Oh boy! here we go. We haven't had a good war in...what...3 weeks?

Paul...you wanna piece a me?

-spence

What's wrong with you people?

:wall:

enough with the insults and personal stuff Steve, I know someone assumed something, but you don't need to escalate things.
It is not making you look good and the board doesn't need that kind of crap. Debate the subject without name calling please.

Me and you Spence, 3:00. behind the swingset.:heybaby: :laughs:

It's on...I'll be the one in the linen leisure suit and karate loafers.

U a ded man.

-spence

The scary part of this is that you'd be wearing that anyways..


I have kept out of this thread because I have mixed feelings... I usually activly fish the spring and fall surf tourny's here in RI and have the last 5-6 years... I am in several fishing clubs where we weigh in fish for a yearlong tourney... so it is a bit contradictory that I should be against this tourney, but I have some serious reservations...
I would like to see some changes...
-Bigger minimum size.. 40" or maybe 43 or 45"
-Limit each angler to 2 or 3 fish for the entire tourney...
-Make penalty points for bringing in undersized fish.. penalize the club and the individual for this...
-No culling

I havent entered the Swamp Yankee for the same reason.. a weekly weigh in adds up to more fish than the normal angler would kill. I'm not anti-kill over a 6 or 7 month season I kill about 10bass and eat them. I have zero problem with that... killing 2 a week for an extended period of time I would have a problem with

Having grown up in the moratorium I dont remember the good old days of the 60's and 70's but I sure as hell dont want to be back in 1985 again... with a 36" limit it took along time for me to see a legal bass as a kid....

Someone brought up SF... Steve... know where at least I'm coming from.. I'm not a supporter of them at all.. perfect case of too much of a 'good' thing... i.e. being an environmentalist is good... being in Greenpeace is taking it (in sarcastic voice) A BIT too far... same idea...

If anyone is going to enter the tourney to go for largest fish, go for it, if it means you are killing the same number of bass as before... if it means you will be killing significantly more bass than normal, then use your head and decide for yourself...

*** let's move this back to discussion on the issue, not at a personal level ***

Guys and gals - the subject warrants good discussion - not crap slinging... Let's keep it at discussion please...

Thanks,

John

But I like Mud wrastlin' :hihi:

Can I Film This??????????
 

Striped Bass Fisherman Gone Wild :spin:

Time contraints and tickets
 

Spence move the rumble off a couple of hours so we can sell some tickets to raise money for the site.

Regardless of all the emotion this issue has raised its nice to see so many people so interested in the same the, the well-being of the species.

Nib - thanks for being the first one who brought this to light - I noticed.

Just a few thoughts and observations:

Almost everyone enjoys a good tournament based on the healthy competition and camaraderie it develops. I’ve fished in many, good and bad, over the years. I’ve also have the experience of organizing many others.

It seems the major part of the “Striper Cup” that is generating controversy (as well it should) is the “Aggregate weight/points” divisions. I’d like to state that I, like many others, enjoy a good tournament. I enter a few each season, usually because I feel I may have a shot of winning something such as some new gear (which I probably don’t need). The events I enter are usually beneficial to fisherman and/or society in general.


Some key points of good tourneys:
1. A sense of fairness to all participants – an example of this would be separate categories for surf and boat and equal prizes (in value) for both. I’ve been involved in some where prizes were used fishing gear! (A half filled bulk spool of line in my case)

2. Most well run tourneys had rules and regs that took conservation into consideration. This would prevent over-fishing and the needless entry of bass that had no chance of taking a prize. An example would be a minimum weight entry that is not “easily” attainable. For instance the fishing club I’m a member of requires any bass entered into the club tourney to be 25 lbs minimum. (A poor example would be a tourney that took and kept a fish you entered then sold it to the market next door and the organizers kept the proceeds! True story).

3. If a tourney has a “club competition division” there would be a limit on qualified entries, in other words only a clubs top three bass would qualify in that division. This is done to even the playing field between some clubs which may have a 1000 members and others that may only have 20. Top three bass in total weight wins. This set-up also allows individual clubs to let their members know what size fish it would take to qualify so needless fish are not killed for entry. Example: Club A has three bass entered, 45, 40, and 39 lbs. Its members will know not to keep anything that doesn’t beat a 39 because it wouldn’t count.

4. Most responsible tourneys have a designated charity for proceeds or part of proceeds. These proceeds generally go to some organization that stands for the “betterment of fishing” or is youth or health oriented. I’ve always been wary of any tourney that appears to be a money maker for someone behind the scenes.


A few more thoughts about other posts – don’t get mad about how others feel. Everyone has there own view and freedom to express it. There are members here who are great fishermen with who I enjoy talking/fishing with immensely. We may disagree on topics from time to time but I would never let those disagreements allow me to disparage them in a public thread such as this. I value their friendship too much.

I won't enter the "Striper Cup" as advertised. If you enter a tourney you support the whole tournament - not just the part you like.

DZ

Yeah, what DZ said.

One thing that I keep reading is "I won't keep anythin under X." That's fine, no really. The PROBLEM is that a number of people won't do that. That's the problem w/the rules as written. It really does encourage people to kill more than most of us find acceptable.

Will I enter? not as the rules are now. There really needs to be a weight minimum and a set number of fish to be entered. I am not slamming OTW, but come on. This seems like a much to obvious issue to miss.

Thanks DZ;clarity and serenity.

Great post DZ.

(so did you win the used line?)

Great post DZ :btu:

I hope OTW can make an addendum to their rules regarding your point number 4 or if they want some variation of it I'm sure that would help. That sounds like a most excellant idea as opposed to the way it is written now, where there is the possibility that club members could theoretically enter 40 bass each in the tournament in order to get enough points for their club to win which IMO would needlessly kill far to many bass that may otherwise have been released.


I also hope that some of the proceeds go to help the fishery or to aid in teaching youngsters about fishing and the right way to do it.

This summary paragraph is a copy of the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries
Technical Report TR-24 regarding Striped Bass harvest in Mass in 2004

During 2004, the commercial fishery for striped bass in Massachusetts harvested about 60,632 fish weighing 1,206,305 pounds. Total losses due to commercial harvesting (including release mortality) were 70,544 fish weighing 1,304,752 pounds. The recreational fishery harvested about 403,547 striped bass weighing over 5.4 million pounds. Total losses due to recreational fishing (including release mortality) were 868,413 fish weighing over 7.7 million pounds. Combined losses (including scientific losses) were 939,078 fish weighing over 9.0 million pounds, which reflects a 16% increase in numbers lost and an 11% increase in weight lost compared to 2003 (810,381 fish: 8.1 million pounds) The majority of losses, 92%by number and 86% by weight, was attributed to the recreational fishery.

After reading the above summary does anyone really believe the OTW fishing derby is going to have any effect on the fishery whatsoever? People Who Fish, Keep Fish, and those that catch and release kill a percentage of those they release, plain and simple. And it would be the vast majority of those fish that are killed anyway that would make it to the scales, and entered into the derby Big Dave

I spoke for quite a while to Neil Larson, gm of OTW, and expressed my concerns about the 2 fish per week. He seemed genuinely interested in my comments. He also told me that OTW was not opposses to making rule changes as issues arise. OTW was not looking for a kill tourney. I will give OTW a chance at this, and have signed up.

I read into those numbers a bit differently.

They are attributing nearly 1/2 of the rec loss to reasons other than harvest.

If release mortality is a big part of that, and say the mortality rate is say about 10%...it would indicate the majority of bass caught are released.

-spence

Denny,
I Bet U noticed the part about mud wrastlin.
:rotf2:

Spence to your argument.

Not every fish is a keeper. A lot of those fish die, from being caught, this is especially true of small fish, and they fight so hard they damage and pull their mouths and at time gills apart during a fight. Yet the fishermen will cast another offering to them. Which leads to another point about recreational guys, not many of them stop fishing when they take a keeper or even 2. If the fish are there and they are willing to be caught most fishermen I’ve seen will keep catching and releasing as long as the fish cooperate. Which counts as well towards the mortality of the fish. Again I state, people like to fish, keep fish, and keep fishing no matter what, and with that comes the inevitable death of fish, well intended releases or not. Big Dave

Mass, RI & CT regulations clearly state that anglers are allowed 2 fish at 28” per angler per day. That’s 14 fish per week. If someone really wanted to, they can keep over 300 bass a season. Does anyone keep that many fish? No. But according to the marine biologists that come up with these #’s, the population would, theoretically, be able to handle it.
In my opinion, harvesting fish can be good for a species. Many fisheries encourage keeping fish, and if regulated properly, leads to a healthier population.
Take a look at deer hunting. Overpopulation leads to malnourished deer that can’t survive the winter. Hunting leads to bigger, healthier deer.
Weighing in 2 fish a week over an 18 week tournament will not make stripers extinct. Just as we are all allowed to keep 14 fish a week, no one really does, and I don’t think there will be many people weighing in 2 fish every week in this tournament, just to win a trophy. I think the two fish-per-week rule is a good limit, and is far more conservation-minded than many other tournaments (take a look at the MV derby). Let’s say you hook up a 35-pounder on Monday, and then land a 50 on Friday. How are you going to feel letting go a fish that might get you the key to a Grady White?

Yes the regulations clearly state that BUT assuming if everyone were able to catch and then to take 2 legal fish per day / 14 per week, there would be a SIGNIFICANT impact on the fishery.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the state allocations are based on perceived pressure as there are not landing receipts from every angler on every trip to give hard numbers. So they use their estimates from their dosckside / shoreside studies and guestimate a total catch and compare that to what they feel the biomass can manage and be sustainable. A couple years ago they might say to Mass DMF that they can allocatate for grins and giggles 1 million pounds of bass and Mass then would need to come up with regulations to meet that target. For years Mass had 1 fish @ 28 inches and based on the numbers available at the time, Mass had an uncaught balance of about 14% under the quota. So Mass for example could have added 2 fish @ 28 for say 3 months of the season as they felt that would use the last 14% of their allowable quota. When Mass went to 2 @ 28 they felt the chances of one person keeping the second fish was significantly less than keeping the first. And they assigned some number like 10% of trips would catch a keeper in the first place...

Sorry for the ramble but 2 fish per day per angler for 7 days a week for the entire season would really harm the fishery.

I'd wager there's simply no way this could be true. The difference in scale is so huge the formula must be weighted to compensate.

I think this sums up the entire thread pretty well.

-spence

Unfortunately, since there are big prizes involved that 50 pounder will go imediately on ice until the next week when it can be weighed.

woooooooo...back to your corner ladies ... ding ....its round two....this debate is very construtive???i,m certain lots of ears are listining...and it dont hurt to hear others opinions,but i,ll tell you now the rules are set for this year ,and the rules can be adjusted ,changed or modified for future derbys..otw and its sponsors did not put this party together so we could tear them apart with neg-opinions and spectulations....lightin up ,, this is a good local sports rag ,,,with good intentions ''' dave ;; I still like one fish per week per enterance....big dave i like your thinkin too;

Am I gonna have to start to another Hamas/Humus thread?

Does OTW practice OJT?

Dave - this debate isn't constructive? I've seen similar talk, though brief, on the SNESA list. A president of a well respected RI fishing club has presented many issues with the current rules. Yet, "lots of ears are listening" but we're being too negative. I don't follow you. They are listening but don't like what is being said? They are a fantastic magazine, really (not just plugging for a free subscription), they have great writers and contributors, and their show, thought it competes in my household with Teen Titans and What not to Wear (just guess who gets left out) is excellent. It doesn't mean that we should lemming our way on over to the signup sheet.

I personally think the idea of bringing back a large tourney on the likes of the old Schaefer Cup is a great venture. Sponsored by my favorite beer to boot. BUT could the tourney be a little more conservation freindly? Uhh, yep. And that is what is getting debated here and rationally for the most part. Don't see it as a dig against OTW. Its not. This is open discussion. And it is being discussed by a few well respected members of the fishing community in addition to the rest of the riff-raff (myself included)...

So, seeing that people are reading, are they listening?

And now ....for something completely different
 

some sitting ducks :rocketem:

S/T I guess ya didn,t like my way of thinking ><><><><


BTW how many tournaments did you fish in the 60,s & 70,s ????????????????:huh:

gentlemen ??? the idear of the derby was to bring back a tredision of fisherman and striped bass clubs and not to hurt the fisherie.all opinions need to be heard,,,god bless america,,,, for that...i know otw is listining.. an thinkin whats best for ALL the playersin the derby......dave ps clammer i respect your opinions ...thats why i,ma adult