|
|
Member
Posts: 2445
Location: Fremont, Wisconsin | RNT, not looking for a scientific study of public opinion. Looking for a group that has formed to contest these events. Looking for the HORDES that TYEE speaks of that CANNOT STOMACH the tourneys any longer.
TYEE, you cannot dodge your words with lengthy reads that are about mortality. We are not discussing mortality. I want the reads that state the general public IS UP IN ARMS as you said about the tournaments on bago. I want numbers so I may have a percentage of the PUBLIC that hate these events. Come on, you made the statement now produce the goods.
Edited by stacker 3/9/2010 10:24 AM
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 1406
| HG,
I suppose the only study you would believe would be one where every fish caught was radio tagged and monitored huh? That could be expensive and i doubt there is any tournament out there that could afford to do such a study Unless of course you know a political group willing to fork out some of the cash?.
Like I said it is what it is and a number HAS to be used. You can argue any way you want but until funding is available we have to work with what we have. Hows this? Remove all the speculation and go strictly catch and release...you solve both issues (mortality and perception). CRR IS the only course of action for tournament image improvement!
There will still be some (jealosy probably) that will hate tournaments but this would be a huge step forward.
Good luck
Tyee
DEBBY DENNY DENNY...............You need to get out more and talk to your customers.....hows the ice look?
Edited by tyee 3/9/2010 10:25 AM
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 2445
Location: Fremont, Wisconsin |
DEBBY DENNY DENNY...............You need to get out more and talk to your customers.....hows the ice look?
I talk to alot of fisherman, alot, and have yyet to hear them say what you say.
The ice is wet hahahaha I will look at it weds. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 794
Location: Elgin, Illinois | Tyee,
Only a real scientific study can be used to prove a point statistically. Anything else, anything, is just "best guess" speculation. I can do that. And, I have some data to back it up. Pen kept fish die, regardless of whether they have been caught in a tournament, electro-shocked or netted. So, no, I will not and you should not either, rely on any study that used "pens" or tanks that do not require the fish to maintain at least moderate movement through water flow (artificial current). You might as well be relying on mythology and witchcraft. Furthermore, unless the possible variables are controlled and monitored, how do you know what is influencing/causing the mortality? If pen kept electroshocked "control" fish have 15-65% mortality (the Wisconsin Bass "study") and in one instance higher mortality than the tournament fish what is killing the fish. Wake up! Referring to flawed studies as authoritative because that is all that is available is accept the argument that the world is flat because it was written up that way by somebody who said it was so.
What is killing the fish is my concern. Is it netting, handling, water quality? What? Only when we know that can we "fix" it or if it can't be fixed "deal with it".
See, what if getting "hooked", regardless of any other factor, that is causing most of the mortality? Then does CRR make any more sense? No, not from a "mortality" point of study. What if it is weigh-in procedures? Then those can be modified. What if it is livewell function? Then those can be modified. Regardless of what, until proper scientific protocols are utilized, we won't know. So, stop using phrases like; "it is what it is" that mean nothing. Start demanding that decisions be made on scientific data only, no PC or emotion.
Read the entire Mille Lacs analysis again. They are being critical of non-scientific factors and guess work being used as the basis for management decisions. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 49
| The comment that the MWC/NTC got it right is subject to dscssion. If it is run with cull tags which are attached by cutting a slit in the lower jaw and attaching the tag like they did in Nort Dakota does it make it a kill tournament. ( North Dakota was ). Do the DNR rules in Wisconsin allow for a fish to be released after it has been tagged in this manner.
Also if CRR is the way to go and cheating is your concern. What is the difference between culling ad a team that catches a big fish then puts it in the livewell and takes another picture of the same fish an hour later. AIM has other things in place to stop thisfrom happening. Without an observer in every boat it would be just as bad as culling.
Just one more question. Why not remove the culling rules in Wisconsin. The sooner you release a fish back into the water the higher survival rate should be. |
|
| |
