I can see all tournaments adapting this in the future

[Ron]

Angler Young Angler International Championship

 

Article written by Gord Pyzer

 

Very very good read.

[tb4me]

Awesome news! I always wondered why this hasnt been done before. It worked out well at the fishathon too!!

[crappieperchhunter]

Thx for posting that Ron. It sounds like the way of the future for tournaments. It's a WIN WIN WIN from all angles as far as I can see.

[Terry]

I think it is a great idea

 

 

 

however I see cheating.....

 

give me a computer on board and a usb cable and all my bass are 32 inches long..

when you are dealing with big bucks, people will cheat

[Guest gbfisher]

I think it is a great idea

 

 

 

however I see cheating.....

 

give me a computer on board and a usb cable and all my bass are 32 inches long..

when you are dealing with big bucks, people will cheat

 

 

Ya think?...

[kickingfrog]

Guys cheat now. If there are rules, there will aways be someone looking for a way to break them.

 

I'd love to see someone try to enter a 32 inch smallmouth.

[Pigeontroller]

Yup, thats how it should be done...

[grt1]

i don't know how this would work at the red lake fall classic with 140 teams, we would have a heck of a time getting 140 "officials" for the boats. It would work great in smaller tournaments.

[BillsTheBassMan]

I guess photographs would have to be submitted from the camera they were taken on, or film negatives could be the way to go. In court, film negatives are >>>> digital photographs because their authenticity is hard to refute.

[Harrison]

Love it, love it, love it. Only drawback I see is it is based only on length, tough to measure the true weight without the girth, especially for bass. However for walleye and pike I think this would work.

 

Thanks for posting this Ron, I have shared it on another site aswell.

Edited September 15, 2010 by Harrison

[charlesn]

If they would open up a catch and release season to lengthen the bass season in southern Ontario, then I can see the clubs at least adopting this system since most use a blind draw partnering system which can help keep people honest. The biggest problems would be in a "buddy" or team tournament which is the great majority of the events up here. It would be cost prohibitive to have an observer on board every boat and as much as I'd like to give everybody the benefit of the doubt - I think cheating (and simple user error) would be rampant. I've taken 2 pictures of the same fish for example and you would swear it was 2 different fish depending on if I let it "colour up" in the livewell. Another thing would be how to deal with an angler or team catching the same fish multiple times in a day. If it is a large fish, it could certainly skew the results. But maybe the biggest concern I'd have even in a little clubbie with no prize money - mechanical failure. I'd assume everyone would be supplied with some non tamperable camera - but what if it gets wet or just simply breaks or gets lost. Do you supply 2 per boat? 3? Suddenly the costs are driven up even more for the organizers or for the anglers if you push the cost down to them.

 

But speaking as a tournament angler, the psychological barriers would be the hardest thing to overcome. Nobody that fishes high-level tournaments cares about the length - it's all about the weight. George Perry's record largie isn't XX inches long it was 22 lbs 4 oz. Over time maybe that could change, but there isn't a single true tourney nut I've ever talked to about it that wants it to go in that direction. Watching the fish come out of a competitor's livewell is part of the fascination and anticipation of the weigh-in. It wouldn't be the same handing in a digital camera or memory stick. The cheating aspect would be at the forefront of everyone's mind. The precision would be greatly diluted. I mean how accurate can a photo of a fish on a board be: to the tenth of an inch? Probably not even that precise. Tournaments have been decided by 0.01 lbs. A 1 hundredth of a lb. With precision as low as 1/4 inch at a time, I could see a lot of ties and a lot of arguments about "was the fish's nose touching the bump board" or not, was the tail pinched, was the jaw distended, etc. As OFC well knows, fishermen love only one thing more than fishing and that is arguing about fishing.

 

I'm not trying to pooh-pooh the idea - even without the conservation side of the argument, it can be a boon to us tourney guys.

 

Here are some benefits from a tourney angler perspective:

-Fish are not relocated, therefore locking can be allowed. Currently you can not lock through to another lake and transport fish back to the origin lake. Locking would certainly add a new element to the strategy involved.

-Could hold an event on a slot limit lake or catch and release only lake

-Could even hold an event out of the Bass Pro Parking lot and say basically - be back here at 9 PM with your photos. So every lake within driving distance could be open. Talk about strategy then.

 

So there are some possibilities than could be opened up.

 

Over time maybe we'll have the means to overcome the major obstacles against this format and I can certainly see it working for AYA and at the club level on catch and release lakes or during proscribed catch and release periods. I just don't see it catching on at a higher level than that in the near future until the major flaws are addressed. I can also understand why people that haven't fished bass tournaments for 15 years might not see it as I do.

[Harrison]

If they would open up a catch and release season to lengthen the bass season in southern Ontario, then I can see the clubs at least adopting this system since most use a blind draw partnering system which can help keep people honest. The biggest problems would be in a "buddy" or team tournament which is the great majority of the events up here. It would be cost prohibitive to have an observer on board every boat and as much as I'd like to give everybody the benefit of the doubt - I think cheating (and simple user error) would be rampant. I've taken 2 pictures of the same fish for example and you would swear it was 2 different fish depending on if I let it "colour up" in the livewell. Another thing would be how to deal with an angler or team catching the same fish multiple times in a day. If it is a large fish, it could certainly skew the results. But maybe the biggest concern I'd have even in a little clubbie with no prize money - mechanical failure. I'd assume everyone would be supplied with some non tamperable camera - but what if it gets wet or just simply breaks or gets lost. Do you supply 2 per boat? 3? Suddenly the costs are driven up even more for the organizers or for the anglers if you push the cost down to them.

 

But speaking as a tournament angler, the psychological barriers would be the hardest thing to overcome. Nobody that fishes high-level tournaments cares about the length - it's all about the weight. George Perry's record largie isn't XX inches long it was 22 lbs 4 oz. Over time maybe that could change, but there isn't a single true tourney nut I've ever talked to about it that wants it to go in that direction. Watching the fish come out of a competitor's livewell is part of the fascination and anticipation of the weigh-in. It wouldn't be the same handing in a digital camera or memory stick. The cheating aspect would be at the forefront of everyone's mind. The precision would be greatly diluted. I mean how accurate can a photo of a fish on a board be: to the tenth of an inch? Probably not even that precise. Tournaments have been decided by 0.01 lbs. A 1 hundredth of a lb. With precision as low as 1/4 inch at a time, I could see a lot of ties and a lot of arguments about "was the fish's nose touching the bump board" or not, was the tail pinched, was the jaw distended, etc. As OFC well knows, fishermen love only one thing more than fishing and that is arguing about fishing.

 

I'm not trying to pooh-pooh the idea - even without the conservation side of the argument, it can be a boon to us tourney guys.

 

Here are some benefits from a tourney angler perspective:

-Fish are not relocated, therefore locking can be allowed. Currently you can not lock through to another lake and transport fish back to the origin lake. Locking would certainly add a new element to the strategy involved.

-Could hold an event on a slot limit lake or catch and release only lake

-Could even hold an event out of the Bass Pro Parking lot and say basically - be back here at 9 PM with your photos. So every lake within driving distance could be open. Talk about strategy then.

 

So there are some possibilities than could be opened up.

 

Over time maybe we'll have the means to overcome the major obstacles against this format and I can certainly see it working for AYA and at the club level on catch and release lakes or during proscribed catch and release periods. I just don't see it catching on at a higher level than that in the near future until the major flaws are addressed. I can also understand why people that haven't fished bass tournaments for 15 years might not see it as I do.

 

Solid points Charles.

[Guest Johnny Bass]

I tend to agree with Charles. Too many ties would be the outcome. The only good thing is that they are brought back to their origional habitate. And if I caught a 6lb+ 22 inch bass and had to share the winning with a 4lb 22 inch bass, I would feel ripped off.

[asdve23rveavwa]

That's basically how we ran our little "derby" on Scugog, as well as the Fish-a-Thon for cancer. Great way for the fish to stay in the area they know as home...rather than being carted around in a livewell for hours and released "willy-nilly".

Think it is a great idea!!!!

[Jds63]

That article certainly answered many of my questions about how fishing tornaments are held. It would seem to be a much more responsible way to record weights and sizes and still keeps and improves the spectator appeal.

[Mike Pike]

Great points by charlesn. Maybe we're still a few issues away from implementing catch, record and release for larger, big money tournaments, but for smaller, local events.. wow!

[jimmer]

That's quite the marketing article! AIM and Lund know the right guy to sell this idea.

I like the idea of the fish being released where they are caught, because I can attest to the impact every year after a tournament on the lake where I live and knowing the fish are not being released back to the same area. I definitely see a difference in the fishing. There is no way they transport the fish through two lakes to drop in the third lake. It's too expensive and time consuming.

That's selfish thinking though, as all those boats have every right to keep the fish (5-6) they catch anyways, right.

Maybe they can come up with some kind of onboard weigh system if they use scrutineers (?)

Definitely something to think about as the angling tournaments move forward.

[Guest ThisPlaceSucks]

This summer I spectated a large international walleye derby on the st. mary's river here in sault ste. marie (michigan side). Fish were brought in to the weigh-in, then simply deposited into a large pipe that ran from the weigh in back to the river. My chums and I talked about how most of these boats were running 20-40 km's away from the weigh in site, and that this HAD to have a significant impact on the fishery. For all the downsides, I think the positive outweighs them all...

 

I'm not NEARLY as worried about cheating as I am the health of the fisheries these tourneys take place on.

 

Troutologist worked at this tournament I believe and could definitely provide some insight if he's still kicking around somewhere...

[troutologist]

I think this is a great deal for tournament fishing as we move forward, hopefully with a changing culture of putting the health of the resource and minimizing impacts infront of how its always been...

 

Personally I've fished 1 tournament with this format and been involved in the organization of the AYA Championship that Mr Pyzer refers to in his article. I cannot say enough good about this format, bottom line there is less stress on every fish caught versus the livewell, culling, transporting process. Accuracy is ensured by handing out the same ruler to all participants and getting high quality photos of the fish with its nose on the bumper board and tail pinched to the width of the ruler. High quality photos allow organizers to zoom in further.

 

The Lundmania tournament in MN had 50 odd participants and the AYA Championship had 25, there were no ties in either tournament and to my knowledge no complaints or protests. Though this length only measure is easily applied to walleye through the length to weight equation, application to bass should be possible with some careful thought and planning.

 

Challenges with this format fall on the tournament organizers, how to keep the crowd engaged with out fish coming on stage was the first thought. After watching and helping at a couple of these tournaments a good MC can have the crowd on the edge of its seat. The MC doesn't know the winner, and this way anticipation is built with each new team coming up. A large screen and projector or tv, was showing photos of all the teams catches from that day and the calculated weights were visible.

 

On a side note if you haven't signed up for your local Angler Young Angler Tournament..DO IT NOW! To watch the show put on for these young folks in the Championship was awesome. What a chance to share that experience with your kids.

 

The other challege I see is competitor's reluctance to give away secrets, they may not want to have spotters turn into potential competitors by poaching their spots/tactics. This is tricky but still can be an issue with coanglers in Pro/Ams.

 

 

Above all else, these are minor hurdles to overcome to continue to promote tournament fishing in a responsible light, while highligthing the importance of the resource. Its worth a try to explore every option possible to minimize the impacts of a tournament. Watching this first hand has shown me the potential CRR has to do just this.

[spincast]

This just makes so much sense, and respects the resource. The question is, why isnt it being adopted more willingly already?