| QuietJourney Forums | |
|
Boundary Waters / Quetico Discussion Forums >> General Boundary Waters / Quetico Discussion >> POD (cont. 10)
https://quietjourney.com/community/YABB.cgi?num=1237609077 Message started by db on Mar 21st, 2009 at 4:17am |
|
|
Title: POD (cont. 10) Post by db on Mar 21st, 2009 at 4:17am
Time for a new thread to discuss and/or comment on (You need to Login or Register.
FWIW - I don't specifically thank people for the PODs they supply very often anymore nor do I inform hardly anyone on display dates since the Gallery started. I do appreciate them though and so do many others every day so for myself and (I expect) those daily/weekly 'wish we were there right now too' viewers - Thank You! [smiley=thumbup.gif] Past threads: (You need to Login or Register (You need to Login or Register (You need to Login or Register (You need to Login or Register... |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Mk631 on Mar 23rd, 2009 at 2:18pm
Beautiful portage shot today -- where is it?
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by jimmar on Mar 23rd, 2009 at 3:51pm
Thanks. The portage is from Sarah to Side, my first trip to Quetico. We did PP to Sarah in one day. That was a little too much for me, my trips now are less ambitious.
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by DentonDoc on Mar 23rd, 2009 at 8:55pm jimmar wrote on Mar 23rd, 2009 at 3:51pm:
Your shot must be from the one long portage between Sarah and Side. I did the three shorter portages along the creek last spring and I don't recall any of it looking like this. dd |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by prouboy on Mar 23rd, 2009 at 11:12pm
I've always done the long portage, and will NEVER do it again, now that I know about the shorter portage, thanks to Quiet_passage.
If I had to pick my #1 favorite lake in the Q, it would be Sarah. prouboy |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by jimmar on Mar 24th, 2009 at 12:57am DentonDoc wrote on Mar 23rd, 2009 at 8:55pm:
yup it's the long one, as I recall the other side of that hill is worse. Our outfitter suggested that portage, oddly enough I haven't used that outfitter again. |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by old_salt on Mar 25th, 2009 at 5:57pm
Nice shot. I could not see the QJ decal. :'(
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by jimmar on Mar 25th, 2009 at 10:18pm Old Salt wrote on Mar 25th, 2009 at 5:57pm:
Talk to our outfitter. I ordered a decal today for my cedar stripper. |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by solotripper on Mar 26th, 2009 at 4:00pm
Today's POD is great!
The little guy with the fish draped over his jacket has that " What's the big deal, I got MY dinner right here" ;D Big dude has that " Be sure to bring that fish smelling parka into YOUR tent tonight, THEN we'll have some BIG fun" ;) |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Mk631 on Mar 27th, 2009 at 1:07pm
OK, you got me on this one -- what are we looking at today?
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Akula on Mar 27th, 2009 at 1:34pm
Looks like a wolf track.
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by starwatcher on Mar 27th, 2009 at 1:49pm
Yes, it was a campsite on Jackfish Bay on the end of October last year. These "huge canine tracks" were adjacent to some fresh deer tracks.
starwatcher |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Akula on Mar 30th, 2009 at 4:40am
Nice one today, too. ;D
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by old_salt on Apr 1st, 2009 at 1:24am
Highway 11 ??
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by wally on Apr 1st, 2009 at 1:39am
Today's pic looks like Oct....yikes...winter's acomin'!
Sure has a "cold feel" to it. |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by HoHo on Apr 1st, 2009 at 2:10am
I guess that could be a lot of BW portages, but it reminds me of the Sandpit-Tin Can Mike portage running along the old rail bed.
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by thebutcher on Apr 1st, 2009 at 3:05am
just after you finish the initial hill en route to wood lake?
thebutcher |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Solus on Apr 1st, 2009 at 3:25am
I vote with Ho Ho.
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by monjon on Apr 1st, 2009 at 4:41am
Reminds me of the portage from Cirrus to Beaverhouse
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by db on Apr 1st, 2009 at 6:55am
Tough to argue with that!
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by PhantomJug on Apr 1st, 2009 at 1:03pm
You know, the sad part is that I understand that sign.
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Mk631 on Apr 1st, 2009 at 2:41pm
Great pic!
;D |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by starwatcher on Apr 1st, 2009 at 6:38pm HoHo wrote on Apr 1st, 2009 at 2:10am:
Yes, If my memory is correct. The other end of the portage was the board planks out into TCM starwatcher |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by starwatcher on Apr 1st, 2009 at 6:45pm wally wrote on Apr 1st, 2009 at 1:39am:
October 19, 2008 temps usually on one side of freezing or the other. The worst days are steady drizzle, freezing rain. :P starwatcher |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Akula on Apr 2nd, 2009 at 5:19am
Today's POD has an awesome "off-season" feel to it. Spring? Fall? Either way, great picture, thanks for sharing.
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by thebutcher on Apr 2nd, 2009 at 12:12pm
Where is Bingschick lake?
thebutcher |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Spartan2 on Apr 5th, 2009 at 10:31am
It's a beautiful photo today. And to ask again, where is Bingschick Lake?
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Jim J Solo on Apr 5th, 2009 at 1:44pm
I like it. Good job mr. tiger.
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Mister_Bubble on Apr 5th, 2009 at 5:20pm
"Where is Bingshick Lake?"
Bingshick is north and west from the Brant lake entry (which one getst to from Round Lake off of the Gunflint). The eastern end of the Kekakabic trail runs along the north side of the lake. I was on Bingshick between the blow-down (lots of damage) and the big (ham lake?) fire. It was pretty beat down after the blow-down - must be like the moon after the fire. |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Bon_Voyage on Apr 7th, 2009 at 7:17pm
Sorry for the absence. I got a pm to alert me that some of our photos were PODs. Yes our trip from Brant to Seagull last year was quite desolate at times. Many of the campsites are closed and others offered very little to block the wind. The campsite on Bingshick was one of the nicer ones. I'll check back later today when I get some time to post a follow-up. I'll let Le Tigre know that some of our shots are up to as he may have a smart remark or two.
Karl |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by LeTigre on Apr 8th, 2009 at 1:44am
A smart remark is a lot to ask from me, BV! I'm glad the photos you submitted did not reveal our secret fishing spots ;) Then again, the only secret to be had is to fish wherever BV is not.
Thanks to all for the compliments of the photo, there is nothing better waking up to the sun to see lake of glass....especially when the previous day of paddling ended with hurricane like wind and a restless dog. |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by BrownTrout01 on Apr 8th, 2009 at 4:32am
Nice set of pictures starwatcher. Where is todays from?
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by wally on Apr 8th, 2009 at 5:04am
looks like singing brook in high water.....but heck, it all looks the same...gorgeous!
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by flpaddler on Apr 8th, 2009 at 11:13am
Nice photo starwatcher appears to be Lower Basswood Falls from a really nice angle.
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Wenonah Rider on Apr 8th, 2009 at 1:55pm
My guess also. LBF taken standing on the Canadian mainland looking up the chute between the Canadian mainland and the island that splits the falls
Gorgeous (is that a pun) shot WR |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by thebutcher on Apr 8th, 2009 at 2:01pm flpaddler wrote on Apr 8th, 2009 at 11:13am:
most definitely thebutcher |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by starwatcher on Apr 8th, 2009 at 6:42pm wrote on Apr 8th, 2009 at 1:55pm:
Thanks for the compliments; WR, You are correct; LBF week of Oct 20th, 2008. "Gorgeous;" I'm kind of slow, and didn't catch on very "rapidly" it took a while for it to "sink-in" ;D Okay; I'm done. :P (Reminds me of a canoe trip with a friend that used puns the entire trip. (We managed not to drown him on the spot!) Yeah, we still would invite him back. starwatcher |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by HoHo on Apr 8th, 2009 at 7:42pm
I was wondering if that was LBF but it didn't quite look right to me. I guess that's the "interesting angle" part. Great picture!
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Wenonah Rider on Apr 9th, 2009 at 1:41am
[quote author=starwatcher link=1237609077/30#36 date=1239216155]
"Gorgeous;" I'm kind of slow, and didn't catch on very "rapidly" it took a while for it to "sink-in" ;D Okay; I'm done. :P (Reminds me of a canoe trip with a friend that used puns the entire trip. (We managed not to drown him on the spot!) Yeah, we still would invite him back. starwatcher [/quote] Starwatcher, I get sick of myself quite often also but I still invite myself back along each trip. Mid-October, I'll bet, was a nice time to be up there. That area is way to popular in the summer but that time of the year is great. It is an area that everyone should get to once. Thanks again for sharing the pic WR |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by starwatcher on Apr 9th, 2009 at 2:11am
WR, you're alright by my standards, puns and all. Summer its popular, but we had it all to ourselves. I'm trying to recall whether we saw anyone else on this trip. Maybe one set, usually we might see someone during our week long trip. Like I say; worst is freezing drizzle, but the best is sunny, 50 degrees, and I love the autumn canoe scene.
starwatcher |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Solus on Apr 9th, 2009 at 3:18am
I saw 2 folks at the campsite by the falls on Oct 22- first humanity in 9 days
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by BrownTrout01 on Apr 9th, 2009 at 4:34am
Ahh, so it is, didn't see it at first. The color of the pine needles? on the ground and the orange in the rock really stands out.
Lots of people camping there for the night in Sept. We had a solo paddler vist our campsite and later we visted his. It was fun talking with him. It was our first quetico trip, and the first time I heard the term 'decompress'. |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by starwatcher on Apr 11th, 2009 at 4:15pm Solus wrote on Apr 9th, 2009 at 3:18am:
We just missed you then, we went out from Mudro thru Lower Basswood Falls on Oct 20th up into Crooked and came back thru LBF on Oct 24th and looped around thru Jackfish Bay (today's photo fighting the wind) and up thru Range. Solus, I really like the photos of your trip on your website: (You need to Login or Register. Those are really spectacular panoramic scenes. :) starwatcher |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Solus on Apr 11th, 2009 at 6:24pm
Thanks Starwatcher: it was a good week to be in the woods. Jackfish rarely gathers the wind in the direction you need to travel. I found a photo of the falls from nearly the same angle from May of 08.
lbasswood08.jpg ( 96 KB | 0
Downloads ) |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Solus on Apr 11th, 2009 at 6:26pm
A better idea of the water volume- I've posted this before.
lowerbasswood_001.jpg ( 65 KB | 0
Downloads ) |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Jim J Solo on Apr 12th, 2009 at 1:55pm
Great pic of the Tamaracks in color. I can see the birches behind them have their leaves down already. So how far behind the birches and red maples do the Tamaracks turn? They usually begin with a lighter golden color??? These might be ready to drop their needles?? When I've gone in early Oct the Tamaracks are still green, but the small red maple bushes and birch are nice. Northern Indiana is just barely in the Tamarack range and where they are it's closed for deer season when they turn.
pre [smiley=dankk2.gif] for info |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by starwatcher on Apr 12th, 2009 at 8:16pm
Thanks Solo, I also love the tamaracks changing to that nice yellow ochre. We went out from Mudro thru Lower Basswood Falls on Oct 20th up into Crooked and came back thru LBF on Oct 24th and looped around thru Jackfish Bay this past season. There were since a few small pockets of birch since changing, but most leaves were down. We normally see birch changing around the first weekend of October. maples start around mid September.
starwatcher |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by starwatcher on Apr 18th, 2009 at 1:59am
Here's a pamarama of the west end of Jackfish Bay, todays' POD.
starwatcher Jackfish_Bay_Crop1_2008_108.jpg ( 59 KB | 0
Downloads ) |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by starwatcher on Apr 18th, 2009 at 2:21am
Here's a zoom lens shot of the west end of Jackfish Bay, todays' POD.
starwatcher Canoe_trip_Crooked_Oct_2008_055b.jpg ( 152 KB | 0
Downloads ) |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by marlin55388 on Apr 18th, 2009 at 2:54am
Beautiful picts! I wonder if the larches are kicked into a color change by a lower temperature than the decidedous trees???? Beautiful nevertheless.
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by wally on Apr 20th, 2009 at 11:13pm
marlin....I've always wonderd about the Tamarak's as well. Some years they come on in color while there's still alittle deciduous color remaining as well....often they seem to turn yellow just after the deciduous drop...and sometimes they seem to hang on into Nov.
This last fall, I noticed a short season for the Larch color, and most were bare Nov 10th. Thought it was a pretty poor intensity of color as well. I love to photograph them. So what prompts them?....same as the other trees....light, temps, and the years water availability? It seems to me that dry years seem to produce a shorter color show....but by my (admittedly poor observational skills)...as much more intense color show. |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by wally on Apr 20th, 2009 at 11:14pm
Todays pic
reminds me of the Sandpit -- Tin Can Mike...in a dry year. |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by starwatcher on Apr 21st, 2009 at 12:44am wally wrote on Apr 20th, 2009 at 11:14pm:
That's it! I noticed Tin Can Mike is named Murphy on my E-15 large scale (c) 1967 Fisher map. There was a moose swimming across it, Tin Can Mike, when we arrived at the end of the portage. So, what is it like in a wet year? starwatcher |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by marlin55388 on Apr 21st, 2009 at 1:21am
MMMM-maybe water levels buffer temperature for the Larchs-wet year color is later, dry year color is earlier....not that it makes much difference theyre still wonderbar. Grow them at home-not the same though. Always make a point of hitting the local spots in the fall to take a gander-try to pick the dreariest day i can.....Love them!
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Riversend on Apr 21st, 2009 at 1:29am
marlin: I transplanted several tamaracks to some wet areas in my yard about 20 years ago, now their about 20' tall and starting to really take off....shure glad I did that, when that golden glow is highlited by autums setting sun rays.....ooooooo..ahhhhh..oh yea..baby, baby//// ;D
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Spartan2 on Apr 21st, 2009 at 10:23am
Karl-Starwatcher,
Your autumn photography has been stunning! Thanks! I am enjoying every shot. |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by wally on Apr 21st, 2009 at 1:14pm
Starwatcher...the "average year" sees most of that end of the portage under water. Don't have pics...but the reason that "planking" is there is because the water is usally somewhere between ankles and mid leg.....if you manage to stay on the planking. Problem is...it floats as well. I've seen more grouse concentrated there (the sandpit end)....in the BWCA, than anywhere else.
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by starwatcher on Apr 21st, 2009 at 3:27pm
Wally, I understand. I haven't been out this route for a while.
Spartan2 wrote on Apr 21st, 2009 at 10:23am:
Thanks Lynda, coming from the pro I really feel honored. starwatcher |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Solus on Apr 21st, 2009 at 4:17pm
I think they may have modified the planking. I went through there early last May with exceptionally high water levels and the planking was pretty dry.
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by marlin55388 on Apr 21st, 2009 at 6:36pm
Riversend....oooo....ahhhh......lighting is the bomb isn't it.....try with grasses/willows-pussy and such. ;)
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by El_Tigre on Apr 22nd, 2009 at 6:53pm
BAD
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by starwatcher on Apr 23rd, 2009 at 9:51am
Attitude
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Mk631 on Apr 23rd, 2009 at 12:43pm
This has been a very nice set indeed. Thanks for the pics!
-Tom |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Jimbo on Apr 23rd, 2009 at 4:37pm starwatcher wrote on Apr 23rd, 2009 at 9:51am:
SW, Small farts (meow!) are soon overwhelmed by prevailing breezes. Good pics! Jimbo 8-) |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by El_Tigre on Apr 23rd, 2009 at 5:57pm
You had some good pics going until the leaves
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by solotripper on Apr 23rd, 2009 at 6:37pm
db,
Is there ANY way you could run a series of El_Tigre's POD"s ? I think if he wants to be a critic, he should be able too take what he dish's out! Better yet, how about a Mexican Death Match between the "UNMASKED" wrestler in Jimbo's Jimboree pic and the Tigre ? Loser shuts up for good about the PODS ;) |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Spartan2 on Apr 23rd, 2009 at 6:54pm
We all have our opinions about the POD's. Sometimes we express them, and sometimes we don't. I guess we could say sometimes we sound off and sometimes we shut up. ;D
El_Tigre is entitled to his opinions, but I agree that I would enjoy seeing some of his photos as POD's, and identified as his, since he seems to consider himself quite an expert, and he has said in the past that he has submitted photos that were used as POD's. Since we don't know his name, I can only assume that we have seen them and not realized who El_Tigre was. I suspect that I would enjoy his photography, and we all know that they would be robust northwoods scenes--none of that itty-bitty nature stuff! ;) The interesting thing for me about Starwatcher/Karl's recent series of photos is that it has gone from the large--gorgeous landscapes and water scenes, portage scenes in October, color shots--to the small--a single leaf highlighted against a background of the fall brown. It takes a certain amount of artistry to see all of that, not just the overall picture, but the pieces that make up the puzzle as well. And photographing all of it well is also a challenge. I have already congratulated Karl on this series of photos. I especially liked the waterfall perspective with the rocks in the foreground, and a couple of the color shots, but I also thought the red leaf was beautiful. Keep 'em coming, db! [smiley=dankk2.gif] |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Jim J Solo on Apr 23rd, 2009 at 8:22pm
I think I did see a tiger shot in POD resently. It was nice. Sunset, lake, and shoreline shot. I even might have commented. (It was nice too, just checked.)
But really, why the negative and closed mind. Nothing wrong with the shots he's complaining about IMHO. I guess he's intitled to his own opinion. I'm just hoping tiger can expand his appreciation of simpler motifs. Here's a concept for the artist. Still life; orange trowel, white paper on roll, cat ;D Let him search for meaning. No help please. 8-) Actually the maple leaf raises a question I have about the maple trees in the Q. Mostly they seem more like bushes than trees. Is it just the limit of their range or are they different? I've seen very few at even a modest height. |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Spartan2 on Apr 23rd, 2009 at 9:08pm
No, Jim J, that was LeTigre, not El_Tigre. Two different persons. And it was a nice photo. That tiger has had several nice POD's.
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by prouboy on Apr 24th, 2009 at 2:13am
We all react to the PODs -- some we like and some we don't like.
Fortunately, most of us control ourselves, and compliment when we see something nice and keep SILENT when we see a pic that doesn't impress us. We try not to be judgmental, because we understand beauty and art is personal, and who are we to judge? This approach is based on humility and maturity, among other things. El_Tigre: I would tell you to grow up, but I'm not sure you get it. I'm irritated for responding to this. It's exactly what the little person wants -- attention. I suggest we ignore future stupid comments when they occur again, as they inevitably will. Sad. Pathetic. Ridiculous. prouboy |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by starwatcher on Apr 24th, 2009 at 2:46am
I am an engineer and not a photographer or artist, but I have been accepted into juried art shows, sold paintings and have won awards. I have received awards on another canoeing website for my photography. Never the less; I’m purely an amateur. You can ask db and he will verify that he has not paid me for any of my entries. In fact, I have donated money to this site; along with many other members. I submit my photos as a token to assist the continuation of the site. If db can sell a card to continue this site, that is my cheerful, token donation. Last years photos ran the stretch from most of the month of August (You need to Login or Register. Some may like them, some may not; db is the first line of defense whether my photos are good enough to post and has the choice whether my photos are acceptable.
Canoe country is rocks, water, wildlife, sky and trees. There are many entries on this site of photos of various themes; I like all scenery shots to micro shots from fungi, lichen, leaves, bugs and flowers. I admire wildlife photos which I’m not capable of taking. But that’s my preferences; I like most entries but not everyone. If I want to encourage the person; typically the ones I like I will compliment the artist. The few I’m not fond of I’ll bite my tongue; a drop of honey catches more flies than a gallon of gall. I view the people on this website like I view a canoe trip. The rules are that everyone needs to chip in and give 100% (money, time, or effort); and do their best. We invite people on our canoe trips of all ages (12 to +70) from all walks of life to share the adventure; no experience necessary. Last trip we had two teenagers, a couple of college age kids and several adults. Whining and complaining is not allowed on our canoe trips, and those that do are not invited back. starwatcher |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by marlin55388 on Apr 24th, 2009 at 11:49am
Quote from jimjsolo:
Actually the maple leaf raises a question I have about the maple trees in the Q. Mostly they seem more like bushes than trees. Is it just the limit of their range or are they different? I've seen very few at even a modest height. Been to woodland caribou but not the quetico....the pict is definitely Acer rubrum....red maple....is at northern end of range there is also Acer spicatum-mountain maple-similar leaf -if I had a scanner I would plagerize and send copy of leaves from Dirr's Woody Plant manual. Google. Both are going to be smaller statued trees unlesss they are in a very happy spot....Mountain maple I have expereinced on the north shoreof lake superior is typically growing in a clump of sorts like Amur Maple,, Acer ginnala- a non native asian landscape plant, and is considered more of a sub tree or understory tree. Red Maple is a a very popular ;D shade tree in the US due to the fall color , like in starwatchers pict everyone digs red. Personally I have yet to see a high quality selection of red maple but that is another topic...I believe the are better left to the north woods than the city, I have to admitt been enjoying the beautiful flowers again this spring-for that is how the tree,I believe, got its name-Acer rubrum.....red maple. They also prefer lower areas as the like water-very closely allied to silver maple-Acer saccharinum-which is the common riparian tree-there are actually hybrids between the two...the grex is known as Acer freemanii.....So that is the scoop.....northern edge of range, dry conditions .....a young stresssed out tree that is also most likily why stargazer got that shot of the amazingly saturated fall colored leaf.....right place right time! Good shots stargazer ;) |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Jim J Solo on Apr 24th, 2009 at 8:35pm
S_2, Thanks for setting me straight.
Marlin, Thanks for the maple info. Here's one about as big as I've found. Straight across from the portage landing on BH for BH/Q. QueticoOct2007_092_resize.jpg ( 40 KB | 0
Downloads ) |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by starwatcher on Apr 25th, 2009 at 3:12am
Thanks for the maple information marlin! Very informative. The red maples really stand out during late September when they are the first to turn color. I think I found the last remaining leaves on our late October trip.
I always liked the small-sized Moose or Mountain Maple from the BWCA and really like the bright orange color they turn in the Fall. We also saw them in the mountains of Virginia where we lived out East. I was wondering about the difference between the Red Maple and the Sugar Maple (acer saccharum) that's the emblem on the Canadian flag, that has a similar range up through the area and I'm curious about the variety the Ojibwa in MN depended on the sap for maple syrup. I know that in Duluth and the up farther north along the Laurention Divide Ridge we get spectular red colors in the fall. I assume red maple, or maybe both, but I'm not sure. Any thoughts? May be I need to start a new thread. starwatcher |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by thebutcher on Apr 25th, 2009 at 3:34am
absolutely beautiful photos starwather! please keep them coming. you have a way of making my day with your submissions.
marlin##### as a botanist I appreciate your descriptions of what we are viewing. Dirr, although quite the character in person, does have the "bible" of references in the woody plants manual. One thing I would disagree with you on though is the lack of quality rubrum selections. I believe there are quite a few - especially burgundy belle, A. rubrum 'magnificent magenta' is quite nice in my opinion. are you familiar with that one? thebutcher |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by marlin55388 on Apr 25th, 2009 at 4:23am
solo quote:Marlin, Thanks for the maple info. Here's one about as big as I've found. Straight across from the portage landing on BH for BH/Q.
Looks like a rubrum to me. I have seen them just a bit bigger in the BW, at least in the area that i have been and they are really show stoppers in the fall. For years I have been meaning to catch the early show of flowers as i think that that is more impressive. They are flowering now in the metro are of Mpls. |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by marlin55388 on Apr 25th, 2009 at 4:41am
Quote from Starwatcher:I was wondering about the difference between the Red Maple and the Sugar Maple (acer saccharum) that's the emblem on the Canadian flag, that has a similar range up through the area and I'm curious about the variety the Ojibwa in MN depended on the sap for maple syrup. I know that in Duluth and the up farther north along the Laurention Divide Ridge we get spectular red colors in the fall. I assume red maple, or maybe both, but I'm not sure. Any thoughts? May be I need to start a new thread.
Big differences between red and sugar....srongly recommend Dirr's woody plant manual....very informative ;)Sugar maple is the one that i am aware of that suits itsself to the sugar shack-I have seen people tap silvers also....dont know about red maple however. The one thing that I have always found curious is that it is not just the sugar in maple syrup or maple sugar that makes it an interesting taste it is also has a substantial salt content....K/ potassium.....My adviser told me on numerous ocassions that the indigeous people pioneered the sweet salty thing....he was also of that genetic make-up.....The other thing that you might find an interesting read in Dirr's manual of woody plants is a reference to black maple-what some believe is a population of sugar maple existing in the north country-the book is in most decent book stores and i would say you could probable find it in any reasonable library. I totally understand the fall color thing check out the temperance drainage up on sawbill trail in mid sept...know those are sugars for sure......note the red oaks in tetteguche too....northern most range....great place for warblers in the spring. Topic....then you'll really get me writting ;) Oh yeah there is every and american elm in the woodland! Seen it myself! And there are ginormous yellow birch on Isle Royale! Oh no I must stop ;D |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by marlin55388 on Apr 25th, 2009 at 5:16am
thebutcher quote:as a botanist I appreciate your descriptions of what we are viewing. Dirr, although quite the character in person, does have the "bible" of references in the woody plants manual. One thing I would disagree with you on though is the lack of quality rubrum selections. I believe there are quite a few - especially burgundy belle, A. rubrum 'magnificent magenta' is quite nice in my opinion. are you familiar with that one?
Dirr is a character, a well connected one at that ;) Many many years with plants....woodies....a child of Raulston to whom we own tons...the same does to Dirr especially if you are of the southern type. Disagreement is healthy and good. I say let them prove themselves. I have seen Northwoods come and go, October glory come and go, Autumn Blaze is junk....all in search of the fall color....what about heat tolerance, branching angle, sun scauld, leaf spot.....? I watch and I observe the plant material....check out the display gardens year after year and for God's sake dont trust everything that a salesman tells yah they're salesman and time will always tell the truth that is what I think, or what i have learned....think about the flower carpet rose series....trash think about about the new scandinavian rhodes...trash......I can go on and on....well maybe trash is a little harsh and I should really give credit where credit is due....as humans we all want...usually what we have not got and G. Jekyll said something to the effect always place the right plant for the spot...dont make the spot suit the plant....how many of us have the spot in our backyards for a red maple----I do love them so thou especially in the canoe country. Alemanchier, Carpinus caroliana-been selecting the reds out in the fall every chance I get-might be container culture :-?, Quercus alba or rubra(beware of oak wilt :-/), or Acer saccharum if you are confident with the genetics and the verticillium factor are safer bets I think. But i have been watching the cultivars that you spoke off in the trials, and my verdict is still in process :-?. The breeders tried sorting out the heat and soils thing with the fremanii grex...again hit or miss I will let you be the judge. I know we will get to the spot someday with the reds but what will it be an emerald ash bore equivalent, or a new race of verticillium, or maybe a vascular disease like phloem necrosis/dutch elm disease in elm, or even something like chestnut blight ...ponder just how long the oaks, sugar maples, and basswood have been here in there upland environment.....I think that is just another thing, a pretty thing, that makes the canoe country an amazing place....the more one looks the more amazing it becomes and I know i am very lucky to be able to experience and soak up the things there that only can trully exist there. Its kinda like planting a black ash in a boulevard.....just cant quite get my mind around it....maybe its just me ;) |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Jim J Solo on Apr 25th, 2009 at 1:20pm
Seems the west side of Q and BH in particular has a lot of maples. Here's another almost next to the other shot at BH/Q portage.
QueticoOct2007_089_resize.jpg ( 55 KB | 0
Downloads ) |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by starwatcher on Apr 25th, 2009 at 1:26pm
Thanks for the Maple info. I hadn't paid much attention until now, but the maple leaves in my POD
(You need to Login or Register is from the same campsite on Thursday Bay and obviously a different variety of Maple. Silver? The reference I really enjoy is John Eastman, Forest and Thicket, because he decribes all the lore associated with the plants. starwatcher |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Riversend on Apr 25th, 2009 at 1:42pm
Starwatcher: beautiful :) I'll take an 8X10 glossey ...pretty please 8-)
I was one having fun I met you then there were two we said ,,I :-* do forever more now we're four ;D forevermore |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by starwatcher on Apr 25th, 2009 at 2:02pm
Riversend,
Thanks, I'm not sure what your poem is about, but If you're sincere you are welcome to have a print., or you can go to the POD and have db send you a card with your poem attached. starwatcher |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by PhantomJug on Apr 25th, 2009 at 2:31pm
Lerome put-in?
I don't have a poem though. Riversend scares me. |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by starwatcher on Apr 25th, 2009 at 3:02pm
Phantom Jug,
It's the campsite on the island point on the north side of Jackfish Bay; the opposite direction of the previous day's POD that was looking down the Bay. I guess he must be refering to the four canoes. I hope he understands that they're a cross breed between Grumman and Alumicraft. starwatcher |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by marlin55388 on Apr 25th, 2009 at 5:10pm
Starwatcher-its a red maple also...both the tree and the leaf photo, think diversity not all of us have the same lobes and points right....same color and such....that is why i get to have some of the fun I do. ;) Riversend thanks great poem :)
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Riversend on Apr 26th, 2009 at 2:21am
starwatcher, yep I'll take one if O.K by you...poem was a spontanious little ditty dedicated to my wife that I'll put alongside the photo mat..I will hang the photo where it can be admired by others that will say...oohh, ahhh when they see it too, and yes the 2 types of canoe is obvious and stands out to my eyes..
pj:scary.. :question...you aint seen nuttin yet sugar |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by starwatcher on Apr 26th, 2009 at 2:45am
Okay Riversend,
Send me a PM and I'll forward a larger version of the photo to your e-mail. Nice poem; I'm glad it was decidated to your wife and not me. ;D starwatcher |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by solotripper on May 2nd, 2009 at 4:10pm
That water looks COLD Rick ;D
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by flpaddler on May 2nd, 2009 at 6:17pm
It did keep the platy's cold. ;)
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by solotripper on May 8th, 2009 at 7:37pm
Regarding todays POD.
I "thought" only the Native Peoples could have live wells in the Q :question I searched the MNR regs, and all I could find was that the live wells had to be marked with a name and address and that contents of well, were part of the your daily limit. Obviously nobody is putting their name on a rock fish well in the Q. I could of sworn that was discussed here before, but didn't find in a search. |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by ToothFairy on May 8th, 2009 at 10:02pm
Very interesting, never thought I would have to leave a name at a live well in the Q (if you leave camp?). What if you don't leave camp? They are all over the place and we seldom use them but we were base camping on Pooh Bah and kept the fish alive and cold until we were ready to eat. I'll have to read the regs again....Seems like overkill...
Kim :D |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by solotripper on May 8th, 2009 at 10:56pm
All I could find in the regs, under storing and transporting fish, seemed to be in reference to fish holding structures made with man-made materials. That's were the name and address thing comes into play.
I've seen plenty of rock fish wells, but I thought "we" had a conversation about them, and I'm thinking the thought they were "illegal" had to do with fish mortality rates from predators or fish that get out but have been affected by heat or possibly low oxygen rates? It might just be faulty memory on my part :-/ |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by old_salt on May 9th, 2009 at 3:41am
Since they were only keeping baitfish, there is no need for name/address.
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by db on May 9th, 2009 at 7:05am
I believe we've discussed fish pens before but I don't remember anyone saying they were any legal issues involved. If there were I'd bet they'd have more to do with baitfish than someone's breakfast/brunch/linner/lupper.
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by solotripper on May 9th, 2009 at 5:26pm
db, I guess we need to determine whether THEY were eating fish as TF stated, and YOU and I believed, or BAIT-FISH as OS says ;)
One man's "eater" is another man's BAIT ;D |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Akula on May 9th, 2009 at 9:50pm
Excellent POD today. I can almost feel the cold, clear water on my feet... I wonder what kind of fish is on?
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by ToothFairy on May 9th, 2009 at 9:59pm
WE were eating the fish, they were all 14-16 inch fish which we consider the best size to eat for walleyes. If the fish looks smaller to some people, look again. Pictures distort the true image. Is this the problem for someone??? We have friends that keep 12 inch walleyes and eat them, we think that is too small. They were not bait fish as OS suggests. Have a good day.
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by ToothFairy on May 9th, 2009 at 10:03pm
Akula-- to answer your question--walleye. We stood in that spot and caught some nice eaters in the early morning. Pooh Bah is an extraordinary lake. Have you ever been there?
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Kingfisher on May 9th, 2009 at 10:17pm
I think it's a great idea to eat 14" walleyes and smaller is ok too. Old Salt thinks so too, he's just being Old Salt.
As far as the legality of a rock construction live well, I don't know. As far as conforming to the intent of the rules however there is really no difference between putting your fish in the well vs. putting them on a stringer. Bear in mind that they do become part of your possession limit the moment they go on a stringer or into a live well...even if they are eventually released. |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by ToothFairy on May 10th, 2009 at 3:53am
Oh yes, we know that. we only had 8 fish in the well, our conservation limit for the day. We didn't eat 8 fish a day though. I understand the limits very well. Kim
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Spartan2 on May 10th, 2009 at 10:56am
Great photo today, Kim! :)
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by ToothFairy on May 10th, 2009 at 12:56pm
Thanks, I love to use black and white film. Kim
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by starwatcher on May 10th, 2009 at 6:07pm
I agree, nice photo today. I like the range of tones in the B&W picture. It seems different from the old time B&W that appear to have harsher contrast; but maybe it's just takes a good photographer w good equipment.
starwatcher |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Mk631 on May 11th, 2009 at 1:09pm
Gotta love that pic today -- The white pants are particularly good for showing how deep the mud is! :)
-Tom |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Yellowbird on May 13th, 2009 at 12:46pm
"First walleye in the Quetico"
That's a memorable occasion to be sure. Mine came on Jesse, about 50 yards off the portage after putting in, (traveling from Maria). Eater sized, it took a floating Rapala. 2004 trip with my then teenaged son. -YB |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by starwatcher on May 17th, 2009 at 7:41pm
The blueberries and raspberries hit home today. I just bought six blueberry bushes and two raspberry bushes and I'm planting them today. I'll hope to have a bumper crop in a few years, or the other outcome is that somebody has to feed the deer in my yard. :) Hopefully the former version.
starwatcher |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by ToothFairy on May 18th, 2009 at 2:46am
We found these on Kahshahpiwi, in the burned area on the east side. With all the areas that have burned the last few years, raspberries and blueberries should be on our radar. good luck with your plants. Kim
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by marlin55388 on May 19th, 2009 at 12:51am
MMMMMMMMMMMM :PYummy in my tummy.....put them in yellow and chocolate cakes too....go real good with the lakers and sweet potato....mmmmm cant wait ;D......Starwatcher beware of the bunnies with the Bberries they luv to browse in winter.....one of their favorite foods....cage them in winter ;) Plant with wood ash and peatmoss too-the berries will be numerous and large ;)
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by starwatcher on May 19th, 2009 at 1:25pm
Yes, thanks marlin; I got the peatmoss and mulch w pine needles for added pH. Same for the raspberries, but I wonder if that might be to acidic for them? I don't know if I'll be able to cage the bunnies........ ::)
starwatcher |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by marlin55388 on May 19th, 2009 at 2:44pm
Hey Starwatcher....not sure about the specifics for razzleberries....@ folks the pH is high...so I guess since I really never saw any severe issues there I would belay to that and what I have seen in the woods....pH @ folks is/was in the high 7's....up there I would think that you should be below 7...and in the woods I most commonly see them associated with deciduous hardwoods and that reinforces my feelings regarding a sweeter(higher pH) soil.....the most important thing that I recall in regard to the raspberries is that one should avoid dryness at fruit set and there after...during production times-a thick later on compost/leaf mold would be of assistant and putting the fertilizer under this compost would lock the phosphates down where they need to be, and pruning them properly.....and burying the summer canes over winter to get good production on the first fruit set....but I grew up with day length specific berries not day neutral like Heritage is.....fertilize w/ 10-10-10...5/10/5... they are heavy feeders. the varieties that I grew up with were Latham and September Red. The pH can be dropped with lime, gypsum(pellitized), and maple/birch compost...mom made this wonderous raspberry sauce with the fall berries(they are much bigger and taster IMHO)-process is similar to processing tomatoes in glass mason jars.....it was holiday fare on homemade vanilla ice cream or frozen custard....very good stuff and I cant forget the raspberry red currant jelly...MMMMMMMM YUM ;)
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by marlin55388 on May 19th, 2009 at 2:46pm
Nice trout KIM!
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by starwatcher on May 19th, 2009 at 3:24pm
Thanks for the info on raspberries marlin.
starwatcher |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by marlin55388 on May 20th, 2009 at 5:23am
My pleasure :)
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by marlin55388 on May 20th, 2009 at 11:57am
Where is Shade Lake?
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Mk631 on May 20th, 2009 at 5:48pm
Beauty of a shot!
PS: Shade is West of Agnes & Noon, east of Dell, North of North Bay (Basswood) |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by prouboy on May 21st, 2009 at 4:40am
Check out the "tackle box" POD pic today, and you'll understand why I'm trying pipe insulation on my thwarts to hold lures....
Untangling this mess kept my dear daughter busy while I cooked her up a nice shore lunch! prouboy |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by marlin55388 on May 21st, 2009 at 11:53am
Holy school of rapalas! :o I have been messing with twist ties, twist tying the trebles to one anouther when in the tackle box-got a lure that can this way this winter.....I am sitting here wondering.....how in the heck could I ever use all those lurers? :-?
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Mk631 on May 21st, 2009 at 12:15pm
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by solotripper on May 21st, 2009 at 3:50pm
2 words for you, Hook Bonnets ;)
While the foam insulation is nice when your switching a lot of lures back and forth, the hook bonnets are the best for storage or even when your switching a few lures. I just put the extra lures in my shirt pockets or on the floor of canoe under the seat. The bonnets will keep the lures from tangling and are easy on and off. Cabelas sells them by size, and in a mixed bag, which I recommend. |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Yellowbird on May 21st, 2009 at 4:10pm
Prouboy,
Be sure to put a good swivel ahead of that bait. -YB |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by starwatcher on May 22nd, 2009 at 2:20am
I'll quote Patrick McManus, "The Fishing Lesson,"... Finley wanted to keep all his lures arranged in neat little piles arranged according to function , size, color, etc.
"With my lures, I just keep them all dumped together down in the bottom of the box. Then all I got to do is grab one of them and they all come out in a big clump. I just turn the big clump around till I find something that looks good and plunk it off. You're gonna waste a lotta time pokin' around through all them compartments." starwatcher |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by starwatcher on May 25th, 2009 at 12:59am
Nice phote prouboy!
I assume that's a De Havilland Beaver (You need to Login or Register Is that a telephoto shot, or are you water skiing? :) Attached is my version of the De Havilland Beaver that landed on Tanner Lake on our previous trip up the Maligne River in the Quetico. starwatcher 10-18-2007-08small.jpg ( 47 KB | 0
Downloads ) |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by prouboy on May 25th, 2009 at 2:52am
Thanks Starwatcher...
I took that picture while sitting in a canoe, watching as the Beaver landed to pick us up, after 9 days in Woodland Caribou Park. The water was as calm as glass. We were excited to see the plane at the end of a fantastic trip. I used my trusty Olympus 770SW to take the shot. It has a small telephoto, but not much. It has great optics, and is as sturdy as it gets. prouboy |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Spartan2 on May 27th, 2009 at 10:57am
Aaaaahh! Beautiful. It's a foggy morning here in Michigan, too, but it isn't nearly that pretty where I am. No sun to light up the mist. And no lake. Sigh.
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Snow_Dog on May 27th, 2009 at 11:19am
Now if only you could have hear the loon serenade that was going on at the time that pic was snapped...
Without a doubt, that was one of the best mornings I ever spent in the park. I often use this pic as wallpaper on my PC at work and it takes me back to that trip every time. |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Spartan2 on May 27th, 2009 at 11:27am
I suppose that is one of the best things about the photography for me, Snow_Dog. There are so many shots that can take me back to a place and time. And now that you have shared that, I can almost hear the loons, myself. :)
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Mk631 on May 29th, 2009 at 12:22pm
Trees and water to the right! Water & trees to the left! The shoreline all looks the same!
Great shot & caption ;D |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by PhantomJug on May 29th, 2009 at 1:33pm
Purple shorts? Pink Polo? Who you camping with prouty?
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Mk631 on May 29th, 2009 at 2:14pm PhantomJug wrote on May 29th, 2009 at 1:33pm:
Short shorts too... Then again, it's good the shot isn't of someone wearing a kilt ;) |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by solotripper on May 29th, 2009 at 6:27pm
Seasoned paddlers prefer the word "confused" too "lost" ;)
I've been confused for hours at a time but never "lost"! |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by prouboy on May 30th, 2009 at 12:41am PhantomJug wrote on May 29th, 2009 at 1:33pm:
That's my 6'6" 250# brother-in-law! A guy his size doesn't need to worry about pink polo shirts or little purple shorty-shorts....who would make fun of him, and risk pissing him off? Not me!! Oh yeah, little scrawny me portaged the canoe the entire trip... >:( prouboy |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by PhantomJug on May 30th, 2009 at 1:44pm
Yeah, well it's still a "wardrobe malfunction" 6'6" or not. ;D
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by solotripper on May 30th, 2009 at 4:37pm Puckster wrote on May 30th, 2009 at 12:41am:
WHAT does THAT tell you ;D |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Snow_Dog on May 30th, 2009 at 4:52pm
It tells me that Mike got the full wilderness experience while his brother-in-law did not. You only cheat yourself when you duck out of any part of a trip...
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by solotripper on May 30th, 2009 at 8:12pm Snow_Dog wrote on May 30th, 2009 at 4:52pm:
It tells me that SIZE doesn't always equate toughness ;) |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Akula on May 31st, 2009 at 6:43pm
Funny, I had visions of a younger John Belushi at first glance. John Belushi in a canoe in the wilderness, trying to read a map...now THAT'S comedy.
I REALLY like today's POD of the Ladyboot Bay twilight. The moon, the still water, everything adds to the feeling of serenity. I can almost hear the loons across the water, and the crackle of a campfire in the background... nice shot, Mike. Thanks for sharing. |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Jim J Solo on Jun 1st, 2009 at 12:12am |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Akula on Jun 1st, 2009 at 5:09am
[quote author=Jim J Solo link=1237609077/130#136 date=1243815121]Looking at the old pics, the plane looks like an old Norseman. They were pre-war fabric covered, post-war they were aluminum skinned (from what I heard). You had a rare ride. In the body you can see where the fabric was stretched over the frame ribs.
(You need to Login or Register Looks like you're right. The tail, "stretch marks," and the humpback/ cargo door are right on with the photo in the link you posted. Another fun fact: Rusty Meyer's Flying Service, operating on Rainy Lake in Fort Frances, ON has the oldest DeHavilland Beaver still in operation anywhere in the world. Their Beaver has the serial number three. (You need to Login or Register |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Riversend on Jun 1st, 2009 at 11:19am
Akula: thanks for the info and photo on Rustys Beaver :exclamation
and [smiley=dankk2.gif] for the link to trip report and photos of the Slipery trip......I really enjoyed that :) [smiley=thumbup.gif] |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Mk631 on Jun 1st, 2009 at 3:06pm
The last couple of POD's are just beautiful! :)
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by old_salt on Jun 1st, 2009 at 6:57pm
Nice pic Dan! Would love to get back there!
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Walking School Bus on Jun 2nd, 2009 at 12:18am
I don't understand where these pictures/images are. What do I click on to bring them up? :-/
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Snow_Dog on Jun 2nd, 2009 at 12:49am wrote on Jun 2nd, 2009 at 12:18am:
Up at the top of the forum's main page you see this: Canoe Camping in the Boundary Waters & Quetico Park Site Map | POD | Council Fire | Old Forum Search | Inukshuk Photo Gallery Just click on "POD" which is the link which takes you to the picture of the day. The POD has back-arrows which allow you to see previous pictures of the day. |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Snow_Dog on Jun 2nd, 2009 at 11:32am
Did today's photo make you cringe, db? ;D
Just to clarify, this was a "posed" shot. I liked the way the trees framed the lake so I decided to insert the canoe. Then I decided the canoe just looked all wrong unloaded, so the pack went in. After the shot, I unloaded and moved the canoe into the water to reload... I do abuse my canoe, but not nearly to that extent! |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by PhantomJug on Jun 2nd, 2009 at 1:36pm
O_S's hat is a really nice touch too. ;D
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by db on Jun 2nd, 2009 at 2:24pm Snow_Dog wrote on Jun 2nd, 2009 at 11:32am:
;DAhhh, you know me too well. Abuse! Abuse I tell ya... I tried not to look too hard. Packs that high only make me chuckle though. From a photographic standpoint, making it an action shot with someone struggling to drag it into the water would have been a nice touch. ;) |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by solotripper on Jun 2nd, 2009 at 4:10pm
The "high" pack and the Kevlar on the rocks loaded, made me a little bit suspicious considering who posted the POD ;)
I KNOW he was taught better than that! |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Spartan2 on Jun 6th, 2009 at 11:44am
Amazing photo, Dan! [smiley=dankk2.gif]
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by thebutcher on Jun 6th, 2009 at 1:01pm
are we looking at a golden or an immature? beautiful picture.
thebutcher |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Snow_Dog on Jun 6th, 2009 at 4:18pm
That one is an immature eagle. We saw this eagle and one of it's parents feeding on "something" on the bank of Cutty Creek. That "something" turned out to be the remains of a huge snapping turtle.
Mama (or Dad) flew off pretty quickly but "junior" hung around quite awhile while we snapped pics and shot video. This was by far the closest I've been to an eagle for longer than about 5 seconds. We spent a good 10-15 minutes practically right underneath him. We even tried to get him to fly off for some good video by splashing, waving paddles, and shouting. He was quite unconcerned by it all. |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by solotripper on Jun 6th, 2009 at 4:30pm
I bet "Mama" was eyeballing you for the "entrée" after the snapper " appetizer" ;)
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Akula on Jun 7th, 2009 at 7:23am
LOVING today's pod. Thanks for sharing, Dan W...
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by wally on Jun 7th, 2009 at 6:08pm
indeed, it's gorgeous!
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by HoHo on Jun 7th, 2009 at 6:37pm
I'm enjoying all the pics from Dan's trip last summer. Thanks!
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Yellowbird on Jun 11th, 2009 at 2:31pm
Todays POD - Hummingbird Rapids
A.) "Yup, I'd build my cabin right over there" B.) "Dang! WHY did I leave that extra fishing rod in the truck?" C.) "Is today Tuesday or Thursday?" D.) "I wonder if my coworkers have finalized the inventory audits" E.) "I wish Snowdog would put down that camera and get up here with the lunch pack" -YB |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Snow_Dog on Jun 11th, 2009 at 4:13pm
C or E are probably good guesses, though I'd also throw in:
F.) Nothing at all, just letting the river refresh the spirit. |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Arrowhead Paddler on Jun 11th, 2009 at 4:27pm
Where are hummingbird rapids? The Maligne?
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Snow_Dog on Jun 11th, 2009 at 4:31pm
Correct. They are below Sturgeon.
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by starwatcher on Jun 13th, 2009 at 4:09pm
db, Your campfire site is way neater than ours. I don't think I could take a picture of our war zone campsite without a major housekeeping effort. I guess that's one difference between solo vs a group of eight.
starwatcher |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by db on Jun 14th, 2009 at 7:49am starwatcher wrote on Jun 13th, 2009 at 4:09pm:
Funny you should say that. I had to look to see if I labeled it 'messy camp' or something of that nature since that's what crossed my mind the most. The nice thing about solo is you can spread your junk out w/o bugging anyone. Take all the one person's junk in that shot, multiply by 8 ... add some wet socks ... ;D ... such is life. |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by starwatcher on Jun 14th, 2009 at 2:40pm
Wow!! neat photo today db!! Not only is your campsite neater, but your canoe trips have better scenery. The grass is always greener ;)
starwatcher |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by solotripper on Jun 14th, 2009 at 7:42pm
I like the morning mist, best time too paddle IMHO
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Akula on Jun 15th, 2009 at 12:26am
Agreed. Fantastic POD today, nice work.
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Mk631 on Jun 15th, 2009 at 5:41pm
Beautiful beautiful shot - thanks db.
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Spartan2 on Jun 16th, 2009 at 10:27am
Great photo, db! I have been trying for a shot like that for a lifetime!
|
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by db on Jun 17th, 2009 at 6:24am
;D Me too! Wish I could tell you my secret but it was pure luck. I just saw him speeding up and hit it. While I often curse auto focus, I guess that little lag helped. The highlights are burnt out though. I smell re-shoot!
Someone asked so: 1/20th sec. |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by Spartan2 on Jun 17th, 2009 at 10:22am
:questionSo. . . .do you have a photo of a fish jumping, too? I have wasted many a morning trying for one of those and only have a couple of 'way to late splashes. (nothing like your nice splash!)
And I don't think burnt highlights in a splash are too serious. Not to me anyway. But if you want to re-shoot, have fun! ;D |
|
Title: Re: POD (cont. 10) Post by solotripper on Jun 18th, 2009 at 3:42pm
Very nice db ;D
|
|
QuietJourney Forums » Powered by YaBB 2.6.0! YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2026. All Rights Reserved. |