2009 Angler of the Year Feedback

2009 is fast approaching.  Anyone have any ideas/feedback on possible updates to the AOTY competition?  Voice 'em here and we can discuss.

-Allen

more variety of marine species.. lots of fish out there ie.. flounder, pile perch, greenling,  different kinds of rockfish etc. etc.  Would be fun to have lots of opportunities in the salt and maybe get more folks interested and exploring different  potential yak fisheries.

Thanks for the feedback PP.  Yup, we're considering some expansion of species.  I'm sure we could go overboard on the rockfish, but perhaps seperate out blacks and blues to their own category.  Love the perch, greenling, and flounder idea.

Salmon ... should we add chum and pinks?  Not much of a run in OR for these species.  Or maybe make a combined silver/chum/pink category.

Trout ... separate out cutthroat and lakers?

But how about some contraction as well.  I don't recall anyone (whether entered in AOTY or not) catching a halibut or a walleye this year (at least in WA or OR).

I recall some questions about catfish, but again, I don't recall anyone catching a yakcatfish this year.

Our BC brothers want in.  Last year we just deferred the topic.  Should we revisit this again?

-Allen

Adding species to AOTY is pretty trivial.  Right now we have four marine species, four anadromous species (although 2 are caught almost exclusively in fresh water), and five fresh water species.  I think this strikes a good balance at the moment.  If we had different kinds of rockfish,  one could argue to split up the various trout and panfish as well.  Flounder, perch, and greenling are potential add ons, but so are sockeye, chum and pink salmon, carp, and pike minnows.

Is everyone happy with the point allocations?  Do you think there are some species that are worth more or less per inch than they should be?

We talked earlier of having bonus points for "winning" at gatherings.  For example, who ever catches the largest target fish at one of our monthly events.

Mini-tournaments?  We could set up within AOTY a mini-tournament that only lasts a day (weekend, week, or month, etc) with all the same rules but the points are only calculated from fish caught within that time frame.

Anyway, I need to know soon as I don't have a lot of time to make changes between my work schedule, the holidays, and Jan 1, 2009 when next year's AOTY starts.

Brian

Good question on the points allocation.  In looking at the top 3 fish in each category, I have the following observations, assuming we are looking at normalizing on 150 points for an average/typical fish.

Lingcod seems low in points per inch.  It would take a 37.5 inch fish to make 150 points.  Maybe up it to 5 points per inch (30" gets you 150).

The average Chinook points for the top 3 was only 126.   Maybe up it to 4.5 points per inch (33.3" gets you 150).

Trout was wacky with the laker I caught, which is why I suggested breaking them out.  If lakers are extracted, may bump PPI to 8 (18.75" gets you 150).

For the size largemouth we get up here, I don't think it bears less PPI than smallmouth.  Set both smallmoutch and largemouth to 8.5 PPI (17.6" fish gets you 150).

Panfish PPI is on the low side.  Right now a 15" panfish would get you 150 points.  Probably more appropriate for it to be in the 11-12 inch range, perhaps 13 PPI (11.5" panfish gets you 150 points).

-Allen

New points sound like a good thing.  What I do for NCKA's AOTY was to keep everyone's previous years fish (no need to delete anything) and update the program with a filter to only count fish from the current year.  I also put up a static copy of the leaderboard for the previous year.  That way, even if the point allocations switch for 2009, the points and ranking of the 2008 AOTY leaderboard don't change and you can always go back and see how people did in the past.

Brian

Personally I think the card is too full with 13 species. A full card should be 10 fish so that we could concentrate on getting the best fish in each category instead of just checking each off the list. It felt a little too much like a mad dash.

Halibut. For Washington anglers one month is just too narrow of a time limit to get one. At least disproportionately to Oregon. I think trout should be trout no matter what species. I think running around the state to catch a rainbow, laker, steelhead etc. would lend it to become pretty mundane IMO.  Also, i'd like to see the panfish bow out. Although it is fishing, I felt it to be more of a chore to fish for them other than looking forward to a new species.

Z

Also, i'd like to see the panfish bow out. Although it is fishing, I felt it to be more of a chore to fish for them other than looking forward to a new species.

Hey, maybe it's a chore for someone with the wrong gear and no panfishing skills, but as a father of a 3 yr old son, I think I'll be seeing a lot of panfish in my future and would like to keep it.

Let's see, I spent eight days on the water this year for salmon and all I have to show for it is a wife giving me crap about not catching one.  That to me is a chore.

Brian

Great points Z.  If you all were following NCKA AOTY this year, it really is heating up for the top spot with the top anglers looking for upgrades instead of filling their tab.

Going along these same lines, I might suggest merging largemouth and smallmouth.

What would you suggest for the 10 categories?

I might suggest something like:

1) King Salmon
2) Silver/Chum/Pink/Sockeye
3) Freshwater Bass
4) Lingcod
5) Rockfish
6) Cabezon
7) Trout (except #8)
8 ) Lakers and Steelhead (similar length qualities).
9) Sturgeon
10) Shad ... what the hell!!!

-Allen

Great points Z.  If you all were following NCKA AOTY this year, it really is heating up for the top spot with the top anglers looking for upgrades instead of filling their tab.

Exactly. I think we've got a lot to learn about the way it's done down there. It was really exciting this year!

Going along these same lines, I might suggest merging largemouth and smallmouth.

I think we have solid stocks of these in both states and they are around most of the year. I think keeping these in play separately is important to have a solid area that we can contest each other in.

What would you suggest for the 10 categories?

1) King Salmon
2) Silver/Chum/Pink/Sockeye
3) Smallmouth Bass
4) Largemouth Bass
5) Lingcod
6) Rockfish
7) Cabezon
8 ) Trout
9) Walleye
10) Sturgeon
 

Hey, maybe it's a chore for someone with the wrong gear and no panfishing skills

Ouch man... breathe.... breathe. OK, let's put it this way. Do any of us put our gear together the night before fishing and go "Man, I can't wait to catch that 12" Crappie!!" ?

Z

I'm all for merging bass and splitting trout.
King versus other salmon seems okay?  
What happens with a kokanee, do we count that as a lesser trout or a lesser salmon?

Maybe make #10 a catch all for other lesser fish (maybe with an approved list of species).  Not sure what the point allocation would be, but it would be the same for everything in the category.
Panfish, carp, flounder, catfish, surfperch, shad, pikeminnow, greenling, chubs, smelt, etc..

Walleye are a pretty important gamefish along the Columbia R as well as some eastern reservoirs.  It's a shame no one was able to take advantage of it.  I'd like to see it stay on the AOTY list, if not for any other reason that to get people to start a kayak walleye fishery.  Maybe just add it into "category 10" and you'd obviously get a decent length advantage over some of the other species in there.

Brian

Zee,

I see your point regarding largemouth and smallmouth.  So for my list, I'll separate them out and delete shad.

Other than that, we mostly agree except whether to have walleye or split trout to "big" and "small".  I could go either way, but if trout are to be one category, then the PPI should be adjusted a bit (maybe 6 PPI).

I'm a bit mixed on walleye.  On one hand, nobody here seems to fish them much.  On the other hand, AOTY might provide an incentive to do so.

-Allen

I've got to say that I really like the categories the way they are.  Maybe I'm just bias.  

Let's keep trout in one category but let's keep steelhead seperate.  That's one major thing that distinguishes us from the NorCal AOTY.

I'm OK with lumping Chum/Silver/Pinks/Sockey.  They're all fairly low percentage fish for oregon from a yak but it widens the opportunity.

Personally I'm against lumping Bass.  The techniques and habitat are different.
I hate bass fishing but it's fishing and requires different skills.
 
No Shad!

My kids really like panfish....

Ouch man... breathe.... breathe. OK, let's put it this way. Do any of us put our gear together the night before fishing and go "Man, I can't wait to catch that 12" Crappie!!" ?

Z

True, panfish is usually more about good numbers of decent fish than trying to catch one monster fish.  It's more of a "Man, I hope I fill my bucket with 10" crappie tomorrow!" kind of thing.  This is why I'm proposing a sort of trash fish/pan fish pot luck category.  I like seeing fish of all types and I'd like a way for someone who catches that 12" crappie to have it counted.

Brian

IMO, kokanee should be in the "lesser trout" category.

I don't know if I like a #10 catch-all category.  But maybe a separate side bet for most species caught in the year?

-Allen