Official 2013 AOTY thread.....

Could you expand on the State License division clause?  Washington vers Oregon on the Columbia especially.

Yes, that is what we had in mind when trying to word it.  The best way we came up with was that the license you used for that day's fishing is what state an entry applies to.  On the Columbia, you can fish the WA side with an OR license.  That fish would count as an OR fish since you used an OR license to catch it.  And visa versa.

-Allen

What fisheries would that pertain to?  Why would it matter?  Both states are always concurrent with bag limits and seasons, since they share the same waterway (Big C).  Hence allowing the reciprocal landings.  Is it to track and categorize the AOTY catches of individuals who purchase licenses in both states?  So if you wanted to win both states AOTY division you'd have to catch a nook on each states card out of the Columbia?

The only reason it matters is to make sure the rules are clear.  We didn't want anyone questioning which state division a fish would be in if caught on one state's license and landed in another states waters.  It is entirely consistent with the "reciprocity agreement".

-Allen

So the only reason for having different divisions for different states is for ensuring that the regulations are followed?

Nope.  More like bragging rights and prizes.

-Allen

+1

We wanted to give more opportunities for people to place, and make winning a possibility for more.  The "overall" division will still count entries from multiple states.

Cool, thanks for the clarification.

With regards to the point adjustments section, why were chums not given an adjustment?

Why should chum be adjusted?  There were 2 caught, that were barely over 200 points.  There was a 222 point Ling, 212 point rockfish, 231 point Halibut, 10+ Cabezon that are 200 points or more, a 205 point Chinook, a 232 point rainbow trout... caught by some dude in Oregon...

 - but seriously, why would we need to adjust Chum?  There are only 2 in the entire history of AOTY that were over 200 points, and this was noted to be an exceptional year for Chum.  If we decrease Chum, then Cabezon and several others would need a severe point-reducing beating with the nerf bat.

It just seems odd to me that of all the chums caught through the history of AOTY, they all fall into a pretty tight cluster of assigned point values that is between 174 - 207.  Yes, there are other species(cabezon, greenling, etc.) that tend to have a higher point value than other species on the board, but they have a much larger point spread because there is a much larger sample of the species since they have been caught more than chums.  If it is because of a great year of returns of chums, then YAY!  It's always good to see a run getting more healthy.  But it seems like we're only getting higher and higher on assigned point values to fish.  I obviously don't have the spreadsheet of numbers in front of me, but it looks like the average falls in the 190's.  For such a small sampling of the species, does that not seem high to anyone else?  It can't be that everyone is catching much larger than average chums, is it?  Or is our collective community just that much more badass than other fishermen?   

It just seems odd to me that of all the chums caught through the history of AOTY, they all fall into a pretty tight cluster of assigned point values that is between 174 - 207.  Yes, there are other species(cabezon, greenling, etc.) that tend to have a higher point value than other species on the board, but they have a much larger point spread because there is a much larger sample of the species since they have been caught more than chums.  If it is because of a great year of returns of chums, then YAY!  It's always good to see a run getting more healthy.  But it seems like we're only getting higher and higher on assigned point values to fish.  I obviously don't have the spreadsheet of numbers in front of me, but it looks like the average falls in the 190's.  For such a small sampling of the species, does that not seem high to anyone else?  It can't be that everyone is catching much larger than average chums, is it?  Or is our collective community just that much more badass than other fishermen?   

Well, you're hitting on the problems we've debated when it comes to assigning points.  In the end, we are assigning points to make "trophy fish" (or our definition of them) be about 200 points.  We are not optimizing for the average fish.  For fish species with a tight spread in lengths, this means that the average points goes up.  This is where strategy enters the equation for participants.

-Allen

Well, you're hitting on the problems we've debated when it comes to assigning points.  In the end, we are assigning points to make "trophy fish" (or our definition of them) be about 200 points.  We are not optimizing for the average fish.  For fish species with a tight spread in lengths, this means that the average points goes up.  This is where strategy enters the equation for participants.

-Allen

That makes sense.

So 2013 Payment site the same as 2012?if so can I post my payment now, may be the only chance to be in first place for a moment,as I'm going fishing on 10 mile in the Morning.

So 2013 Payment site the same as 2012?if so can I post my payment now, may be the only chance to be in first place for a moment,as I'm going fishing on 10 mile in the Morning.

No.  I'll put up a new Paypal and let you all know.  Remember, we have a grace period in which you can enter any fish caught from Jan 1-7 provided you pay by Jan 8.  This is because we still have a couple rule clarifications we'd like to work out and we'd don't want people to feel they paid for something that changed at a later date (when we finalize the rules).  The rules we have finalize are already posted on the signup thread, the biggest one being the strict mouth closed rule.  All entries in 2013 must have a mouth that is completely shut.

-Allen

Cool thanks.

I'm probably the only one who this matters to but I think the "no sails on board rule" bites. I agree it shouldn't be used to increase the range during fishing but I consider having it on board a safety issue.  Peddling my TI on the salt or up the Columbia alone is at least twice as hard as most other kayaks. Having the sail aboard for emergencies makes sense to me.

If I drift downstream on the Columbia and land at a different spot and drive a car back to pick up my trailer it's ok, but sailing back upstream after I've landed is banned. Don't see any justification for that. On days I don't catch an AOTY keeper I enjoy just sailing around to visit the guys, play in the swells, etc. if I do get some AOTY points I don't pop the sail.

Like all amateur sports, the integrity of the contestants should be assumed.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

I'm probably the only one who this matters to but I think the "no sails on board rule" bites. I agree it shouldn't be used to increase the range during fishing but I consider having it on board a safety issue.  Peddling my TI on the salt or up the Columbia alone is at least twice as hard as most other kayaks. Having the sail aboard for emergencies makes sense to me.

If I drift downstream on the Columbia and land at a different spot and drive a car back to pick up my trailer it's ok, but sailing back upstream after I've landed is banned. Don't see any justification for that. On days I don't catch an AOTY keeper I enjoy just sailing around to visit the guys, play in the swells, etc. if I do get some AOTY points I don't pop the sail.

Like all amateur sports, the integrity of the contestants should be assumed.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Are there really enough of us using sails to justify the "no sails" rule?
If not, maybe the rule should be revised or removed. I've been out with Hop and the sail really does make it easier for him to navigate the TI.
I'd hate for Hops fish to be disqualified due to the no sail rule if he's the only one who needs a sail.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

RR, thanks for the support but I'm NOT asking to be allowed to use the sail to compete in AOTY, just to be able to carry it on board. If I have to pedal back to the launch to pick up my sail to go play in the wind it wastes too much valuable on the water time.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Hoppa, the intent of the sail rule has not changed.  It was updated to clarify a grey area.  Having a sail on board does offer an advantage, whether you use it or not.  By your own words, it is a safety net, and one that is not available to other competitors.  This has been brought to my attention a number of times, that having a sail on board may allow a competitor to "push it" slightly farther than they otherwise would without a sail.  It was never the intention of the original rule to allow sails onboard, in use, or otherwise.

RR, it is not a matter of whether there is enough amongst us using sails to justify the rule.  It is a matter that there are enough amongst us that don't have a sail, some of whom perceive an unfair advantage.

BTW, at NCKA there are enough sailors there now that we have a sailing kayak division.  Hopefully someday we can do the same here.

The AOTY committee had to make some hard decisions this year, in terms of clarifying and updating rules.  Most changes were hotly contested and the decisions we made weigh heavy on us.  Believe me, it wasn't easy, and it still isn't.  But the lines have been drawn, and we drew them in places that we thought offered the most amount of fairness with the least amount of inconvenience to ALL competitors in the event.  Many of these decisions were sure to ruffle some feathers one way or another.  For that I will apologize.  But we did what we felt was best for the event and for all.  Thank you for your understanding.

-Allen

RR, it is not a matter of whether there is enough amongst us using sails to justify the rule.  It is a matter that there are enough amongst us that don't have a sail, some of whom perceive an unfair advantage.

-Allen

Thanks Allen. It makes sense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I like the changes that you guys are making.  I think the addition of the species is good and will help even out things for the guys in the east and Alaska.  I do feel those of us that live in southern Oregon are getting the short end of the stick because we don't have the sockeye and pink runs.  I would strongly encourage you to look at adding stripers to the list to balance things out.

I like the changes that you guys are making.  I think the addition of the species is good and will help even out things for the guys in the east and Alaska.  I do feel those of us that live in southern Oregon are getting the short end of the stick because we don't have the sockeye and pink runs.  I would strongly encourage you to look at adding stripers to the list to balance things out.

Hi Dana,

We did consider stripers this year, but in the end, decided not to add them.

Let me ask.  Has anyone here caught an Oregon striper from the kayak?  Has anyone here caught an Oregon striper not from a kayak?  How popular are these fisheries?  It is my understand (and I could be way wrong), that stripers are not present in enough numbers to have a consistent fishery.  Please do educate me if my understanding is incorrect.

-Allen

Jgrady caught a striper on the Umpqua this year from his kayak.  The Umpqua and smith have a fair striper fishery.  CBY and I did some research and scouting earlier this year into fishing the stripers but never got around to it because we were distracted with chasing aoty fish.  I have a lot of friends that have fished them over the years.  I'm not sure about the more southern rivers.