Three (3) Rods

[spoonfed-1]

You guys are making to much sense now.

Knock it off.

Glen

[Has Been]

Thanks Glen!I knew you would come around.

[spoonfed-1]

Believe me that was not directed at you Hasbeen.

We must have hit the send button at the same time.

Glen

[YodaMage]

"As far as a 3 rod rule it doesnt change a thing with bag limits in place. DEC doesnt tell me how many arrows I can carry in my quiver to deer hunt but they sure do tell me how many deer I can shoot... Think about it for just a minute......."

I think I can't shoot 20 deer because I have 20 arrows and be legal because I only kept one of them. Thunk about it

Forget 3 rods...or four rods...or 20 rods...give me some explosives, then I can get some big fish. As long as I don't keep them, I'm legal

[Tim Bromund]

I think that 10 " alewives mean that we have a healthy baitfish pop. Exactly what we want.A great thing IMO . Maybe the reason we saw 2 33 # kings this spring derby . I remember the shores when we had piles of dead ones after the dieoff. Just like money in the bank I want more bait than the fish need.Arrows? I have boxs full of lures & Racks of rods , but what does that have to do with anything.Also,some Charter Capts wanting more fish stocked?Imagin that.Why would the letter I recived from Great Lakes Section Head Wm. Culligan state that B of F does not support the 3 rod bill. What possible difference would it make to them either way unless they knew somthing . Think about that for a minute.

The position of the B of F is not because they are concerned about the impact on the Lake Ontario T&S fishery, it is because the y have to take into consideration that if it happens this will be an across the board, state wide regulation change and certain groups, particularly some of the muskie clubs don't want it for whatever reason, so politically they have to take a neutral position.

Tim

[ray koziatek]

why do they want to cut it back to 3 rods?

[Has Been]

Look at the Reg book T BRO . Stipulations for every corner of the state in detail.Not a valid reason of no suporrt. "B of F has NOT supported the idea" is NOT a neutural stance. Kudos to the Muskie guys & certain groups of fisherman .

[rolmops]

I am all for the 3 rod rule,but I have to take exception to the idea that just because the bag limit is not changed, there is no difference in the amount of fish being taken.

We may innocently start a chain reaction

3 rods means more people actually catching the bag limit. That by itself is a HUGE increase in fish being caught. This does not mean that the stocks are going to be destroyed,but it will make a difference.

There may well be an increase in lamprey attacked fish because the lamprey population has fewer fish left to feed of.

As for Tom's argument about it being good for the economy. Everything comes at a price. We do not yet know that price.

I would love to see some cause/effect study results by the DEC or a similar agency and take it from there.

[Jolly II]

Holy Buckets Ray!! That's funny!

This is the way I look at this. More rods for the new guy on the lake equals more opportunity for success. Which means once that person is hooked, he or she will spend more money on their passion.

Another thing.... Our license fees just went up 50%, it would be nice to see something for that since that $10 increase is probably going to the general fund, and not into our fishery. Being able to run a third rod, or lengthening the deer season are good ways to make things right with sportsmen and women across the state.

In terms of impacts to the fishery, with the current possession limits, I doubt that there will be any noticeable impacts to the fishery, or to the adult returns to the stream. Things that probably do impact the fishery, that some people are disillusioned by thinking they are positive changes, are regulations like having to release 21" steelhead.

Another thing is, isn't the DEC every year saying the forage basin is stressed for predation. If that's case.. a three rod rule, and an increased harvest rate, not catch and release, would have a positive impact on the forage basin. However I also think that is a bit of song and dance by the DEC and fishery experts, considering the questionable science that has been done in the recent past.

So yes to 3 rods!!!

[jimski2]

Three rods should be illegal for those catch and release guys.

[spoonfed-1]

Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe these fish, that we as sportsman pay for, are stocked for purpose of being caught.

Catching these fish seems to be very good for the local economys around the lake as well as the ability to pay for these fish to begin with.

If the 3 rod rule has detrimental results you 2 rods is OK but 3 would be catastrophic, poor fish crowd can move to have it repealed. Or move to have our license money go to putting a few more fish in the lake instead of going into the States General fund.

Cut out the economic benefits and see what your State does for your fishery.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Glen

[Tim Bromund]

Look at the Reg book T BRO . Stipulations for every corner of the state in detail.Not a valid reason of no suporrt. "B of F has NOT supported the idea" is NOT a neutural stance. Kudos to the Muskie guys & certain groups of fisherman .

Yes, "does not support" is absolutely a neutral stance, it means they have no formal opinion. "Opposed" is a stance against the idea. I know full well what the reg book says, so climb down off your high horse already. When this was originally proposed, it was proposed for Lake Ontario only, and the response was that that wouldn't fly, it had to be a statewide reg change.

Besides, Bill Culligan is retired now, so your letter is dated and irrelevant. We'll have to see what Steve LaPan, the new Great Lakes Fisheries Chief (former head of the Lake Ontario Unit) has to say.

The muskie guys are opposed because those fish occupy a very different niche in the ecosystem than salmonids and are MUCH more sensitive to pressure.

Tim

[stinger]

My side of the boat with two of us fishing........

[spoonfed-1]

My side of the boat with two of us fishing........

[Misty IV]

My side of the boat with two of us fishing........

Love it!!!!!

[Has Been]

I could probably live with Shades idea of 2 guys 6 & 10 max. But that is not the point. I can see some over the top Cowboy w/ a 82' sport fisherman -cruise ship- floating hotel casino that has an in w/the equipmet suplier. A 3 man crew & 6 anglers. 27 electric reels&rods spread out across 300 yds of the lake.The problem is some moron out there would do it & other got to have it now wannabees would think it was OK. T BRO, DEC regs stipulates specifics all the time. Weak argument by who told you that.Does not support means does not support, PC way of sayin NO. Also yea, what did that old geaser Bill Cullighan know anyway with all those years of experince. Good thing he's out . Ha!I paid my money, give me what I want , NOW!!!Some of the best fishin in the world right at our doorstep, courtesy of the Great State of NY. All for $29 /yr. It ain't perfect ................but it ain't bad either. The older I get , the more I cherish it.

And Rolmops, I don't think it will make a diff either way. Guys who know how to fish will catch just as many, maybe a few more , guys who don't will run more stuff wrong , get frustrated & catch less. I said less is more a long time ago, run what you have correctly . Heard that recently from some of the best on here who have figured that out. Some have not,and may never.

[Tim Bromund]

I have the utmost respect for Bill Culligan, that was not intended as a slam on him in any way. Thank you SO MUCH for pathetically trying to put words in my mouth. Bill will be VERY difficult to replace, but I think they made the right choice in promoting Steve to the position.

I've stated many times, gosh even in this very thread if you happen to look past your ego, that it really doesn't matter to me as the only time I would take advantage of it is when there's just 2 of us in the boat so I could run my normal 6 rod spread. In fact I have really always been an advocate of the less is more philosophy and believe lost of stuff in the water chases the bigger fish away from your spread. Glen (spoonfed-1) and I recently had a lively debate on this topic over on Great Lakes Angler. Even with two of us and 4 rods we usually have no problem catching fish.

That being said, I also see absolutely no harm in raising the number of rods allowed, if guys wanna put all that crap in the water and chase the big guys away from their boat, more power to em.

Tim

[lakebound88]

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Glen

[LongLine]

According to the 2009 DEC Annual report for Lake Ontario (Boat Survey for Trout & salmon seekers):

Sect 2 pg 32 (all boats)

T&S Fishing boat trips: 62,599

Average # anglers per T&S trip: 3.06

Average length of T&S trip: 6.02 hours

Ave # of NYS residents per boat trip: 60.8%

Sect 2 pg 36 (all boats)

# T&S caught: 222.8K

% T&S harvested: 53.8%

Sect 2 pg 37:

Ave catch T&S per angler hour (all boats): 0.197

Sect 2 pg 38:

% of boats with zero catch any T or S: 32.6%

Charter-all anglers - % of boats harvesting bag limits T&S (aggregate): 3.1%

Non Charter boats - % of boats harvesting bag limits T&S (aggregate): 1.6%

(2009 was probably the best year for T&S fishermen of the last 10.)

1st grouping of data tells me there are a lot of non-resident fishermen out there. It also says that for every one boat (charter) that had 6 anglers there were at least 3 boats with 2 or less anglers. (average 6+2+2+1+1=2.4)

2nd data group tells me that there is a lot of C&R going on among the T&S fishermen.

3rd data group tells me that the average single angler spent 5.07 hours catching one T&S or (referring to group 1 data) basically his entire fishing trip and caught one fish.

4th group tells me that quite a few get skunked when they go fishing and that very few anglers harvested their bag limits. It also tells me that boats that generally run many rods outfished the smaller guys by a 2:1 ratio. However two times squat is still squat.

If you do the math, you’d see that if every fisherman had caught his bag limit every time out, they’d have caught a hel[ of a lot more that the total given in the 2nd group of data.

3 rods would give the small guy more potential to catch fish by helping him locate the active fish a bit easier.

Tom B.

(LongLine)

http://www.dec.ny.gov/outdoor/27068.html

[muskybob]

Nice report Tom, thanks

[jeb1340]

I think a much simpler solution would be to say a 8 rod limit or 10 rod limit per boat. At the end of the day you are only allowed to harvest X amount of fish per fisherman. It doesn't matter how quickly you get there. You wouldn't have to worry about having 20 guys on a boat with 60 lines off of the back. You could have different regulations for charter fisherman (perch parties). We already know that there are different rules for charter and personal boats. Why would this have to be any different?

[Has Been]

Who takes the surveys? Are they the boats W/ the orange buoys that say DEC on the side & sit at the popular ports & show up around Noon on sunny days & weekends?How many times have they heard " should have been here yesterday"? If I went out at first light & came back in at noon that would be ....Six hrs.A lot of times I would go out at first light (best time)do very well & be back at dock by 9 am & go to work. Or go out after work till dark.No survey there. Or drive by the creel survey boat cause I was running late .Big boats that run many rods are generaly experienced anglers, thus the success rate . So the data may be a little lacking.The problem with stats is they can somtimes be not as they seem. Does Anglers on board of a charter count the Captain & Mate?( 4 addl rods). Who keeps every fish they catch? Not most of us,Especialy the guys who go a lot. I have said for years that 1 out of 3 trips I don't do well. The math supports that. And from my experience, the extra rod would have done little to change it.

T Bro,you seem like a good guy, so sorry about the pathetic part.

[LongLine]

Who takes the surveys?

Anyone that is involved in the fishery and cares about facts, rather than promoting unsubstantiated personnal opinion, would know the answer, as well as how the survey is conducted & the science behind it.

The link is posted so you can read it for yourself. The report does a pretty good job explaining it.

Tom B.

(LongLine)

[Has Been]

Untill every fish is recorded from every fisherman, the data is incomplete.

The stats alone don't tell all the story. If they were recorded during poor fishing times( Transitional, upwellings,highwind-poorweather, srewey currents,etc. )they could be interpreted for year tally poorly.

The Cy Young winner had an ERA of 1 but a record of 13-12. QB passer ratings can be high and looking at them only you would think they won the game, the most important stat ,but did not.

Gov Financial data is argued both ways all the time. Even the figures from the WIND Energy guys would make you think they were the greatest.

When I see lots of stats I ask questions, as allways.

My oppinon is that some of the experienced guys on this board could out fish with just one rod, just one , most of the guys on here w/ 3 each most of the time,especially in tough conditions 9 out of 10 times.Some have said as much. 10% of the fisherman catch 90% of the fish. That's because of the intangible experience they have you can't buy.

So to say that 3 rods would help the small guy, well , that statement is oppinion in my book. They would be better served to learn what to do under certain conditions, plan their trips to know peak times & areas,& learn their boat & equipment better , instead of throwing more "magic" lures in the water.

[LongLine]

It’s not about baseball/football games or winning awards. (Those are individual histories and not scientific population statistics)

3-rods is about increasing the potential of that percentage of boats that get skunked to locate & hopefully catch a fish. Catching a fish once in a while is the attraction to fishing, just as when you go swimming, the attraction is being in the water (the attraction disappears if you can’t find safe water to swim in.)

If a guy goes fishing & never catches a fish, the probability is pretty high that he’ll lose interest in the sport just as the guy that can’t hit the hoop eventually turns into a spectator rather than remain a player. Fishermen that don’t catch a fish in one place often move to another place to catch fish. (Look at how protective some guys are about revealing the “secret†place in fear of being crowded out.) Interest wanes with each unsuccessful move/outing until he finally takes up golf or some other sub-civilized form of recreation.

Increasing potential is what it’s all about. The more people that are attracted to fishing by being somewhat successful will lead to continuation and/or increasing participation in the sport, which is something our sport needs. Albeit a couple minor blips the trend in license sales is downward, tackle shops & manufacturers are struggling, fees are up, and tournament participation is nowhere near what it used to be. Looking at the numbers from the NYSDEC site, participation is less than half of what it used to be. Costs to support the fishery are going up. The only way yours and my increases will be slowed is if they can be spread to a broader base. i.e. more fishermen making return trips to our fishery.

A guy with 3 rods out-fishing the experienced angler that only uses one rod always comes up. Other than elitist snobs, who cares? - because it’s a bogus statement. Regardless of the number of rods, both are restricted by the creel limit so who out-fishes who - the single rod guy that catches 3 fish or the 3-rod guy that catches 3 fish?

Tom B.

(LongLine)