|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Big John1
USA
10 Posts |
 Posted - 07/23/2010 : 12:28:53 PM
|
| I'd like to lobby for the scales to stay open a little longer at the CH tournaments.18" lengths are fine with me also. |
Edited by - Big John1 on 07/23/2010 2:08:12 PM |
 |
|
|
Rick
USA
466 Posts |
Posted - 07/23/2010 : 4:26:39 PM
|
With 18" limits, there would be more fish to weigh, and the scales would have to be open longer!!
JMO,
Rick
 |
|
|
|
Fogman
USA
227 Posts |
Posted - 07/25/2010 : 10:00:37 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by RealityBites
Catchin small fish don't excite me...I'd rather catch one big fish than ten peanuts... The avg size of the fish in CH will get bigger soon... Why change to make it smaller now and then change it again later when they grow up? All that will accomplish is us keeping more fish and weighing more fish and cleaning more fish and eating more fish... I'm sure the teams that caught a fish over 21 inches also caught several between 18 and 21 inches as well... and the hybrids survive release much better than the stripers...I like the challenge that the 21" minimum represents. It forces you to move around, learn the lake ,and think a little harder... I only saw two floaters the whole weekend and one was at a boat ramp....
TWITTER on tournament day! Fish pics and reports: RealityBites1
"I've spent 85% of my lifes wages on fishing, the rest I just wasted..."
So, by your definition Woody, a 21 incher is a big fish and an 18-20 incher is not?? I really don't think either is a "big" fish. It's just a number; however, changing the limit to 18 could certainly put a different spin on our Clarks Hill events. Also, who says we will have to increase the limit again after things get better. SK and Clarks Hill Striper Club have had their limits at 18 for as long as I can remember.
If it's about riding around, burning gas, and learning the lake, check that off our list. We stayed down there and fished 3 days, catching alot of fish on both ends of the lake with just 2 over the magic 21 inch threshold. I feel like we know the lake a heckuva alot better now; so I'll agree on that point . |
|
|
|
RealityBites
USA
399 Posts |
Posted - 07/25/2010 : 11:03:59 AM
|
nah, 21" is not a big fish to me either... I'm just saying the majority caught a 21 " fish so why change it for the sake of more numbers of fish to weigh? Its the more conservative approach to the fishery. There will be more 21" fish on Clarks Hill in the next year or two. We are the Midlands Striper Club, not Hybrid club... Keep it at 21" like it always is...
TWITTER on tournament day! Fish pics and reports: RealityBites1
"I've spent 85% of my lifes wages on fishing, the rest I just wasted..." |
|
|
|
Fogman
USA
227 Posts |
Posted - 07/25/2010 : 11:41:45 AM
|
Woody, we will have to just agree that we respectfully disagree We have always allowed hybrids that measure to be weighed like other clubs that are not the "Hybrid Kings," "Clarks Hill Hybrid Club," or "HBCC."
I've weighed several myself in Murray tournaments over the years. You all weighed in a really nice hybrid in February(Yes.Over 21).
We'll see how things pan out at the PAC meeting. |
|
|
|
Jon Boy
USA
145 Posts |
Posted - 07/25/2010 : 2:19:11 PM
|
Or... we could just give a trophy to everybody that catches any kind of fish at all. Kind of like YMCA T-ball for Tots.... everyones a winner. The unique thrill about fishing for stripers (over perch, crappies, largemouths) is the size. Let the winner be determined by the person that can find that bigger fish. My opinion, if I have to weigh in an 18 inch fish to win, I'd just as soon lose.
From my perspective, the better argument would be getting the points system back to a year-long battle, rather than 2 separate six-tournament competitions. But that's a whole 'nother story.
Jon Boy |
|
|
|
Rick
USA
466 Posts |
Posted - 07/25/2010 : 3:04:10 PM
|
OK, I have a procedural question. The By-laws state
"ARTICLE IV
Method of Amending Constitution and Bylaws
The constitution may be amended at any regular meeting, provided that the proposed amendment was presented in writing to all club members two weeks prior to the regular club meeting at which vote is to be held."
So my question is, is posting on the club message board, considered "presented in writing to all club members two weeks prior to the regular club meeting at which vote is to be held."??
Rick
|
|
|
|
VanMan
USA
66 Posts |
Posted - 07/25/2010 : 3:04:17 PM
|
This is a good discussion with good points to consider on both sides of the arguement. However if we currently don't weigh in 18" fish on Murray because we consider them short (and illegal most months), and the goal is to let them grow up to over 21", then why do we we need to go to a lake that is apparently as bad or worse off than Murray and drag their 18"'s out of the water? The origional idea of going to the Hill and catching bigger fish was exciting, however like Johnboy, if I am going to spend all day and a wad of money on gas and bait just to weigh in a few 18" short fish, I might would just consider staying home and catching 21"-23" here on Murray...
I probably would like to see our August tournament back on Murray, and see how the Hill recovers in a year or two... I also go back to my other comment earlier about possibly looking at a couple of other lakes on "off tournament" weeks for those wishing to go fish other waters.
VanMan
 |
|
|
|
Rick
USA
466 Posts |
Posted - 07/25/2010 : 3:12:32 PM
|
We do not have the population of Hybrid's on Murray, that Clarks Hill and Hartwell have, so we are not comparing "apples and apples", in my opinion.
My guess is a 19" Clarks Hill Hybrid will weigh as much or more than a 21" Murray Striper. Since our tournament's are based on weight, not total inches, I don't understand the problem with including 18" Hybrid's as part of our legal creel on lakes other than Murray. All of the other club's/organizations use an 18" limit where it is legal, why shouldn't we?
Rick
|
|
|
|
Chipman
USA
48 Posts |
Posted - 07/25/2010 : 5:36:11 PM
|
We went to the Hill for two reasons that I see. First being the shape of the Lake Murray Striper population. The second was the shape of the Striper population on the Hill. One was great and the other wasin badshape. It would "appear" that the conditions have reversed. Murray appears to be in better shape than the Hill at this time. It might be time to let the Hill get back in shape. It is a great lake to fish, just like Murray. We have to recognize the cycles that all lakes go through.
On a related topic, some of the club has gone to other lakes for a few days late fall. It started on Cherokee and has been at the Hill for the last couple of years. That is with the exception of Marshall, Woodie and myself spending some sub artic days on Cherokee a couple of years ago. I plan to check out some Tennessee lakes for a trip this fall. I don't see me taking vacation to go fish the Hill this year.
Just one guy's two cents.
Chipman |
|
|
|
VanMan
USA
66 Posts |
Posted - 07/25/2010 : 6:55:03 PM
|
Sounds like the popular opinion on this board may be an 18" limit if we fish the Hill. I would agree the smaller limit would make the tournament more competitive for more people, and certainly change some startegies as Warren mentioned. With hybrids being fairly plentyful, they are fun to catch and put up a good fight if no bigger fish are biting that day. However if we want to stay 21" for all fish then we might as well stay on Murray. If we fished another lake where say the limit was "no keepers over 24" then we would have to abide by those size limits as well. Maybe the lake limits help set our tournament rules but I would also hate to bring smaller than 21" to the scales on Murray during the summer. If they do change the 2011 summer regs to "first 5 fish caught" then we may not have a chice next year.
Rick, I ceratinly cannot answer the question on if a "web posting" would serve as a "written notice two weeks before a vote", (especially since we no longer mail anything out)but I would think most members would want to have a live discussion at the meeting prior to changing any major bylaws unless time was a factor. Secondly would any information or voting ever need to remain within the club and not be posted on an open public website? We would probably have to change the current bylaw to "include" web postings as an acceptable form of communication, before it could be accepted.
Oh well the Pac does a great job on their decisions with the input we provide and whatever is decided is fine as long as it is fair to all, preserves the fisheries and keeps the fun in fishing. This is a great club and I really enjoy the fellowship, learning new tips at the meetings and participating in our freindly competitions each month.
As Forest Gump says; "Thats all I have to say about that!
Keep on fishing...
VanMan
|
|
|
|
Tom Gitto
222 Posts |
Posted - 07/25/2010 : 7:54:14 PM
|
I think all the input on this issue is good stuff, that is what makes this club so special.. Having said that we should consider the fact that this club is not primarily a tx club. It;s a youth tx, ladies tx, ride along tx, family , teaching ( as evidenced by our monthly programs) club. We also help people in distress, Haiti, Chili, DNR, ect.. We do sustain our club by dues, size of membership, door prize ticket sales, Hydra glow tx particapation.. We have one more tx on the hill August 21st . If we change the limit to 18 inches for this one tx it would make the weighin more competitive as long as we can find a way to put Lee,Kreg,Weston,Rick,Donnie,and Richy in jail for Sat from 6am to3pm. The PAC meets on August 3rd . We will give alot of time to this important issue I;m sure. In my opinion there is more to this beautiful lake and club then fish in the box, txs, who wins or loses, or how many fish you catch , we should concentrate more on the whole picture. Taking the kids,wives, and older members like Me FISHING. Thanks in advance for your time.
Tom Gitto |
|
|
|
Fogman
USA
227 Posts |
Posted - 07/25/2010 : 9:25:50 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jon Boy
Or... we could just give a trophy to everybody that catches any kind of fish at all. Kind of like YMCA T-ball for Tots.... everyones a winner. The unique thrill about fishing for stripers (over perch, crappies, largemouths) is the size. Let the winner be determined by the person that can find that bigger fish. My opinion, if I have to weigh in an 18 inch fish to win, I'd just as soon lose.
From my perspective, the better argument would be getting the points system back to a year-long battle, rather than 2 separate six-tournament competitions. But that's a whole 'nother story.
Jon Boy
OK Jon Boy, I guess Striper Kings, SBCC, and Clarks Hill Striper Club are just "YMCA-- Everybody's a Winner Organizations," because they allow 18 inchers to come to the scales on lakes that don't have 21+?" I don't think so. We're just talking about adding an element to our tournaments that could make weigh-ins more interesting in taking advantage of what is readily available on a lake that we are fishing. Do we want to make everywhere we fish a tournament a 26 inch limit like on Santee? Where does it stop? 21 is Lake Murray limit. Who said that is the be-all-end-all length everywhere? I like and have caught a few big fish. That is our overall pursuit. On Clarks Hill, if we are going to fish it, lets use what's available to make our tournaments more competitive and interesting.
As for our points system, though I think the TOTY points should be tweeked a little, I think our concept of separating team and individual tournaments is good. Everyone has to earn their individual standing and not just benefit whatever boat they happen to be on board. I guess we can start a new thread if you like
|
|
|
|
Jon Boy
USA
145 Posts |
Posted - 07/25/2010 : 11:10:09 PM
|
The SBCC, CHSC, and SK clubs also don't change their rules every time the wind changes directions. They have a different scoring system and weigh in different numbers of fish. They also don't change their rules based on someone not winning a tournament or not having a fish to weigh in. You make my point for me. As you said, where does it stop? Do we allow 10 fish limits to be weighed in? That's legal on some lakes. Do we allow short fish to be weighed in in July and August on Murray? That's legal. And just how does a few anglers weighing in 4 18" hybrids make our tournaments any more competitive and more interesting? And in who's opinion? In the example you site, is the SBCC, CHSC, or SK tournament more competitive and interesting than ours? And, if I were to enter their tournament under those rules, would I not have an equal chance (competitive)?
We are already "invading" Clark's Hill, to relieve pressure on our home lake and prevent the slaughter of short fish, for the good of the resource. That, I believe was a good and well-intended decision, based on what we knew at the time. We believed Clark's Hill could withstand the pressure better than Murray at that time. Maybe so, maybe not. But we made that decision with good intentions. But I don't believe rewarding folks for targeting smaller fish is the right answer, under any circumstances.
But to cut to the heart of the matter;
Prior to the past year, the points had remained relatively unchanged. Since I joined the club in 2001 (and from what I have heard, well prior to that) we only changed the points awarded for meeting attendance and for paying to fish a tournament. Those changes were based on encouraging participation in the meeting attendance and in the tournaments. Both I believe were succesful. The 2004, 2005 and 2006 tournaments were probably the most well-attended we have ever had, and our meetings likewise. Now I see a reversal of that trend, and that is what concerns me. In the past year, we have changed:
1) the AOTY points kept separate from TOTY points
2) 10 tournaments total with combined points changed to 6 tournaments TOTY, and 6 AOTY.
3) Fishing Clark's Hill lake for two tournaments
4) Points awarded based on finishing position rather than ounces of fish weighed.
We haven't even given those changes a chance to be fairly evaluated. We need to make changes during a crisis like a fish kill, or a Regulation change, but sheesh!
I am all in favor of changes made for increasing interest, participation, or to preserve the fishery, and I do believe that some change is good and necessary. I just don't see any of those being germane to the arguments here. The argument that the tournament is more competitive is just not true. I could just as easily argue that if the minumum length was changed to 23" or 25" it would be more competitive. It can just not be substantiated except by everyone having an equal opportunity, which they do already. If you say you hate to turn back an 18" fish, and that 18" fish fight hard and are fun to catch, there's absolutely nothing to prevent you from catching them, fighting them, and keeping them to cook now, with the current rules.
So... my point is the same as my original post. WHY are we changing the rules, again? IF it is for the good of the fishey, then by all means, change them. IF it is going to result in better participation, then by all means change them.
My concern is that there seems to be a "sour grapes" contingent of partipants in the club that support a rules change based on their belief that they will fare better under a different set of rules, and the betterment of the club or the resource is secondary. When I hear comments like "whose boat you are on", and "I would have won if the rules were different"... that is the only conclusion I can draw.
Like I said, if anyone can convince me that we need to change our rules to an 18" weigh-in minimum, encouraging participants to target smaller fish, to improve the fairness to all competitors, increase excitement, make the tournament more competitive, or increase participation numbers, I am all for it. How many times have we heard at our club meetings a rant and rage against guides who put clients on those same fish? I say it is a double standard.
I do not want to appear closed minded about change. That is not my intent. My only hope is that the PAC will rule based on facts, not on emotion from a bad tournament or two, and based on the perception the public will have of what our club does.
Jon Boy |
Edited by - Jon Boy on 07/26/2010 01:34:11 AM |
|
|
|
RealityBites
USA
399 Posts |
Posted - 07/26/2010 : 12:32:24 AM
|
Well said Jon Boy...
TWITTER on tournament day! Fish pics and reports: RealityBites1
"I've spent 85% of my lifes wages on fishing, the rest I just wasted..." |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
|
© 2010 CharlestonFishing.Com, LLC |
|
|
|
Clarks Hill Tournaments
