George, challenge and speculation has been the foundation of a great many new discoveries, as well as provided different interpretations of previously accepted norms. As was said earlier, we may never know the reason those fish are in there, unless someone steps up and announces "I did it". Until that day however, speculation is all we have.

And while I intend no harmful inference to Overton's, or anyone else for that matter, I still believe the possibility exists...highly unlikely and improbable, but certainly not impossible.

Keeping it quiet for fear of upsetting someone is fine, but if it were me, I would want to know how those fish got there, and would leave no stone unturned in my efforts to find out....if I didn't, who's to say that the next bucket might contain Crappie, or bullheads, or those funny sunfish with the large gape?

It's true that I tend to get stuck on a subject... I struggle with that. But leaving things unknown, in this case anyway, just carries too much risk in my opinion. Good ole' boy syndrome or not, I still think every option should be examined, BEFORE being dismissed. I don't think Overton's is at fault, and I'm certainly not saying otherwise here on the forum.

All possibilities. That's what I'm getting at.


"Forget pounds and ounces, I'm figuring displacement!"

If we accept that: MBG(+)FGSF(=)HBG(F1)
And we surmise that: BG(>)HBG(F1) while GSF(<)HBG(F1)
Would it hold true that: HBG(F1)(+)AM500(x)q.d.(=)1.5lbGRWT?
PB answer: It depends.