Tndeer Logo

Page 2 of 9 <12345>Last »
Topic Options
#835080 - 07/23/08 08:16 PM Re: I'm taking a poll on Caney Size Regs [Re: bowriter]
Stalker
8 Point


Registered: 12/06/04
Posts: 1468
Loc: Greene / Cocke County

Offline
 Originally Posted By: bowriter
Model 70- Explain to me just how you would do that and how you would enforce it. It didn't work 20 years ago. How would it be better now?

Now as to my statement re size limits. That stream is not stocked for the trophy fisherman. It is not stocked for the flyfisherman or the bait fisherman. It is stocked for the enjoyment of all fishermen, very few of whom would support a size limit or even understand it.

Why, pray tell, can't we just leave it alone. There are very few of us interested in trophy trout. Why can't it just continue to be managed for trout fishing?

And scrubs, I haven't written for that rag in 15 years. But I think I'll start again. \:\)

7mm08- No, I never have. Never gave it a thought. The trout fishing here is so much better, it never crossed my mind to fly somewhere and fish for smaller fish.

Now Gil- What evidence do you speak of?

I'm having fun, now.


Get'm BW!!

I think that the regs should support having a fishery not a trophy fishery...We are experiencing the same crap on Smallmouth over here in Region IV and it stinks...I understand some of the slot limit for brood fish but in some good areas they have changed to 1 fish 20"...I'm sorry that is managing the entire fishery for trophies only and that aint what my dollars should be funding. You can not have or expect to have trophy fish on your line every time you go...what kinda trophy would that be if you caught them everyday?
_________________________
"A government strong enough to give you everything you want, is powerful enough to take everything you have" Thomas Jefferson


Top
#835290 - 07/23/08 09:51 PM Re: I'm taking a poll on Caney Size Regs [Re: ]
Doskil
6 Point


Registered: 09/23/07
Posts: 764
Loc: NC USA

Offline
I think managing browns for 'trophy' status is fine but leave the rainbows and brookies for the dinner table
Top
#835333 - 07/23/08 10:26 PM Re: I'm taking a poll on Caney Size Regs [Re: Doskil]
gil1
12 Point


Registered: 04/06/07
Posts: 6349
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: Doskil
I think managing browns for 'trophy' status is fine but leave the rainbows and brookies for the dinner table


Not stirring, but couldn't you live with seven 15 1/2 inch rainbows for supper per outing?
_________________________
It is not the killing ...; it is the contest of skill and cunning. The true hunter counts his achievement in proportion to the effort involved and the fairness of the sport.

Dr. Saxton Pope

Top
#835369 - 07/24/08 12:26 AM Re: I'm taking a poll on Caney Size Regs [Re: gil1]
bowriter
Non-Typical


Registered: 08/31/02
Posts: 42314
Loc: Lebanon,TN USA

Offline
Okay. Being serious now. Here is the problem with slot limits and most size limits on trout in a place such as the Caney. I should say, here are the problems because they are manifold. And let me also state, I throw them all back so I am not affected by any kind of limits.

#1- As I stated earlier, the majority of fishermen, just as with the majority of hunters, are not trophy enthusiasts. Therefore, that river would be managed for a minority. That, to me, is not fair.

#2-It is my belief that the reason for the size of the browns in the Caney is that they are more predatory and to some degree, harder to catch once they reach a larger size. I am not convinced the 18" size limit has a single thing to do with it. Afterall, there are plenty of rainbows being thrown back to produce a trophy fish in common amounts. Few are actually caught over 8#.

#3- RE trophy waters: If you have trophy water on a river, it must either be a stretch at the mouth or at the head. It can't be in the middle. When this was first discussed, I'm thinking maybe 15 years ago. I pointed out to the then head of enforcement, the enforcement problems and how easy it would be for anyone ticketed to get it thrown out of court. Those problems still exist. You have to ban live bait fishing and go to barbless, single hooks. You can't do that in the middle of a floatable river and make a case. Just as you can't ticket someone for having an undersized fish in the middle of a floatable river. No judge would even hear it.

#4- The trout fishing on the Caney is better than any I have seen out West. Keep in mind, I lived in WY for 10 years and fished most, if not all of the major streams in WY and MT. By a long mile, I have caught far bigger rainbows and browns out of the Caney in one year than I caught out there in 10 years.

#5- When you take the first five into consideration, then add the incredible fishery that river is right now (crowding not included)I can't see a reason for change. There is ample opportunity to catch trophy fish right now and that opportunity has been there for almost as long as I can remember. You just have to know how, when and where to fish for big fish. A size limit or slot limit will not change that. For that to change, the entire river would have to be no live bait, single barbless hooks and closed to fishing for at least three months each year. And that is just not fair.

Now my field of expertise is not in icthyology. But it appears to me, those of us who would really like to catch trophy fish, whatever your definition of that is, are already practicing catch and release. So do we want now to force our views on others who may not agree with us? Gil, didn't I just read a post of yours in answer to a post from Troy that was against that very thing? \:\)

Come on guys. Keep in mind, that river is only 26 miles long from dam to mouth. And for the most part, less than half of it gets any fishing pressure. If you want to declare from Stonewall to the mouth trophy water, I'll support that...cause that's where the real trophy fish are right now.

I wonder if you realize I started this whole dang thing back 25 years ago with an article, "Silver Bullets of the Caney Fork." Until that ran, you never saw another fisherman on that creek.
_________________________

Constipation has ruined many a good day. Not as many as stupidity, though.

Top
#835392 - 07/24/08 02:16 AM Re: I'm taking a poll on Caney Size Regs [Re: bowriter]
stillinscrubs
4 Point


Registered: 08/16/07
Posts: 351
Loc: nashville, tn

Offline
BW,

You're a legend in your own mind. Anyone who buys the load you shovel deserves what they get.

Top
#835433 - 07/24/08 05:04 AM Re: I'm taking a poll on Caney Size Regs [Re: stillinscrubs]
bowriter
Non-Typical


Registered: 08/31/02
Posts: 42314
Loc: Lebanon,TN USA

Offline
 Originally Posted By: stillinscrubs
BW,

You're a legend in your own mind. Anyone who buys the load you shovel deserves what they get.


Perhaps you'd care to elucidate?
_________________________

Constipation has ruined many a good day. Not as many as stupidity, though.

Top
#835446 - 07/24/08 05:28 AM Re: I'm taking a poll on Caney Size Regs [Re: ]
bowriter
Non-Typical


Registered: 08/31/02
Posts: 42314
Loc: Lebanon,TN USA

Offline
Well said C. Hook. No problem with your views. If the Caney was constantly stocked, I would have no problem with slot limits. My posisiton is, with the stocking and the number of fish not caught or caught and released, there is no need for it. As it is, it is bascially a fish pond...just a long one.
_________________________

Constipation has ruined many a good day. Not as many as stupidity, though.

Top
#835758 - 07/24/08 08:52 AM Re: I'm taking a poll on Caney Size Regs [Re: bowriter]
gil1
12 Point


Registered: 04/06/07
Posts: 6349
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
Of course we don't NEED slot limits, but do we want them? I wish I had the data from the Tech survey taken a few years ago. We used the results as evidence to try to get the brown trout regs. on the Caney. Basically, the data showed that things have changed. The definition of a "quality fishing experience" is changining dramatically from years ago. Yeah, the states around us have changed, and we're ripe for a change, too.

I think that if you build it, they will come. In other words, those that disagree can be swayed once they see the difference. I believe that's what happened on Dale Hollow when people were adamantly against limits but are for limits now.

According to the survey, people want to catch bigger trout. They're willing to give a little to do that because what they get back is much better. Instead of driving to AK, KY, or GA for that experience, they'd like a shot at that here. There are plenty of ditches that are stocked in the urban stocking program here that can be unprotected and solely for the meateaters.

But the Caney has room for tons of improvement in that fish are starting to holdover well. Obviously, and I'll never understand why folks don't get it, but the more you protect the fish, the more and bigger the fish will be to catch. Only a fool can't figure that one out. "Size limits don't work." - if enforced, name me one example in the world where they don't, just one. Anyone that has ever fished a healthy catch and release trout river knows differently.

There is no data on how effective the brown limits are on the Caney. The science has not been done, and there are too many factors at work. The overwhelming majority believes that they are producing astonishing results because the big brown fishing has been so off the charts, but although it may seem obvious that the regs. are working, nobody knows for sure why there has been such a big brown explosion.

Just like the Cumby in KY, the only way to know if it works is to try. The results have been remarkable, and the public has been swayed. They love the rainbow slots and the 1 brown over 20. And as much as I love the Caney and see its potential, it can't, won't, hasn't, and never will fish as well as the Cumby (or not consistently) because there are few protections for the fish.

I'm really sick of hearing that something won't or can't work because TWRA won't enforce the regs. That's a cop-out. You put pressure, do the best you can, get TWRA behind it full-force, and soon the people will be behind it. They can be won over, but it takes time. Some folks will never play by the rules. And some others need to be slowly swayed into progressive management so that they can see and believe in the results themselves.

Really, no offense to anybody and all and this is just my opinion, but it's time to move on. It's time to stop living in the past. It's time to start believing that people can't change because they do, they have, and they will. Progressive management is working all around us. Not only that, people love the results. Everybody wins. The meathunters are happy because they get tons for supper and the fishermen are happy because the fishing is much better.

The other side benefit to regulation is that you force folks into a change in thinking - that a river is a precious and limited resource. For some folks, the Caney is a drive-thru fast food window. They pay for their license, they catch and eat all they can, they toss their trash in the driveway, and they move on to their next meal without thinking of any consequences to the resource.

I believe progressive management teaches people to think for just a little bit. Maybe they will even teach their kids to protect the resource. The reason I joke about the Caney being just a big ditch is because that's what some folks see when they take from it. In my mind, it's a much more complex and beautiful gal. Maybe we can enlighten some others to take stock in the resource instead of just using it as a drive-thru.
_________________________
It is not the killing ...; it is the contest of skill and cunning. The true hunter counts his achievement in proportion to the effort involved and the fairness of the sport.

Dr. Saxton Pope

Top
#835794 - 07/24/08 09:16 AM Re: I'm taking a poll on Caney Size Regs [Re: gil1]
onerarebreed
Spike


Registered: 07/23/08
Posts: 74
Loc: Tn

Offline
can anyone tell me what the leafy stuff growing in the Caney fork is.I have lived on the river all my life and it did not start growing there until a few years back.
_________________________
Life is a garden.Dig it
Countryfied and Satisfied and I aint gonna change my ways.

Top
#835830 - 07/24/08 09:36 AM Re: I'm taking a poll on Caney Size Regs [Re: onerarebreed]
bowriter
Non-Typical


Registered: 08/31/02
Posts: 42314
Loc: Lebanon,TN USA

Offline
OKAY-MY BAD In my last post, it should have read if the Caney was NOT constantly stocked.

Now Gil. \:\) I never said size limits don't work. Of course they do. I am not convinced they would make much difference on the Caney in terms of rainbow trout. What I said was...and I stick by this, are they fair? I also said a trophy "piece of the river won't work". I stick by that as well.

I have no idea what survey you refer to re folks wanting bigger fish. But I suspect if you asked 100 fishermen on the Caney, they would all, 100% say they want bigger fish. Now ask them if they are willing to throw fish back to achieve that goal. The ones who speak fluent English might, by about 40%. But I am also pretty sure, at least 70% of those surveyed would just like to catch...and keep a limit of trout.

Remember, we here on this forum are accustomed to catching 20-50 fish a day. The average Caney fisherman is tickled to death with a limit.

I know as a staunch TU member, you have certain standards to adhere to. I also know you believe in those standards. I have no problem with that at all. But as you know, I don't keep trout. They are all C&R to me. But I do feel an obligation to the Joe Saturday fisherman. Right now, the Caney Fork just suits his needs ideally. And is that not, afterall, what that fishery should be about? That guy is not going to KY or wherever to catch bigger fish. That guy could care less about big trout if he can only keep one. That guy...just wants to catch him a limit of fish to eat. I don't have a problem with that. That is why that river is constantly stocked.

Now, stop stocking? That's a whole new ballgame. Then I am in your corner 100%.

RE the grass. I don't know what it is but it has been there a long time. It is just getting more prevalent.

Again, let me state. I don't keep any trout. So I have no personal axe to grind. Make the whole shebang no fish under 24 inches, I'm cool with that. But let's not apply QDM logic to a fishery equation.

And hasn't this become a dadgummed good discussion?
_________________________

Constipation has ruined many a good day. Not as many as stupidity, though.

Top
Page 2 of 9 <12345>Last »


Moderator:  RUGER, Unicam, CBU93, stretch, Bobby G, Cuttin Caller, Kimber45, Mrs.Unicam, Crappie Luck, gtk 
Hop to:
Top Posters
4106599
RUGER
88400
Deer Assassin
65979
BSK
62020
Crappie Luck
51392
spitndrum
Newest Members
yarddawg54, schiesser, bigdoc, Bggamehunter, willy2763
13605 Registered Users
Who's Online
0 registered and 39 anonymous users online.
Forum Stats
13605 Members
43 Forums
100233 Topics
1180120 Posts

Max Online: 788 @ 11/11/13 08:06 PM
Moon Phase
CURRENT MOON
December
Su M Tu W Th F Sa
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31
Forum Donations
The TnDeer.Com Deer Talk Forum is for Tennessee Deer Hunters by Tennessee Deer Hunters. If you enjoy using our Talk Forum and would like to contribute to help in it's up-keep. Just submit your contribution by clicking on the DONATE button below and paying with PayPal or a major credit card. Any amount is much appreciated. Thanks for your support!

TN Burn Safe

Generated in 0.006 seconds in which 0.001 seconds were spent on a total of 15 queries. Zlib compression enabled.