AOTY 2010 interest

I realize it's still only early February, but we currently have only about twenty folks signed up for AOTY this year.  It's too late this year to really change anything but I'm just looking for some feedback on how to increase participation (that and I'm hoping to motivate some of the slackers in the bunch). 

Thanks,
Brian

I think it would help if you counted fewer fish.  As I understand it, currently you count the top 10 fish from each angler towards their score.  I'm personally going to have difficulty getting to fish for 10 different species, let alone try to catch 10 that can get good points.  I consider myself to have decent time to fish, and for people that don't get as much time as myself, or some others, catching all those different species becomes difficult.

Also, if sponsors are donating the prizes, what does the entry fee go to?

I don't know what you can do to increase the sign-up rate at the moment - I didn't sign up last year until I realized that I might as well, since I was fishing as much as I was.

Also, if sponsors are donating the prizes, what does the entry fee go to?

 Sponsors donate some prizes outright.  In other case, we buy them at a sponsor discount.  The rest goes into Brian's pocket ... NOT.  All fund cover costs for this event and others.  It all goes back into NWKA events.

-Allen

Just curious 

My hesitation had to do with retention rules.  The gap between retention rules and recreational fishing is getting so wide, the two really have nothing to do with each other.  Normally, I would feel great about catching a three foot sturgeon or a wild coho because I'm not really in it for the food.  But the contest's tie-in to retention rules becomes more of a liability for the contest as the rules get more restrictive.  Maybe consider switching to "a fish is a fish" guideline if others feel this way too.

An even more likely scenario playing out now is the economic situation most of us are in, and which Oregon voters have decided to extend.  Not much you can do about that one.

The rest goes into Brian's pocket ... NOT.

What?  I wish.

My hesitation had to do with retention rules.  The gap between retention rules and recreational fishing is getting so wide, the two really have nothing to do with each other.  Normally, I would feel great about catching a three foot sturgeon or a wild coho because I'm not really in it for the food.  But the contest's tie-in to retention rules becomes more of a liability for the contest as the rules get more restrictive.  Maybe consider switching to "a fish is a fish" guideline if others feel this way too.

I'm a little confused here by your comments.  What is the liability of retention?  You don't have to actually retain and eat the fish to count it for points.  Catch-Photo-Release is highly encouraged. We have the "retention rule" in place to primarily avoid the backlash tournaments and forums can get in the Pacific Northwest when someone finds out you've been encouraging the molestation of native salmon/steelhead by lifting them out of the water to measure them and and photograph them.  Besides, in Washington you can't legally lift a native salmon out of the water to measure it and I haven't figured out how to use the hawg trough underwater at the side of the kayak.

An even more likely scenario playing out now is the economic situation most of us are in, and which Oregon voters have decided to extend.  Not much you can do about that one.

I hear you about the current economic situation possibily being a factor, and I'm trying to use this poll to see how much of a factor it might be (hence the $40 is a bit steep option).

An even more likely scenario playing out now is the economic situation most of us are in

hey! i resemble that remark.... 

To expand on what bsteves is saying - from what I understand, it's illegal to remove any fish completely from the water if it's not legal to retain it. (at least in WA)

I'm a little confused here by your comments.  What is the liability of retention?  You don't have to actually retain and eat the fish to count it for points.

Sorry about the confusion.  Of course I encourage the catch and release aspect - and I get the reason for the contest rule.  What I mean is that when fish eligibility is directly tied to "if" the fish could have been retained, and then at the same time, retention rules are becoming stricter, the result is that less fish will count.  I can't always plan my fishing around the retention rules, so while I might have some fun catching fish this year, some of them just plain won't count for the contest.  It's going to get harder and harder to make the two match up as the retention guidelines get more restrictive.

I'm a little confused here by your comments.  What is the liability of retention?  You don't have to actually retain and eat the fish to count it for points.

Sorry about the confusion.  Of course I encourage the catch and release aspect - and I get the reason for the contest rule.  What I mean is that when fish eligibility is directly tied to "if" the fish could have been retained, and then at the same time, retention rules are becoming stricter, the result is that less fish will count.  I can't always plan my fishing around the retention rules, so while I might have some fun catching fish this year, some of them just plain won't count for the contest.  It's going to get harder and harder to make the two match up as the retention guidelines get more restrictive.

I guess for me that is part of the challenge of the "Game".  For instance: I make sure to get a Cabazon early in the summer before they possibly close it due to the quota being reached etc. Seasons/retention limits/ handling rules and closures are all there to help protect fish. Ignoring them for the sake of making a fishing contest simpler might send the wrong message. 

 Short of some possible changes in quota numbers coming down the pipe for strugeon I can't think of any large changes in retention rules in the recent past (sure they closed the Nehalem to Chinook but 5 miles away its open in Tillamook). In fact for salmon, this year will most likely be less restrictive than the last few.

I guess for me that is part of the challenge of the "Game".  For instance: I make sure to get a Cabazon early in the summer before they possibly close it due to the quota being reached etc. Seasons/retention limits/ handling rules and closures are all there to help protect fish. Ignoring them for the sake of making a fishing contest simpler might send the wrong message. 

 Short of some possible changes in quota numbers coming down the pipe for strugeon I can't think of any large changes in retention rules in the recent past (sure they closed the Nehalem to Chinook but 5 miles away its open in Tillamook). In fact for salmon, this year will most likely be less restrictive than the last few.

Good points.  I'm not advocating ignoring anything and of course the rules are there for good reasons.  Just stating the simple fact that if retention becomes more difficult, the contest becomes more difficult.  Bottomfishing is banned year-round in many areas in British Columbia waters, which could be a sign of things to come for the San Juans.  Not saying its wrong...just makes it harder to fish.

To expand on what bsteves is saying - from what I understand, it's illegal to remove any fish completely from the water if it's not legal to retain it. (at least in WA)

WTF?  Outside of the obvious instances, the difference between retainable and not can only be verified by measurement.  My eyes aren't calibrated down to that degree... and when I've got $40 in it you bet your a$$ I'm measuring every fish that looks close to retainable.  

I wouldn't worry about measuring a fish that wasn't quite large enough to make the minimum (or maximum) size.   How are you supposed to know it wasn't retainable until you measure it.  I guess it's a bit of a catch-22 in that regard.

The point of the WA law is for when you catch say a wild salmon or an out of season fish there is no need to take the fish out of the water to measure it before releasing it.  Just release it while it's still in the water to improve its survival. 

I think I prefered the old way with only ten species.  I know the general concensus was it needed to be changed but I think it made people get out and try some new things.  I know Spot fished hours for his bass and probably wouldn't even have gone walleye fishing except he felt he needed to if he wanted to win.  Not sure if PP ever made it but it sounded like he was gunna try and get some walleye to.  Plus the only two full cards took 1st and 2nd.  This year a full card doesn't really mean much.  I suppose there is a argument saying the new system will make trophy fish count more since there should be more people with ten species entered. 

I hope a bunch more people are going to enter and just haven't signed up yet. I like looking at fish pictures.


(I reserve the right to change my opinion on the new format at the end of the year  )