Walleye Derby Pinehurst

[Ukrainankiller]

Originally Posted by Dirt2oil

Not everyone sits on the outdoorsman forum and make 9 posts a day like yourself, some have lives and use this forum for a tool. But the only tool it seems to be is a way for grow men to beak off behind a computer.

Thanks. You couldn't have said it better

[pikeslayer22]

Originally Posted by Tikka300

I used to have a similar opinion on tournaments as the op. Especially on lakes with so called vulnerable populations.... After finally fishing one this spring my opinion has changed. Tournament anglers do take rather good care of the fish compared to the general public. Not many fished getting smashed on the side of the boat or booted off the boat back into the water. Even outside of the tournaments I try to handle fish as best as possible but too often you see them taking a ride off the bow of the boat or getting a swallowed hook torn out of their throat....

To me SRD should really use these tournaments as a bit of a study. When else are you going to have over 150 - 300 anglers coming into a specific spot with live fish and be willing to give you information???? Seems like an easy way for SRD to do some fin clippings and even try a mark and re-capture program? They would have quick and ready access to lenght and weight measurements as well and can determine general health of fish too. All at the cost of the anglers.... The tournaments will generally pull in a few of the bigger fish that you may not get with normal fishing or keeping fish based on tags so they could potentially see some of the bigger ones and determine age class etc. I don't think the tournaments are a bad thing, just make sure they are not in warm water temperatures and watch fishing depths.

To me SRD should really use these tournaments as a bit of a study. When else are you going to have over 150 - 300 anglers coming into a specific spot with live fish and be willing to give you information????

Good point and also a good reason to move lakes after 15 years I think they should know all information they need! Move on to another lake!!!

[Hunter Trav]

So why should they have to move, the fishery is in good shape, and anglers can compete on a lake where the potential to get large weights is a reality. That in turn means more anglers entering and making the tourney more successful. More anglers = bigger payout. Tourneys aren't there to provide info about a lake, they are for the entertainment of competitive anglers...

[new LT]

Originally Posted by Hunter Trav

So why should they have to move, the fishery is in good shape, and anglers can compete on a lake where the potential to get large weights is a reality. That in turn means more anglers entering and making the tourney more successful. More anglers = bigger payout. Tourneys aren't there to provide info about a lake, they are for the entertainment of competitive anglers...

I have done tournys that did do info collection for SRD but they were always in house tournys for fish and game clubs was always to much hassle to do it at a public entry tourny.I see no reason why the tournament should not continue at Pinehurst it is not a closed lake just a tag lake.

[gramps73]

The info from these said touraments is turned over to the SRD..

[new LT]

Originally Posted by gramps73

The info from these said touraments is turned over to the SRD..

Do they collect data on all fish caught or just legals?

[cube]

Originally Posted by Hunter Trav

The guys who fish this tourney don't get to keep any walleye, so how is that hypocritical? You can go catch walleye there just like the tourney guys, you just have to put them back, or buy tags. Whether they hold the tourney or not, it isn't going to change the decision to not open it up to allow people to keep walleye there. Give your head a shake guys...

Not sure why you would say I should give my head a shake.
Given SRD ranks general public angling higher than tournament angling and given the fact that they have classified Pinehurst as vulnerable (hence the limited tags available) I’m sure you can see why some would think this hypocritical. I.e. closed limited angling to the general public but open to the lowest ranking priority, tournament angling.

I personally also don’t think that my head is in need of shaking as to having a limited opening of Pinehurst. For example Moose lake is the same size as Pinehurst and has the same FWIN catch rate. Moose also has much heavier fishing pressure than does Pinehurst and as you know the Pinehurst tournament just finished with as [B]you said [/B]“Second highest weights in their 15 year history, lots of big numbers coming out this past weekend. If you didn't have over 20lbs both days you were not even close to the money...” Hence, I believe a limited opening of Pinehurst is quite reasonable or are you suggesting Moose be put on tags?

[Hunter Trav]

Sure its reasonable, will it happen now that its on tags? Probably not...

[new LT]

Originally Posted by cube

Not sure why you would say I should give my head a shake.
Given SRD ranks general public angling higher than tournament angling and given the fact that they have classified Pinehurst as vulnerable (hence the limited tags available) I’m sure you can see why some would think this hypocritical. I.e. closed limited angling to the general public but open to the lowest ranking priority, tournament angling.

I personally also don’t think that my head is in need of shaking as to having a limited opening of Pinehurst. For example Moose lake is the same size as Pinehurst and has the same FWIN catch rate. Moose also has much heavier fishing pressure than does Pinehurst and as you know the Pinehurst tournament just finished with as [B]you said [/B]“Second highest weights in their 15 year history, lots of big numbers coming out this past weekend. If you didn't have over 20lbs both days you were not even close to the money...” Hence, I believe a limited opening of Pinehurst is quite reasonable or are you suggesting Moose be put on tags?

Can you explain closed limited angling to the general public...

[npauls]

Originally Posted by new LT

Do they collect data on all fish caught or just legals?

For data to be collected on every fish they would need a data collection person on every boat that would have to collect data on every fish brought to the boat. I would think the info being submitted would be of the legals only that are weighed in.

This past weekend I was in the SAWT tourney at ridge res. down here in the south. We probably caught somewhere around 150-200 fish in the 2 day tourney. There were times when we would have double headers get rebaited drop back down and get another 2. That would mean there would be 3-4 fish out of water flopping around the boat while the data collection was being done.

[Walleyedude]

Originally Posted by new LT

Can you explain closed limited angling to the general public...

X2

I don't understand what is being perceived as unfair. It seems to me everyone, tournament angler and non-tournament angler alike, has the same opportunity to fish under the same regulations.

[new LT]

Originally Posted by npauls

For data to be collected on every fish they would need a data collection person on every boat that would have to collect data on every fish brought to the boat. I would think the info being submitted would be of the legals only that are weighed in.

This past weekend I was in the SAWT tourney at ridge res. down here in the south. We probably caught somewhere around 150-200 fish in the 2 day tourney. There were times when we would have double headers get rebaited drop back down and get another 2. That would mean there would be 3-4 fish out of water flopping around the boat while the data collection was being done.

Thanks thats what i was wondering have fish tourys before where collection was done both just on legals and where recorder was on boat so i wondered how it was done here

[new LT]

Originally Posted by Walleyedude

X2

I don't understand what is being perceived as unfair. It seems to me everyone, tournament angler and non-tournament angler alike, has the same opportunity to fish under the same regulations.

Thats what im thinking they both can only fish when lake is open and only in open areas so i can't see a problem if there is something i'm missing please tell me

[pikeslayer22]

So what would you guys say would be a fair mortality rate for this week of the tourney? 20 to 30%

[new LT]

Originally Posted by pikeslayer22

So what would you guys say would be a fair mortality rate for this week of the tourney? 20 to 30%

I don't think the mortality rate would be any different then any other week.

[Walleyedude]

Originally Posted by pikeslayer22

So what would you guys say would be a fair mortality rate for this week of the tourney? 20 to 30%

5-10% at most would be my guess given the care taken and the time of year.

Likely lower than the regular C&R angling rate, but the larger number of fish being caught probably evens things out a bit.

Fishing is fishing, no matter who is doing it, there is a mortality rate involved.

[cube]

Originally Posted by Walleyedude

I don't understand what is being perceived as unfair. It seems to me everyone, tournament angler and non-tournament angler alike, has the same opportunity to fish under the same regulations.

Alberta’s Fish-Use Allocation Process
The Fish and Wildlife Policy for Alberta (1982) stipulates that the interim allocation priorities will be in the
following descending order,until supply and demand issues are addressed on a site-specific basis through the
allocation process:

1 Conservation of fish stocks,
2 Subsistence fishing for Alberta’s aboriginal people,
3 Resident recreational use
4 Commercial fishing and tourist angling.
5 Competitive fishing events

If you have CFE’s at a tag lake you are effectively robbing quota from higher order priorities. I.e. the lowest priority (5 CFE’s) is taking quota from the number of tags (priority 3 Recreational use) that will be issued. The calculated mortality for the CFE comes from http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&...48340889,d.cGE


Therefore technically you can only have CFE’s at lakes that have an open to general public harvest and then only if there is excess left over quota from priorities 1-4. Hence, why some would see this as Hypocrisy.

[npauls]

Originally Posted by cube

Alberta’s Fish-Use Allocation Process
The Fish and Wildlife Policy for Alberta (1982) stipulates that the interim allocation priorities will be in the
following descending order,until supply and demand issues are addressed on a site-specific basis through the
allocation process:

1 Conservation of fish stocks,
2 Subsistence fishing for Alberta’s aboriginal people,
3 Resident recreational use
4 Commercial fishing and tourist angling.
5 Competitive fishing events

If you have CFE’s at a tag lake you are effectively robbing quota from higher order priorities. I.e. the lowest priority (5 CFE’s) is taking quota from the number of tags (priority 3 Recreational use) that will be issued. The calculated mortality for the CFE comes from http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&...48340889,d.cGE


Therefore technically you can only have CFE’s at lakes that have an open to general public harvest and then only if there is excess left over quota from priorities 1-4.

These rules were probably put into place after that tourney had already been established which means that lake would have been grandfathered through the rules.

If the lake is healthier then it has been in a long time what is the problem with having tourneys there? Tourney anglers are looking out for the lakes they fish. The last thing they want is a collapsing fishery that is tough to catch fish and pressure from SRD when they apply for their CFE's.

[cube]

Originally Posted by npauls

If the lake is healthier then it has been in a long time what is the problem with having tourneys there?

Then what's the problem of having a small limit like Moose or Calling lake?

[new LT]

Originally Posted by cube

Alberta’s Fish-Use Allocation Process
The Fish and Wildlife Policy for Alberta (1982) stipulates that the interim allocation priorities will be in the
following descending order,until supply and demand issues are addressed on a site-specific basis through the
allocation process:

1 Conservation of fish stocks,
2 Subsistence fishing for Alberta’s aboriginal people,
3 Resident recreational use
4 Commercial fishing and tourist angling.
5 Competitive fishing events

If you have CFE’s at a tag lake you are effectively robbing quota from higher order priorities. I.e. the lowest priority (5 CFE’s) is taking quota from the number of tags (priority 3 Recreational use) that will be issued. The calculated mortality for the CFE comes from http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&...48340889,d.cGE


Therefore technically you can only have CFE’s at lakes that have an open to general public harvest and then only if there is excess left over quota from priorities 1-4. Hence, why some would see this as Hypocrisy.

How are you robbing quota when no tags are used and no fish are kept quotas remain the same

[cube]

Originally Posted by new LT

How are you robbing quota when no tags are used and no fish are kept quotas remain the same

Because they subtract the estimated mortality of the CFE from the number of tags that will be issued. Net result is less tags issued even thought they have a higher priority.

[new LT]

Originally Posted by cube

Because they subtract the estimated mortality of the CFE from the number of tags that will be issued. Net result is less tags issued even thought they have a higher priority.

Can you show the numbers that the tournament increased mortality rate?

[cube]

Originally Posted by new LT

Can you show the numbers that the tournament increased mortality rate?

Follow the link that I posted earlier (post #50) and read it. It is quite clear, only that it would under estimate the mortality for Pinehurst, given Pinehurst has a fifteen hour fishing time instead of 14, so increase the estimated mortality by 7%. This is then subtacted from the tags that would have been issued for this year.

[new LT]

Originally Posted by cube

Follow the link that I posted earlier (post #50) and read it. It is quite clear, only that it would under estimate the mortality for Pinehurst, given Pinehurst has a fifteen hour fishing time instead of 14, so increase the estimated mortality by 7%. This is then subtacted from the tags that would have been issued for this year.

Im finding it hard to see where they are getting their data it seems to be a lot of projected figures and figures based on older tournaments before new tournament regulation were in affect i cant see where it is affecting the quotas greatly. but I will reread in morning when head is clearer and do some more research. Thank you for your help and info

[Ukrainankiller]

Originally Posted by pikeslayer22

So what would you guys say would be a fair mortality rate for this week of the tourney? 20 to 30%

I agree with this mortality rate. You try and tell me with that many boats and that many fish being caught each day, no fish are being killed give me a break!!!

[Ukrainankiller]

Originally Posted by new LT

I don't think the mortality rate would be any different then any other week.

Since when does pinehurst have between 150 to 300 fisherman fishing the lake every week? That's what you are saying ,by saying the mortality rate is the same as any other week.

[pikeslayer22]

There are a few things that really bother me with the tourneys...one being double standards...enter a derby and cull fish all day no laws broke....sport angler culls he is breaking a law??? Might need to join one to get a better feel for it, I have a hard time believing the mortality rate would be as low as even10%

[catnthehat]

There sure is a lot of guessing and estimating and accusations in this thread.
I don't have a dog in this fight, but can tell you that even though the lake gets fished hard in a tournament, if these fishermen were responsible for the collapse of the fishery with the mortality as high as some are guessing , the lake would be closed to a tournament.

Cat

[farmsniper]

I encourage the sceptics to go out and participate in some tournaments and you will find out first hand what really goes on, I believe your attitudes will change. I personally have volunteered at the willvil event on countless occasions and as far as mortality rate goes it is extremely low. with 4 fish weighed per team per day say there is 250-350 fish weighed per day, over a 2 day period and 400-500 fish weighed over the tournament weekend there are usually only a couple fish that go belly up, with weights they can be revived at the weigh in station and are usually able to be released shortly after. I would guess mortality rate is 2-3% at any well run tournament. It is up to the fisherman to handle fish responsible and not pull them out of deep water as well. Tournament guys love competing and if they set a bad example then some events can be shutdown in the future so they do their best to take care of the lake and the fish.

[Walleyedude]

Originally Posted by cube

Alberta’s Fish-Use Allocation Process
The Fish and Wildlife Policy for Alberta (1982) stipulates that the interim allocation priorities will be in the
following descending order,until supply and demand issues are addressed on a site-specific basis through the
allocation process:

1 Conservation of fish stocks,
2 Subsistence fishing for Alberta’s aboriginal people,
3 Resident recreational use
4 Commercial fishing and tourist angling.
5 Competitive fishing events

If you have CFE’s at a tag lake you are effectively robbing quota from higher order priorities. I.e. the lowest priority (5 CFE’s) is taking quota from the number of tags (priority 3 Recreational use) that will be issued. The calculated mortality for the CFE comes from http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&...48340889,d.cGE


Therefore technically you can only have CFE’s at lakes that have an open to general public harvest and then only if there is excess left over quota from priorities 1-4. Hence, why some would see this as Hypocrisy.

You still haven't shown me anything that's unfair. The only reason that I can see for objecting to a tournament being held on Pinehurst, or any lake, is personal greed or selfishness. Your objection to the tournament being held is that it might cost you personally, or "rob" you of the opportunity to harvest a fish, and you believe that your rights should trump those of tournament anglers.

In a lake with a healthy fishery, or one that is deemed able to withstand the fishing pressure by SRD, you have two different groups enjoying it in their preferred way. As long as they're following the rules, those 150-200 tournament fishermen have every bit as much right to the resource and to fish on Pinehurst or any lake as anyone else.

Anything else would be unfair in my opinion.