties yet? Don't want ya spots, just want to know if you've got 'em at all yet.

the t-curves are really good rods. can't go wrong. popular and reliable.don't know about the ifish nano's as I haven't seen one, but the catana nano's are great.

Yeah projoe's pretty much on the money. Unfortunately you generally won't get a single piece replaced like that, usually if it's under warranty they will replace the entire rod. The Jewels have been replaced by the new range of Catana's which are really nice rods. The Catana Nano's are the same price range and in my opinion, better quality rods than the Jewels.

Using artificial sharks placed at various depths and locations along a stretch of southern NSW, the study noted plane crews spotted just 12.5 per cent of the dummies.Helicopters, which are used for all WA's aerial patrols, were marginally better, identifying 17.1 per cent of the dummy sharks.Colin Barnett, whose Government significantly increased funding for aerial shark patrols, stood by the practice as an "important and effective tool" to safeguard swimmers.

Can't say I didn't see this coming. Where was the promised consultation and review? Oh that's right, the latte sipping greenies who got this introduced in the first place had their consultation and review 12 months ago.

Why do they want to extend the breakwater? Not mentioned in the planning documents.

If you choose not to talk to me Ugly then I don't care but you should read the CYC file held in SARFAC. It has all the history collected over the last ten years including letters between the then Minister' date=' CYC and the town planning committee. See the current Chair of SARFAC, he has been briefed on it all as well over several years and should be willing in the interest of anglers to pass the info onto you for a read.Trust me anglers are being screwed again, this time by the big end of town......again !Altogether now I have given you three people that can fill you in on this and preceding events to these issues. Get all the facts , then comment I will concede however you are entitled to an opinion, but be informed.[/quote']So inform us. Why are you dodging and hand-balling me off to other people when you have all this information yourself?

Sure it wasn't Stren Microfuse? I've been using it for years and love it. It's my braid of choice. One of my rods has been spooled up with the same 2lb Stren for 5 years and it still hasn't failed me.

No, not lazy at all, but neither am I inclined to call you. We've spoken to Craig Evans directly about the topic in a lengthy meeting (as it directly affects our business) and I'm happy to take Moggy on his word about the things Gary Johanson had to say. Surely if the information is confidential and you tell me and then I repeat it, it's on your head as much as mine?I'm just wondering why you would choose to come here to comment on something like this if you have nothing you can actually contribute to the thread other than cryptic messages? If I recall correctly this isn't the first time you've alluded to having special 'inside information' on a topic that you 'couldn't share with the public'. You can call it healthy skepticism if you like.

Here is a letter from Craig Evans posted on the CYC website here: http://www.cycsa.com.au/events/north-haven-inner-breakwater-and-boat-ramp

The Club has recently received a number of enquiries and concerns about the future of the CYCSA owned North Haven Boat Ramp that we make available to the general public.Many of our members that have friends that use the North Haven Ramp are looking for answers to the growing rumours and innuendo surrounding the future of the ramp. The following statement explains the Club’s current position. We want to keep the boating public informed on two things:• Our commitment to improve the safety of North Haven Marina• Our desire to continue to offer public access to our boat ramp – the most popular ramp in the State – and our other boating facilities.Right now, we are negotiating with the State Government to achieve fair and reasonable arrangements that meet our needs and those of the wider boating community.As a not-for-profit community sporting club that exists to advance boating, our first priority is to satisfy the needs of our 1200-plus members and safeguard their interests. This drives our approach on all matters, including our negotiations with the State Government.First some background. Every boat owner pays an annual Facilities Levy to the South Australian Government’s Facility Fund for boating, established in 1996 to help establish, maintain and improve recreational boating infrastructure throughout South Australia.The CYCSA in 2009 for the first time discussed with the State Government the need for improved breakwaters at North Haven. After two years of discussions and investigations, the Club applied for a contribution from the Facility Fund to pay half the cost of a necessary $1.9 million (excluding GST) extension to the inner breakwater at North Haven Marina. The application was in partnership with the City of Port Adelaide and Enfield and met the requirements for facility funding.The Government-appointed South Australian Boating Facility Advisory Committee (SABFAC) receives applications and advises the Minister of Transport, Mr Koutsantonis, on whether they should be granted.Following our three-year negotiations with SABFAC, the CYCSA agreed to provide additional benefits for the general boating public as part of a funding arrangement for the extension of the inner breakwater. These benefits featured a 10-year guarantee from CYCSA to maintain public access to our boat ramp, public access to our pump-out facility – the only such facility on the metropolitan coastline – and emergency mooring facilities for vessels in distress and volunteer and government vessels involved in safety or emergency operations.As a result, SABFAC recommended to Minister Koutsantonis that he approve a contribution of $950,000. The Minister accepted some of the SABFAC recommendations but rejected the 10-year guarantee for public access to the Club’s boat ramp. Instead, he sought a guaranteed period of 57 years in return for a $950,000 contribution from the Facility Fund. This is 47 years more than was agreed in negotiations between SABFAC and the CYCSA.The CYCSA is unable to agree to this. It is inconceivable that we would agree to lock up for 57 years an asset worth millions of dollars in exchange for $950,000. It could financially strangle us.CYCSA met Minister Koutsantonis on 3 September 2013 to try to resolve this impasse. The Club’s position and the Minister’s position could not be reconciled at that meeting but we remain hopeful and will keep our door open to work positively with the Minister to achieve an outcome that maintains the boat ramp for public use.If the CYCSA is forced to proceed alone to extend the inner breakwater within North Haven Marina and take on the full cost, that will force us to review all aspects of our operations, land and assets, including the boat ramp. We made this clear to both the Minister and his Department.The land upon which the boat ramp is built is worth vastly more than what it generates as a boat ramp. It also is worth vastly more than a $950,000 contribution from the Facility Fund.We just can’t give what the Minister asks. To do so would irresponsibly compromise the finances of the Club and impose insurmountable burdens on our members as we strive to maintain the precinct and pay the looming cost of marina facility replacement.If we have to, we will examine alternative uses for the boat ramp that better reflect the value of the land that it occupies.This is not our preferred option. We readily appreciate that many people rely on the North Haven Boat Ramp. We want to continue to enable the public to use our boat ramp for the next 10 years.We commit, therefore, to continue to negotiate with the Minister and the Department to find an arrangement that accommodates everybody.We will keep you informed of progress and developments in our talks with the Minister.CRAIG EVANSChief Executive OfficerCruising Yacht Club of South Australia

I cannot repeat what I know here' date=' but happy to do privately, but I can say that the CYC doesn't, give two hoots about anglers, and by the way that ramp was built with SABFAC funding and Minister Conlon did you all in at the last set of changes..[/quote']I fail to see the difference between saying what you know here and repeating it to anyone who asks you privately...? If you're not bound by some sort of confidentiality agreement then what is the issue with letting us all know the information? What's to stop someone asking you privately and then repeating all the information here?

I may be off the mark but I seem to recall a fair while ago the Yacht club land was given to them by the Government or maybe someone else. I may be wrong but I recall seeing something about this when they made the last lot of changes down there. Please let me know if this was not the case.Cheers Dazz

I see no problem for the ramp to have even a 99 year clause' date=' after all, CYCSA is a "non for profit" organisation.[/quote']Doing that means that the CYC have to finance maintenance for 99 years. I think that it's entirely unreasonable to ask for a 99 year free ride for a $1 million investment (which in the scheme of governments and corporations is not a lot of money). 10 - 15 years is a far more reasonable offer. Especially since this money would be coming from the fund that both CYC members AND rec boaties have been paying for years, both of whom benefit from the ramp being kept open... It's not as if the government is being asked to cough up money from somewhere else.

This is probably the best Public Boat Ramp in Adelaide, let alone SA.

It's a private ramp, open to the public and completely owned by CYCSA. The distinction being that the CYC are sacrificing land that, as you say, could be used for housing or heaps of other things that would generate revenue and offering it to the public instead. I think they should be given some credit for that. Thy're under no obligation to keep it there or keep offering the services to the public but they do...I'm not saying they're doing it solely out of the goodness of their hearts, but surely the fact that they could have closed it down to make more money ages ago has to count for something in this debate? It certainly shows that they have no intention of doing it simply out of greed or spite.

Okay here's the info on what's going on here (to the best of my knowledge):The CYC are a non-profit community club. Raising money for them is actually a lot harder than you would imagine with all those big boats parked in there. So far they have raised $1 million towards the extension of the breakwater, which will cost around $2 million. They are asking the government chip in the rest of the funds and in exchange they are guaranteeing the North Haven Ramp will stay open to the public and be maintained until 2023. However, the government want them to guarantee that the ramp stays open until 2070! 67 years! To me that seems like a very unreasonable request, especially since the other option for the CYC is to simply shut the ramp.If the CYC were to close North Haven, they could easily generate the funds needed to extend the breakwater. The ramp does not generate even close to what you would think per year and using that space as boat storage or something similar would be a better option for the CYC, financially, however they don't really want to do that. They are happy to continue running it, but feel that the government should shoulder some of the financial responsibility.The editorial in the latest SA Angler also has quite a lot of info about this and why it is an absolute necessity to extend the breakwater. Many people are up in arms about the government possibly using money from the boating levy fund to pay for this, because it's private property. However, the owners of most of the craft in the marina have been paying into the fund for years, typically about $250 a year each which is more than the average trailer boatie pays (around $50ish per year) and so it doesn't seem so unreasonable to chip some of that money back in to benefit everyone.Recs get a prime boat ramp. The CYC and its members get an extended breakwater and safer marina and the government gets a public service run on their behalf, guaranteed for 10 years, for basically nothing. Seems like a no-brainer to me personally.

Well done! Not hitting them yet, but I have some time off shortly and the rods are rigged and ready for a few early morning Largs sessions!

Mate that's a great fish. Big salmon have to be in my top 5 favourite fish to catch.