FLW Championship.... Problem?

[JLDII]

The state of Illinois HAS lifted their slot restrictions on the river for this tournament. The state of Iowa WILL NOT lift their slot restrictions. The FLW has told the contestants, via the tournament packets they all got, that the restrictions have been lifted in Illinois' waters.

What nobody seems to know though is how is this going to work. Will the tournament still be on both sides of the river, restricted on the one side, and unrestricted on the other. OR...Will the tourney be restricted to Illinois' waters only?

Strange isn't it??:o

[Guest123]

OLD News

http://www.walleyecentral.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=13&topic_id=11115&mesg_id=11115&page=5

[WAZZZ]

I'm sure the FLW knows. If you are in the tournament call FLW at 270-252-1000. I think it is important for you to understand the rules. If you are not in the tournament you should still call, I'm sure they would explain everything. Let us know what the facts are.

[JLDII]

Hadn't seen it before now. Sorry!

[Quad Cities angler]

Everyone should call the Iowa DNR and complain about this and all the other shenanigans the Iowa DNR has been doing to walleye tournaments.

[rudy]

laws are laws and we should all have to abide by the same ones regardless of what the special circumstances might be.the iowa dnr has developed the 'miss' into one of the finest walleye fisheries in the u.s. and they know what they are doing.bite your tongue and let them keep doing their work as fisheries biologists to keep managing our resourse succesfully.i'm not against the tournament or the fishermen who have been placed in this unfortunate situation but in the general publics eye it's making the tournament fishermen look bad.i talk to the locals on a daily basis as i run a sport shop here in clinton and most are not happy that the tourney anglers don't have to abide by the same rules as they do.i have talked to 3 pro's so far who were concerned that there will be retaliation from the public.i don't know how crazy some might get but most will just be left with yet another sour taste in their mouths.again, i am on both sides as i know the reason for not enforcing the slot is to tag as many fish as possible for mortality study.[which by the way, has already been done several times by the dnr]people here who know fishing were glad to finally get the slot put in so they are naturally going to be put out by the il dnr's decision to waive the slot for a tournament.i really didn't want to get involved because it's a no win situation for me[****ed if i do,****ed if i don't] but i wanted to get some true facts out there before this thing blows up.hopefully it won't happen and we can all go on to something else.it was suggested by a local that if the fishermen are worried about their image in the public eye that they could get together and ask the tournament director that they DO use the slot for the tournament.i know i've stuck my neck out but thats whats going on here.
by the way,fishing has not been worth a crap here.tons of weeds make casting and trolling nearly impossible at times.there seem to be millions of 2-4" shad EVERYWHERE.i've never seen this huge of a forage base here.i couldn't even catch a catfish on a crawler on wingdam last night if that gives you any indication of how tough it is.hopefully the bite will improve and they boys will catch some good fish without conflict.
good fishin',
rudy morgan

[one side]

I talked to a pro fishing it and he said they can only fish the ILL. side. How they mark or determine that is beyond me.

[Juls_OH]

It's the center of the navigation channel...between the red and green bouys. As for the locks that are on the Iowa side, the contestants must stay on the Illinois side of the locks if they have fish in their livewells on their way back in.

The Navionics chip shows the center line in the navigation channel by the way.

Juls

[Question]

Juls,
Maybe you know, I have a couple of guys that went straight from the PWT to there. If they are allowed to fish that way, the center of the navigation channel is not the state boundary is it? I thought the locks as you continue up are either in one state or the other, not split. The state line is the center of the orginal river not the shipping channel.

[makes sense]

Never fished there, but that makes sense.

[Nick(Ia)]

Rudy, you're not against walleye tournaments???? Since when? Is this you talking or are you reporting for the Iowa DNR?

Iowa anglers certainly have the right to question the Iowa DNR and their application of rules to walleye fishing and tournaments in particular. They have every right to question the science being used by the fisheries biologists to manipulate the fishery. The Iowa DNR is not, has not and will not be a friend of walleye tournaments for reasons that date back to the initial PWT event in Dubuque (early 90's) when several of our vaunted river biology staffers became personally involved with that tournament...the PWT has never been back. I'm sure all the other state DNR's are amazed that Iowa has been able to develop the river into the fishery it is...without their help and cooperation. Don't get me wrong, we have good people on the river doing their jobs but there certainly is a valid discussion point as to whether they have a parochial view of the resource.

Why is it every time a tournament comes to the Clinton area there is always a discussion of backlash by local anglers a thinly veiled threat of how "crazy" they might get or how things will "blow up". They wouldn't get "crazy" if you wouldn't whip them into a frenzy about the "outsiders-tournamment anglers" taking their fish. This isn't the first time this tactic has been used and it has always originated from your shop.

The only time there seems to be a problem(image questions, threats, harassment of tournament anglers) is when an event is on pool 14.

Rudy's shop is R & R Sports on N 2nd St, Clinton, Stay off the Iowa side of the river(mid-channel), enforcement will be out and they are looking to make someone an example. The bite is okay, not great but okay. Good luck to everyone participating.

[Fish_on]

Rudy you blow the same smoke every time a tournament comes to your area. No one believes what you say any more.

[Prchjerker]

I had to laugh at that one to Dave.

[EMOO]

I think everyone is in for a big surprise from the Iowa DNR..
Couple years back I was on the Ill. side doin my thing Iowa DNR checks for the 6th straight Sat.. Did I say 6th time .......
He's seen me so much he doesn't want to see my license anymore just check live well. Well low and be hold he says I've got a short fish he doesn't use the bumb board I offer but a small 12foot tape measure he carries in his pocket..Know he ask for my license so I says to him I am on the Ill. side right...His replie was what you so kind of smart #### your lucky my buddy isn't here he'd confiscant your boat and equipment..Thats when I told him not without a fight...
Get ready boys Iowa DNR are some REAL Richard Heads....

Ticket cost me 45.00 bucks plus 15 bucks for court cost and I didn't even go to court.................

[Qaud dude]

The state line does not go down the middle of the shipping channel. It does move in and out, especially around the damms.

It shows two lines on the nav and hot spot chips. Hot spots actually shows a dot dash line line a boarder. Navionics have red line for center of channel and purple/blue for state line.

Take the Muscatine Damm for example. The lock is on the IL side and the damm itself is on the IA side and unfishable if you are not fishing IA.

[Juls_OH]

I guess I'll be making some phone calls today...lol

The Corp. of Engineers told Sonny it was, but the question is, does the Iowa DNR agree with that? I'll see if I can find out more and let you know what I find out later today.

Juls

[Agreement]

It is my understanding that they have an agreement to use the shipping channel as the boundary for the tournament. The GPS line goes all over the river, not down the channel.

[Juls_OH]

That is my understanding too...

Juls

[Shep_Unloggable]

How the heck can they do this on a boundary water? I know they cooperate on the MI/WI border waters, and the WI/MN border waters. Something doesn't sound right. I don't see anyway they can abitrarily set it down the middle of the channel. If you happen to really be in IL waters in the middle, no way can IA do anything to you, tourney or not. It would take a lot of dollars to prove you were or were not on the IA side. This needs to be straightened out before the tourney. IA and IL need to be on the same page, slot or not.

[djpape]

The fisherman can obey the laws as long as they know what the rules are. The disagreement between the two states makes it hard to know what the rules are. One way or the other the Iowa and Illinois DNR should agree with one another. The real tragedy here is that the two departments can not agree. It’s probable down to two grown men that can’t agree. The slot rules agreement is in a trial period for five years. If these two departments can’t agree on this one, what happens to the slot after the five year period? So we have a fisheries policy based on a power struggle. If the Wisconsin DNR, Iowa DNR, Illinois DNR, and the US Fish and Wildlife could really work together on the Mississippi it could be the bests Walleye fisheries around.

Pools 9 and 14 are the only pools that have walleye fingerling stocking programs to enhance the walleye population of those pools. And those are the pools you can really catch some nice fish in. The stocking of pool 14 comes from Quad Cities Spray Canal ( The power plant south of Clinton on the Illinois side) The stocking of pool 9 comes from the Geno fish hatchery because they take brood stock from that pool. Pools 12 and 13 may get some left over stocking from the stocking of pool 14. Again If the Wisconsin DNR, Iowa DNR, Illinois DNR, and the US Fish and Wildlife could really work together on the Mississippi it could be the bests Walleye fisheries around.

[Prchjerker]

The big stir is that Illinois lifted the slot limit, that the two states have had in place for the last 2 years.Thats what has Iowa all fired up.Study or not, if Illinois does it for one tourn. are they going to have to do it for the rest?As far as walleye tourn in Iowa the DNR is still living in the ice age,they wont even allow a walleye tourn on state waters from June 1st until Sept 1.They dont think the livwells in todays boats have proper aeration systems.One thing I can guarantee the contestants,Iowa DNR will make it rough on you guys the week youre there.Make sure you have you T's crossed and your I's dotted.When the GNWC was there last time on a Illinois permit, you might get checked by the same warden several times during the same day.Good luck to all and Ill be curious to see how it all pans out.

[Juls_OH]

Rick and I have been fishing for a week and a half now, and we haven't seen any DNR from either state on the water yet.
We're off the water today, because the puppy got bit by something, swelled up, and had to go to the vet (poor girl :(), so I can't say if they are out there today or not.

Juls

[Nick(Ia)]

I didn't see any enforcment on the water this last weekend but that is not unusual this time of year, they've got waterfowlers to chase. I haven't been checked since late August on Pool 14. However, I believe you will see Iowa enforcment on the water in 14 and 16 next week... There are several Iowa DNR officers that regularly monitor this site and board, perhaps they'll give us their thoughts on this problem...Marion?:D

[Public Info]

The tournament will be Illinois waters only. This has been public for quite some time.

[Gopher Fanatic]

The fish don't know the line, I heard.
So, if you catch any eyes wearing pinstriped bibs and a deKalb caps you gotta release them. That'd be Iowa eyes. *wink wink.

[Gary Korsgaden]

After reading the various posts on here it becomes clear to me that some feel strongly that competive angling takes precedence over recreational fishing. I feel tournaments must abide by the rules and guidelines set up within the state. Fortunately, a number of years back the Minnesota DNR stood their ground when the PWT asked for special exceptions on the St. Louis River. Face it "recreational angling by nature takes a priority over competive angling" that follows through with management practices and goals. Frankly, I do not want competive angling to start telling the DNR or Game and Fish, how to manage the resource. So I want someone on here without taking personal shots, why they feel tournaments should be allowed to abide by a separate set of rules such as those the Illinois Game and Fish has set. Competive angling will stay healthy if we continue to consider the resource and competive angling's social impact on the recreational fisherman and live within the rules in which the event takes place. setting a precedence of "exceptions to the rule" will seriously harm relationships with the State Game and Fish Departments and the angling public.

[reels ul]

Your probably better off posting a new thread asking the question to get a better response.

[reels ul]

Your probably better off posting a new thread asking the question to get a better response.

[KTurner]

Gary - I respect your concern and personally I wish these types of decisions weren't made. I don't know how to say this without sounding like a smart *ss but here goes.....

You're singing to the wrong choir here. Anglers do NOT set the rules or make the requests to have rules temporarily amended. People that feel this is going to have a negative impact on fishing, populations, images, etc. need to professionally direct their concerns to the tournament directors, DNR and state regulatory staff or perhaps their own chamber of commerce....

On another note, the fisheries in the USA might be in better shape if tournament anglers were in charge as I've NEVER met any single person that is more concerned about the health of the fisheries then tournament anglers!

Time to go fishing.......... Kurt

[KTurner]

Gary - I respect your concern and personally I wish these types of decisions weren't made. I don't know how to say this without sounding like a smart *ss but here goes.....

You're singing to the wrong choir here. Anglers do NOT set the rules or make the requests to have rules temporarily amended. People that feel this is going to have a negative impact on fishing, populations, images, etc. need to professionally direct their concerns to the tournament directors, DNR and state regulatory staff or perhaps their own chamber of commerce....

On another note, the fisheries in the USA might be in better shape if tournament anglers were in charge as I've NEVER met any single person that is more concerned about the health of the fisheries then tournament anglers!

Time to go fishing.......... Kurt

[welcome]

welcome to Iowa!!!
that's the IDNR for ya...........take Lake McBride for instance outside of Solon Iowa. BIG TIME MONEY around the lake and it's the money that talks and makes the rules!!!!!!!
Probably the same in other areas. Anybody that lives near this lake probably knows exactly what I'm talking about. It's very frustrating!!!


Good luck to all you tourny guys and gals!!!!!!

[welcome]

welcome to Iowa!!!
that's the IDNR for ya...........take Lake McBride for instance outside of Solon Iowa. BIG TIME MONEY around the lake and it's the money that talks and makes the rules!!!!!!!
Probably the same in other areas. Anybody that lives near this lake probably knows exactly what I'm talking about. It's very frustrating!!!


Good luck to all you tourny guys and gals!!!!!!

[Nick(Ia)]

Gary, I've read your posts on a couple of threads. I appreciate your perspective even if I don't agree with everything you say. I also appreciate and respect the use of your name on a post. Some discussion points on the issues you present:

#1. you post that "After reading the various posts on here it becomes clear to me that some feel strongly that competive angling takes precedence over recreational fishing"

I reread the thread and I'm not sure I see that anyone has made a claim that competitive angling takes precedence over recreational fishing. In Iowa, competitive angling and particularly walleye tournaments are regulated to a much greater degree than recreational angling. Competitive angling is already singled out for different rules than recreational angling-we are forced to abide by separate rules than the recreational angler.

#2. "Frankly, I do not want competive angling to start telling the DNR or Game and Fish, how to manage the resource."

I agree that no single group should dictate the management of a resource that belongs to everybody. Everybody should have a right to the resource and it is the DNR or Fish and Game's job to ensure that those rights are protected. They do this by regulation of the resource. In order to support fair regulation they must have some basis for determining that an event or group will harm the resource. This is the issue that needs to be addressed. How do tournaments harm the resource? To place a greater degree of regulation on tournaments because they will impact the resource and then not have the evidence that the tournament's impact on the resource is negative or greater than other uses is unfair.

#3. "Competive angling will stay healthy if we continue to consider the resource and competive angling's social impact on the recreational fisherman and live within the rules in which the event takes place. setting a precedence of "exceptions to the rule" will seriously harm relationships with the State Game and Fish Departments and the angling public"

I think that competitive fishermen are some of the greatest stewards of the resource, they prize and value the resource. To imply that somehow competitive anglers don't "consider the resource" is not accurate. I'm not sure what you mean when you talk about the social impact on recreational fishermen. I note in your post on another thread that you indicate that the nonangling public gets their hackles up when they see alot of boats on "their favorite" lake. I'm sure you understand that the lake like any other resource is for everyone to use and enjoy, not just the people that are fortunate enough to live on or around it. I think the single biggest "social" impact that competitive anglers have on recreational fishermen would be congestion at the boat ramp. This is an issue that tourney directors and state agencies look at when permits are issued in an attempt to make sure that there are alternative ramp options for recreational fishermen when a tournament clogs a ramp. As far as exceptions to the rules...permits, fishing hours, designated ramp use, catch and release, lower bag limits are all rules that the tournament angler must follow that the recreational angler on the same body of water at the same time doesn't have to worry about. We are already singled out for special regulation so the idea that this is somehow precendent setting is debateable.

The real issue is a public relations issue that the Iowa DNR's anti-walleye tournament policy creates. It is easy for us to sit here and tell our fellow resource users that this waiver will not make an impact on the resource but it becomes much more difficult when the state agency in charge of the resource implies that there is an adverse impact on the fishery by the waiver. Many people will believe them because they are the "DNR". I believe they need to give us the facts and data that support their position that tournaments are adversely impacting the fishery.

I apoligize for the long-winded reply and appreciate the discussion. I'm sorry you find some of my posts to be name calling but this is a walleye tournament message board and if someone anonymously comes here and makes unfounded negative allegations about tournaments then they will be called out to defend their position. I think everyone is welcome to discuss and debate but you've got to be prepared to support your ideas and not just sling mud.

[Nick(Ia)]

Gary, I've read your posts on a couple of threads. I appreciate your perspective even if I don't agree with everything you say. I also appreciate and respect the use of your name on a post. Some discussion points on the issues you present:

#1. you post that "After reading the various posts on here it becomes clear to me that some feel strongly that competive angling takes precedence over recreational fishing"

I reread the thread and I'm not sure I see that anyone has made a claim that competitive angling takes precedence over recreational fishing. In Iowa, competitive angling and particularly walleye tournaments are regulated to a much greater degree than recreational angling. Competitive angling is already singled out for different rules than recreational angling-we are forced to abide by separate rules than the recreational angler.

#2. "Frankly, I do not want competive angling to start telling the DNR or Game and Fish, how to manage the resource."

I agree that no single group should dictate the management of a resource that belongs to everybody. Everybody should have a right to the resource and it is the DNR or Fish and Game's job to ensure that those rights are protected. They do this by regulation of the resource. In order to support fair regulation they must have some basis for determining that an event or group will harm the resource. This is the issue that needs to be addressed. How do tournaments harm the resource? To place a greater degree of regulation on tournaments because they will impact the resource and then not have the evidence that the tournament's impact on the resource is negative or greater than other uses is unfair.

#3. "Competive angling will stay healthy if we continue to consider the resource and competive angling's social impact on the recreational fisherman and live within the rules in which the event takes place. setting a precedence of "exceptions to the rule" will seriously harm relationships with the State Game and Fish Departments and the angling public"

I think that competitive fishermen are some of the greatest stewards of the resource, they prize and value the resource. To imply that somehow competitive anglers don't "consider the resource" is not accurate. I'm not sure what you mean when you talk about the social impact on recreational fishermen. I note in your post on another thread that you indicate that the nonangling public gets their hackles up when they see alot of boats on "their favorite" lake. I'm sure you understand that the lake like any other resource is for everyone to use and enjoy, not just the people that are fortunate enough to live on or around it. I think the single biggest "social" impact that competitive anglers have on recreational fishermen would be congestion at the boat ramp. This is an issue that tourney directors and state agencies look at when permits are issued in an attempt to make sure that there are alternative ramp options for recreational fishermen when a tournament clogs a ramp. As far as exceptions to the rules...permits, fishing hours, designated ramp use, catch and release, lower bag limits are all rules that the tournament angler must follow that the recreational angler on the same body of water at the same time doesn't have to worry about. We are already singled out for special regulation so the idea that this is somehow precendent setting is debateable.

The real issue is a public relations issue that the Iowa DNR's anti-walleye tournament policy creates. It is easy for us to sit here and tell our fellow resource users that this waiver will not make an impact on the resource but it becomes much more difficult when the state agency in charge of the resource implies that there is an adverse impact on the fishery by the waiver. Many people will believe them because they are the "DNR". I believe they need to give us the facts and data that support their position that tournaments are adversely impacting the fishery.

I apoligize for the long-winded reply and appreciate the discussion. I'm sorry you find some of my posts to be name calling but this is a walleye tournament message board and if someone anonymously comes here and makes unfounded negative allegations about tournaments then they will be called out to defend their position. I think everyone is welcome to discuss and debate but you've got to be prepared to support your ideas and not just sling mud.

[Fish_on]

Gary I would take issue with several of the things you say in this post. First of all you state that recreational fishing should take priority over competitive angling. Competitive angling is recreational fishing. You cannot separate the two. Everyone should have the same right to the resource no matter if they have paid an entry fee and plan to weigh their catch at the end of the day or not. Saying that an angler who is not in a tournament should have priority over one who is in a tournament is discrimination in its purest form.

I would also have you take a look at the reason that slot limits were put into place in the first place. They are to protect a certain segment of the population from harvest. They are not intended to restrict anglers from catching the fish within a slot and releasing them. In C&R tournaments there is nothing wrong with lifting a slot in order to make the tournament weigh-ins more exciting and bring attention to the quality of the fishery. That is not what the slot limits were put into place to do anyway. Illinois and many other states understand the great value of fishing tournaments is in driving sales of fishing related products, tourism, and more fishing license, boat registration fees, boat ramp permits, etc. and getting youngsters invloved in fishing. Tournaments have huge positive economic impacts in addition to the great things they do for the fisheries. Illinois understands that, and a couple people in the Iowa DNR fisheries who happen to be policy makers simply don't get it. And it is time they change some of their outdated and discriminitory policies or be replaced by people who will.

[Fish_on]

Gary I would take issue with several of the things you say in this post. First of all you state that recreational fishing should take priority over competitive angling. Competitive angling is recreational fishing. You cannot separate the two. Everyone should have the same right to the resource no matter if they have paid an entry fee and plan to weigh their catch at the end of the day or not. Saying that an angler who is not in a tournament should have priority over one who is in a tournament is discrimination in its purest form.

I would also have you take a look at the reason that slot limits were put into place in the first place. They are to protect a certain segment of the population from harvest. They are not intended to restrict anglers from catching the fish within a slot and releasing them. In C&R tournaments there is nothing wrong with lifting a slot in order to make the tournament weigh-ins more exciting and bring attention to the quality of the fishery. That is not what the slot limits were put into place to do anyway. Illinois and many other states understand the great value of fishing tournaments is in driving sales of fishing related products, tourism, and more fishing license, boat registration fees, boat ramp permits, etc. and getting youngsters invloved in fishing. Tournaments have huge positive economic impacts in addition to the great things they do for the fisheries. Illinois understands that, and a couple people in the Iowa DNR fisheries who happen to be policy makers simply don't get it. And it is time they change some of their outdated and discriminitory policies or be replaced by people who will.

[WAZZZ]

In my opinion this is one of the only things that the IL DNR has done right in the past couple of years. The PWT tournament on the Fox Chain also had the slot lifted.

[WAZZZ]

In my opinion this is one of the only things that the IL DNR has done right in the past couple of years. The PWT tournament on the Fox Chain also had the slot lifted.

[JLDII]

First off, I want to thank everyone for the many well thought out and well worded responses to this issue.

Something strikes me a little strange. It seems that some of you seem to think that the IDNR's tough stance on tournaments is directed primarily towards walleye tournaments.

Is their stance any different with bass tournaments?

[JLDII]

First off, I want to thank everyone for the many well thought out and well worded responses to this issue.

Something strikes me a little strange. It seems that some of you seem to think that the IDNR's tough stance on tournaments is directed primarily towards walleye tournaments.

Is their stance any different with bass tournaments?

[Kolby]

Bass tournaments run ramped here during the summer. Iowa is full of small generally shallow lakes that offer warm water species like bass prime habitat. I've seen water temps as high as 88 degrees here this year, how would a limit of walleyes do after riding around in this hot water for any amount of time? Not being a smarty, I really don't know, because the few I keep get bonked in the head and thrown on ice. I figured a 90 or 100 degree livewell wouldn't work out - no matter how much oxygen I pumped in there. We had a northern pike kill in part of the state this year due to the stressful summer conditions. Yes, they are a cold water fish, but the walleye isn't to far behind in the needs department. To error on the side of caution is good management - no matter what you're managing. I would think the FLW would not want any restrictions lifted. Professional fishermen should be able to find the right fish and catch them. That just adds credibility to whole package. What if the PGA told the pros they could tee off from the womens tee during the US OPEN? You know, since the course is so tough and everything, and folks want to see low scores. Heck, I think it would make tournaments more exciting if they TOUGHEND the regulations. That would breed an entirely new tournament walleye fishermen and maybe even break up some of the "teamwork" you see in the walleye events. Do bass guys share info like eye guys? I can't imagine they do, although it's probably because bass are so easy to find and catch.

Also, I think recreational fishermen and tournament fishermen play totally different functions in the big picture. By and large, recreational fishermen play the part of the target market, tournaments and tournament fishermen are vehicles that help deliver the messages and brand positioning. You can have recreational fishermen and no tournament fishermen, but you obviously won't have tournament fishermen if there were no recreational fishermen or very limited fishing opportunities. And what keeps recreational interest in fishing high is sound management of the resource. We don't get all jacked up to buy a boat or lots of equipment by seeing a big weight of fish come in. We get jacked up because of good fishing opportunity close to home, although our purchasing decisions may be influenced by media. The entire thing is one complex web, every element feeds off the other. But you've go to keep the resource number one priority. Lose your integrity of this notion and you've lost focus. Lastly, if we all listend to, "Shut up and Fish" Walleye Central wouldn't exist.

Kolby Kester

[Kolby]

Bass tournaments run ramped here during the summer. Iowa is full of small generally shallow lakes that offer warm water species like bass prime habitat. I've seen water temps as high as 88 degrees here this year, how would a limit of walleyes do after riding around in this hot water for any amount of time? Not being a smarty, I really don't know, because the few I keep get bonked in the head and thrown on ice. I figured a 90 or 100 degree livewell wouldn't work out - no matter how much oxygen I pumped in there. We had a northern pike kill in part of the state this year due to the stressful summer conditions. Yes, they are a cold water fish, but the walleye isn't to far behind in the needs department. To error on the side of caution is good management - no matter what you're managing. I would think the FLW would not want any restrictions lifted. Professional fishermen should be able to find the right fish and catch them. That just adds credibility to whole package. What if the PGA told the pros they could tee off from the womens tee during the US OPEN? You know, since the course is so tough and everything, and folks want to see low scores. Heck, I think it would make tournaments more exciting if they TOUGHEND the regulations. That would breed an entirely new tournament walleye fishermen and maybe even break up some of the "teamwork" you see in the walleye events. Do bass guys share info like eye guys? I can't imagine they do, although it's probably because bass are so easy to find and catch.

Also, I think recreational fishermen and tournament fishermen play totally different functions in the big picture. By and large, recreational fishermen play the part of the target market, tournaments and tournament fishermen are vehicles that help deliver the messages and brand positioning. You can have recreational fishermen and no tournament fishermen, but you obviously won't have tournament fishermen if there were no recreational fishermen or very limited fishing opportunities. And what keeps recreational interest in fishing high is sound management of the resource. We don't get all jacked up to buy a boat or lots of equipment by seeing a big weight of fish come in. We get jacked up because of good fishing opportunity close to home, although our purchasing decisions may be influenced by media. The entire thing is one complex web, every element feeds off the other. But you've go to keep the resource number one priority. Lose your integrity of this notion and you've lost focus. Lastly, if we all listend to, "Shut up and Fish" Walleye Central wouldn't exist.

Kolby Kester

[Gary Korsgaden]

Kolby you hit the nail right on the head........may I add tournament angling might be recreation to some but for many it is there professions. I also strongly agree that the rules and regulations for the non-tournament and tournament angler must be the identical. Even though tournaments are catch and release in my mind it doesn't make it right for a separate set of rules and regulations. This causes more of a negative social reaction between the tournament and non tournament public. Kolby you also pointed clearly that the role of tournaments is over stated. I might add this includes the benefits to the area such as dollars in the registers etc. and the publicity they generate. Competive angling is here to stay, and it should be at what ever level. Lets not change regulations for tournaments instead, lets work towards a stronger resource. After all the majority lays in the hands of the non-tournament angler, so we need to keep them on our side.

[Gary Korsgaden]

Kolby you hit the nail right on the head........may I add tournament angling might be recreation to some but for many it is there professions. I also strongly agree that the rules and regulations for the non-tournament and tournament angler must be the identical. Even though tournaments are catch and release in my mind it doesn't make it right for a separate set of rules and regulations. This causes more of a negative social reaction between the tournament and non tournament public. Kolby you also pointed clearly that the role of tournaments is over stated. I might add this includes the benefits to the area such as dollars in the registers etc. and the publicity they generate. Competive angling is here to stay, and it should be at what ever level. Lets not change regulations for tournaments instead, lets work towards a stronger resource. After all the majority lays in the hands of the non-tournament angler, so we need to keep them on our side.

[Prchjerker]

Jack,
Yes they do have a different stance on bass.In Iowa once you put a fish in you livewell on in possesion it cannot be replaced (culled) with another fish, except for Bass tournament.I dont know about you, but thats dicremination in my book.
As far as walleye being a cold water fish, explain how come at Rathbun we catch them in 2 foot of water in July in 90 degree water.It not the temp, but the oxygen levels the fish need.I guess you just have to have been around IOWA for a few years a see some of their efforts to muck walleye tournaments.It gets old after awhile.

[Prchjerker]

Jack,
Yes they do have a different stance on bass.In Iowa once you put a fish in you livewell on in possesion it cannot be replaced (culled) with another fish, except for Bass tournament.I dont know about you, but thats dicremination in my book.
As far as walleye being a cold water fish, explain how come at Rathbun we catch them in 2 foot of water in July in 90 degree water.It not the temp, but the oxygen levels the fish need.I guess you just have to have been around IOWA for a few years a see some of their efforts to muck walleye tournaments.It gets old after awhile.

[Marv Sandbek]

This situation is unfortunate, and unnecessary! It would seem to me that, in the very early stages of planning for this FLW Championship event, the DNR's from both Iowa and Illinois, along with the FLW staff would have discussed the existing rules, regulations and special protection requirements for this tournament site. From what I have read, there appear to exist some "territorial issues" that need to be addressed, and a couple of the comments indicate that there exist "personality issues" that impact this situation as well. If the disparity between Illinois and Iowa DNR officials is so prominent regarding interpretation and application of the existing regulations, then perhaps the selection of this site for a Championship tournament was ill-advised.

Regarding the rhetoric centered on "Competitive vs. Recreational" walleye anglers, I offer this commentary: We are all recreational anglers . . .everyone of us! Some choose to enter into competitive events as a form of recreation, others enter competitive events to earn a living. Recreational anglers who choose not to enter into a tournament format, simply enjoy the public resource on a more casual, and perhaps less stressful level. I submit for your consideration that we all care for the health and vitality of the fisheries we frequent, and to a different degree, the competitive angler faces additional scrutiny by the local anglers when visiting various tournament sites throughout the country! As a tournament angler, both at the professional and amateur/co-angler level, I both understand and appreciate the concern by local anglers regarding the conservation practices and angling etiquette employed by visiting professional and co-angler's alike! It has been my experience that the visiting anglers use great care and caution to maintain a professional image and exhibit professional behavior, both on and off the water! Some of the most enjoyable on-the-water encounters I have experienced have been during pre-fishing periods when visiting with local and regional anglers. We enjoy sharing experiences and learning from each other. In general, I believe that all anglers, whether touring pro or local angling legend, have much more in common then we give each other credit for. And, I believe that we can BOTH enjoy the resource, in harmony, with little, if any disruption to the fishery.

I enjoyed the commentary by djpage and Nick (IA) on this subject. There is alot of emotion attached to this situation, and while I understand that, I think this is unnecessary! The FLW Staff does a magnificent job with their tournament circuits. I think many of us do not realize the effort required to make these events happen! If there are a few people in key positions who add a dimension of diffculty to the event, then adjustments can be made to reduce their negative impact! If that means restricting the size and location of fishable tournament waters, then so be it! If it means smaller fish at the scale, then so be it! If it means becoming more adaptable and versatile on the water, then so be it! That's why it is called "Professional" and not "Unprofessional" walleye angling! I respect and admire those individuals who choose to invest heavily into these professional walleye circuits, whether that investment be personal, corporate or government. I also respect and admire those who live, work and recreate in the areas that we enjoy visiting as we travel the tournament trail. I have made many friends over the years on the trail, and I have visited fisheries that I otherwise may have never traveled to. The opportunities for a positive experience have far outweighed the opportunites for the negative! Whether it be Ohio, Minnesota, Michigan, WIsconsin, Kansas or South Dakota, anglers are much and the same . . .we all seek the same things . . . enjoyment on the water . . . success with the catch . . . and new memories for days yet to come!

Keep up the good work out on the trail! Make a difference for those yet to wet a line!

Marv Sandbek

[Marv Sandbek]

This situation is unfortunate, and unnecessary! It would seem to me that, in the very early stages of planning for this FLW Championship event, the DNR's from both Iowa and Illinois, along with the FLW staff would have discussed the existing rules, regulations and special protection requirements for this tournament site. From what I have read, there appear to exist some "territorial issues" that need to be addressed, and a couple of the comments indicate that there exist "personality issues" that impact this situation as well. If the disparity between Illinois and Iowa DNR officials is so prominent regarding interpretation and application of the existing regulations, then perhaps the selection of this site for a Championship tournament was ill-advised.

Regarding the rhetoric centered on "Competitive vs. Recreational" walleye anglers, I offer this commentary: We are all recreational anglers . . .everyone of us! Some choose to enter into competitive events as a form of recreation, others enter competitive events to earn a living. Recreational anglers who choose not to enter into a tournament format, simply enjoy the public resource on a more casual, and perhaps less stressful level. I submit for your consideration that we all care for the health and vitality of the fisheries we frequent, and to a different degree, the competitive angler faces additional scrutiny by the local anglers when visiting various tournament sites throughout the country! As a tournament angler, both at the professional and amateur/co-angler level, I both understand and appreciate the concern by local anglers regarding the conservation practices and angling etiquette employed by visiting professional and co-angler's alike! It has been my experience that the visiting anglers use great care and caution to maintain a professional image and exhibit professional behavior, both on and off the water! Some of the most enjoyable on-the-water encounters I have experienced have been during pre-fishing periods when visiting with local and regional anglers. We enjoy sharing experiences and learning from each other. In general, I believe that all anglers, whether touring pro or local angling legend, have much more in common then we give each other credit for. And, I believe that we can BOTH enjoy the resource, in harmony, with little, if any disruption to the fishery.

I enjoyed the commentary by djpage and Nick (IA) on this subject. There is alot of emotion attached to this situation, and while I understand that, I think this is unnecessary! The FLW Staff does a magnificent job with their tournament circuits. I think many of us do not realize the effort required to make these events happen! If there are a few people in key positions who add a dimension of diffculty to the event, then adjustments can be made to reduce their negative impact! If that means restricting the size and location of fishable tournament waters, then so be it! If it means smaller fish at the scale, then so be it! If it means becoming more adaptable and versatile on the water, then so be it! That's why it is called "Professional" and not "Unprofessional" walleye angling! I respect and admire those individuals who choose to invest heavily into these professional walleye circuits, whether that investment be personal, corporate or government. I also respect and admire those who live, work and recreate in the areas that we enjoy visiting as we travel the tournament trail. I have made many friends over the years on the trail, and I have visited fisheries that I otherwise may have never traveled to. The opportunities for a positive experience have far outweighed the opportunites for the negative! Whether it be Ohio, Minnesota, Michigan, WIsconsin, Kansas or South Dakota, anglers are much and the same . . .we all seek the same things . . . enjoyment on the water . . . success with the catch . . . and new memories for days yet to come!

Keep up the good work out on the trail! Make a difference for those yet to wet a line!

Marv Sandbek

[Kolby]

Surface temps of 90 degrees in June and July may not be a reliable indicator of the temps on the bottom in 2 to 8 feet of water. As you know, the rathbun bite fires off with the initial spike in surface water temps for the year. It's a fairly large body of water and accepts the seasonal shift into dog days slower than most around the state - The extreme shallow bite slowed down for most once the heat and mass forage of August arrived. There was a pronounced pattern of depths that I witnessed since ice out there. I caught ice-out prespawn fish in 30 feet of water, post spawn fish in 1 to 7 feet of water, early summer fish in 3 to 12 feet and later on just before the bite slowed 12 to 17 feet of water produced. As did some suspended fish at that same depth. Yes it is forage related to. I imagine 90 degrees was witnessed on a calm hot day during Late June or early July? The next days winds would have mixed it up during this earlier period. And I agree, lack of dissolved oxygen due to the heat is the real killer. Heat stress is something that I haven't been able to find to many studies about. But I think hot years like this one make it a viable factor for walleyes and of course pike. Heck you can go anywhere in the state of Iowa during August and destroy the warm water species like catfish, gills, largemouths, and white bass, they continue to bite well even with ALL THE FORAGE IN THE LAKE - the walleyes on the other hand typically get slower. And the species like largemouths do need at least 5-6PPM of DO to be active - so we know these levels must be ok. I strictly fish walleyes in Iowa's lakes and reservoirs roughly 200 days on ice and open water through the year and these are just some thoughts based on what I've seen and how my catches seem to reflect just what species are active and which ones aren't. Also, Chad Richardson has an article that talks about walleyes living amongst a forage base that prefers extremely warm water. Don't know if this explained anything or not.

Kolby Kester

[Kolby]

Surface temps of 90 degrees in June and July may not be a reliable indicator of the temps on the bottom in 2 to 8 feet of water. As you know, the rathbun bite fires off with the initial spike in surface water temps for the year. It's a fairly large body of water and accepts the seasonal shift into dog days slower than most around the state - The extreme shallow bite slowed down for most once the heat and mass forage of August arrived. There was a pronounced pattern of depths that I witnessed since ice out there. I caught ice-out prespawn fish in 30 feet of water, post spawn fish in 1 to 7 feet of water, early summer fish in 3 to 12 feet and later on just before the bite slowed 12 to 17 feet of water produced. As did some suspended fish at that same depth. Yes it is forage related to. I imagine 90 degrees was witnessed on a calm hot day during Late June or early July? The next days winds would have mixed it up during this earlier period. And I agree, lack of dissolved oxygen due to the heat is the real killer. Heat stress is something that I haven't been able to find to many studies about. But I think hot years like this one make it a viable factor for walleyes and of course pike. Heck you can go anywhere in the state of Iowa during August and destroy the warm water species like catfish, gills, largemouths, and white bass, they continue to bite well even with ALL THE FORAGE IN THE LAKE - the walleyes on the other hand typically get slower. And the species like largemouths do need at least 5-6PPM of DO to be active - so we know these levels must be ok. I strictly fish walleyes in Iowa's lakes and reservoirs roughly 200 days on ice and open water through the year and these are just some thoughts based on what I've seen and how my catches seem to reflect just what species are active and which ones aren't. Also, Chad Richardson has an article that talks about walleyes living amongst a forage base that prefers extremely warm water. Don't know if this explained anything or not.

Kolby Kester

[Gary Korsgaden]

Marv, hello. I enjoyed your comentary and your background. You speak from experience. There is a variety of reasons anglers fish, competively as you pointed out is one form of recreation. I agree we don't want to put the microscope on tournaments nor do we want to put walls around these events or separate them from recreational fishing, but at times competive anglers want that. A side bar heaven knows if I had the time I would enjoy particpating in a couple of tournaments a year. Here is what I hope from all parties, best use and management of resource possible, positive interaction and parity by everyone. While catch and release reduces the negative impact I don't feel that DNR's from any state or province should make exceptions. It just isn't healthy socially for all. Exceptions to the rules never are. The driving reason for lifting the slots for a competive event makes for more weight at the weigh in and adds glitz and glamour for the tournament it also I know,creates hard feelings by non-competive anglers. Minnesota Fishery Managers do consider
tournaments into the equation. It is a facet that is becoming more part of the recreational sport fishing fraternity. On both sides of the competive scale if competive anglers want to be viewed as recreational angler it is only fair they abide by the rules and regulations set for all.What sticks in my mind is articles from the professional ranks, "fish the conditions" slot rules and limits are part of fishing the conditions, in my mind.

[Gary Korsgaden]

Marv, hello. I enjoyed your comentary and your background. You speak from experience. There is a variety of reasons anglers fish, competively as you pointed out is one form of recreation. I agree we don't want to put the microscope on tournaments nor do we want to put walls around these events or separate them from recreational fishing, but at times competive anglers want that. A side bar heaven knows if I had the time I would enjoy particpating in a couple of tournaments a year. Here is what I hope from all parties, best use and management of resource possible, positive interaction and parity by everyone. While catch and release reduces the negative impact I don't feel that DNR's from any state or province should make exceptions. It just isn't healthy socially for all. Exceptions to the rules never are. The driving reason for lifting the slots for a competive event makes for more weight at the weigh in and adds glitz and glamour for the tournament it also I know,creates hard feelings by non-competive anglers. Minnesota Fishery Managers do consider
tournaments into the equation. It is a facet that is becoming more part of the recreational sport fishing fraternity. On both sides of the competive scale if competive anglers want to be viewed as recreational angler it is only fair they abide by the rules and regulations set for all.What sticks in my mind is articles from the professional ranks, "fish the conditions" slot rules and limits are part of fishing the conditions, in my mind.

[justonce]

gary, when we fished the PWT this spring in Illinois, it was clear that the public initially was not in concensus with the exceptions put in place. one of the bait store employees that i first met upon arriving to town was actually pretty vocal on how he viewed the exception. the local anglers that we met there changed their strong opposition to the exceptions by the time we left the state. i think they were amazed that they did not see one dead fish floating or one walleye filleted the entire time the PWT was there.
at first i was not even comfortable with the exceptions put in place. by the end of the week long prefish and nine days of fishing, it seemed to make sense. they got the show they were looking for and the PWT was able to weigh enough fish to make the event interesting. Yes, it was all about business. good thing in this country is "informed decisions can be made to accomodate the specific situation". thank god we can still make good decisions in this country.

[justonce]

gary, when we fished the PWT this spring in Illinois, it was clear that the public initially was not in concensus with the exceptions put in place. one of the bait store employees that i first met upon arriving to town was actually pretty vocal on how he viewed the exception. the local anglers that we met there changed their strong opposition to the exceptions by the time we left the state. i think they were amazed that they did not see one dead fish floating or one walleye filleted the entire time the PWT was there.
at first i was not even comfortable with the exceptions put in place. by the end of the week long prefish and nine days of fishing, it seemed to make sense. they got the show they were looking for and the PWT was able to weigh enough fish to make the event interesting. Yes, it was all about business. good thing in this country is "informed decisions can be made to accomodate the specific situation". thank god we can still make good decisions in this country.

[Gary Korsgaden]

Thanks for your response. While in this case you never once saw a dead fish or perhaps lost one the nine days of the event. in my mind it is better for the resource to release immediately,you must agree that the fish has a better chance of survival then riding around in a livewell for a day then brought on stage and later released. Secondly, when competive anglers attempt to dictate or dispute or ridicule fishery management practices that also sets a sorry precedence. If some don't get their way they ridicule State Fishery Staff. Read some of the posts on here if you don't believe me. As a sidebar some States Fishery Managers have even added that all tournaments should be catch and kill. This practice would fuel the anti's and cause a riff socially for sure as a negative. Unless there is proper education to go with it. So do we error on the side of the resource or do what creates a good show? Clear to me some fishery folks feel the negative impact tournaments have is minimal, so in their minds catch and kill is fine. The debate will continue that is for sure. I still stand my ground and feel if competive anglers are in the same rank or part of the majority of the recreational angling fraternity, then they too must abide by the same rules and guidelines. Lastly, as I read the posts from the competive anglers, one could gather first consideration is putting on a good show, and the resource takes a back seat. Perhaps the ideal situation would be no slots at all and catch and kill the catch, after all doesn't that offer more balance and use of the resource as it is intended, for food. Alot of points here to consider, on both horizons. No right or wrong answer.

[Gary Korsgaden]

Thanks for your response. While in this case you never once saw a dead fish or perhaps lost one the nine days of the event. in my mind it is better for the resource to release immediately,you must agree that the fish has a better chance of survival then riding around in a livewell for a day then brought on stage and later released. Secondly, when competive anglers attempt to dictate or dispute or ridicule fishery management practices that also sets a sorry precedence. If some don't get their way they ridicule State Fishery Staff. Read some of the posts on here if you don't believe me. As a sidebar some States Fishery Managers have even added that all tournaments should be catch and kill. This practice would fuel the anti's and cause a riff socially for sure as a negative. Unless there is proper education to go with it. So do we error on the side of the resource or do what creates a good show? Clear to me some fishery folks feel the negative impact tournaments have is minimal, so in their minds catch and kill is fine. The debate will continue that is for sure. I still stand my ground and feel if competive anglers are in the same rank or part of the majority of the recreational angling fraternity, then they too must abide by the same rules and guidelines. Lastly, as I read the posts from the competive anglers, one could gather first consideration is putting on a good show, and the resource takes a back seat. Perhaps the ideal situation would be no slots at all and catch and kill the catch, after all doesn't that offer more balance and use of the resource as it is intended, for food. Alot of points here to consider, on both horizons. No right or wrong answer.

[Marv Sandbek]

Hey, Gary! It's always interesting to read your comments! For as long as I have known you, and that's been a long time, you have never been afraid to address the tough issues . . .and this is definately a tough issue! So, where do we go from here? Do you remember the early days of walleye tournament competition? Back then, how high on the scale of consideration are these issues we address today? What has caused all of the uproar? Are tournament anglers killing more fish then in the late 80's and early 90's? Is the resource a more delicate and fragile resource today then it was 15 years ago? Are there many more tournaments today then there were back then? Perhaps this sport has become so popular, that the pressure on the resource is more than it can take? If that is so, then who is at fault (if that is important), and the bigger question . . .how do we fix it???
Perhaps in an attempt to popularize the sport of fishing, the sponsors and promoters have done such a great job that everyone who has even a small interest in high-tech, competitive (and recreational) fishing has, a)purchased a high-performance fishing boat, b)loaded the boat with state-of-the-art electronics and equipment, c)bought the best tackle, rods and reels the budget can stand, and d)attended every fishing seminar, bought all the videos and subscribed to all the magazines humanly possible! Guess what happens then . . .they become BETTER, MORE EFFECTIVE FISH-CATCHING MACHINES!!! And so, I offer this for your consideration . . . have we, as a group of sportsmen and sportswomen, promoted our sport into a precarious situation . . .a situation where opposing forces, both interested in the fisheries and the resource, now find themselves doing battle over the "socially, politically, and ethically" correct thing to do with the resource???? Perhaps we have unknowingly painted ourselves into a box!! Our good intentions have overrun us, and we now have an entire set of different circumstances to deal with?!? I do not know . . . I am not smart enough or wise enough to claim a microchip of knowledge on what the issue (or issues) could be. I am simply offering this diatribe as a list of possibilities to contemplate. We are well-intended, and I believe integrity-based outdoor enthusiasts who have done, and responded strongly to a wide-ranging, well orchestrated promotional campaign. Print and electronic media have brought the championship angler and the tournament sites into our living rooms . . . to be a part of all that, all we need do is get off the couch, head to the nearest marine dealership and tackle retailer, and lay down the money! It doesn't take very long for the average angler to become very good at this game if they put forth the effort! And, on a companion note, have we not addressed the "recreational" angler who regards his/her angling license as permission to harvest limit after limit from the same fishery, day after day, week after week, month after month? I am aware of local anglers who "harvest" far more fish in a month then a tournament angler kills in a season!!! Perhaps it would be a good thing to address "Catch & Release" philosophy with those anglers whose penchant it is to "Kill the Limit" rather than "Limit the Kill!" I look forward to the continuation of this on-line discussion . . .perhaps this can be the advent of getting something positive done for all concerned. Good to hear from you, Gary!

Marv

[Marv Sandbek]

Hey, Gary! It's always interesting to read your comments! For as long as I have known you, and that's been a long time, you have never been afraid to address the tough issues . . .and this is definately a tough issue! So, where do we go from here? Do you remember the early days of walleye tournament competition? Back then, how high on the scale of consideration are these issues we address today? What has caused all of the uproar? Are tournament anglers killing more fish then in the late 80's and early 90's? Is the resource a more delicate and fragile resource today then it was 15 years ago? Are there many more tournaments today then there were back then? Perhaps this sport has become so popular, that the pressure on the resource is more than it can take? If that is so, then who is at fault (if that is important), and the bigger question . . .how do we fix it???
Perhaps in an attempt to popularize the sport of fishing, the sponsors and promoters have done such a great job that everyone who has even a small interest in high-tech, competitive (and recreational) fishing has, a)purchased a high-performance fishing boat, b)loaded the boat with state-of-the-art electronics and equipment, c)bought the best tackle, rods and reels the budget can stand, and d)attended every fishing seminar, bought all the videos and subscribed to all the magazines humanly possible! Guess what happens then . . .they become BETTER, MORE EFFECTIVE FISH-CATCHING MACHINES!!! And so, I offer this for your consideration . . . have we, as a group of sportsmen and sportswomen, promoted our sport into a precarious situation . . .a situation where opposing forces, both interested in the fisheries and the resource, now find themselves doing battle over the "socially, politically, and ethically" correct thing to do with the resource???? Perhaps we have unknowingly painted ourselves into a box!! Our good intentions have overrun us, and we now have an entire set of different circumstances to deal with?!? I do not know . . . I am not smart enough or wise enough to claim a microchip of knowledge on what the issue (or issues) could be. I am simply offering this diatribe as a list of possibilities to contemplate. We are well-intended, and I believe integrity-based outdoor enthusiasts who have done, and responded strongly to a wide-ranging, well orchestrated promotional campaign. Print and electronic media have brought the championship angler and the tournament sites into our living rooms . . . to be a part of all that, all we need do is get off the couch, head to the nearest marine dealership and tackle retailer, and lay down the money! It doesn't take very long for the average angler to become very good at this game if they put forth the effort! And, on a companion note, have we not addressed the "recreational" angler who regards his/her angling license as permission to harvest limit after limit from the same fishery, day after day, week after week, month after month? I am aware of local anglers who "harvest" far more fish in a month then a tournament angler kills in a season!!! Perhaps it would be a good thing to address "Catch & Release" philosophy with those anglers whose penchant it is to "Kill the Limit" rather than "Limit the Kill!" I look forward to the continuation of this on-line discussion . . .perhaps this can be the advent of getting something positive done for all concerned. Good to hear from you, Gary!

Marv

[and...]

maybe they could throw a few dollars their highway department

[and...]

maybe they could throw a few dollars their highway department

[JLDII]

I posted the same question on a different site, which has more of a regional following, and here is a copy/paste of a response that explains alot about how things got to where they are today.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

"Let me try and shed some light on how all of this controversy began. When FLW applied for a tournament permit in early to mid summer, I signed and approved the permit to allow the tournament (there was no request in the original application to waive any regulations). Then the following events occurred.
1. I received notice from the Iowa Chief of Fisheries that the Director of our Department had received a letter from the Director of the Illinois DOC requesting that the slot limit be waived for this tournament. I was asked to respond with my recommendations to this request.
2. I recommneded the slot regulation not be waived for this tournament based on the following:
A- All anglers should be treated the same. Non-tournament anglers already are at odds with tournaments, in addition, many non-tournament anglers see our Departments "catering" to tournaments.
B- At this tournament last year (then RCL) they weighed in over 300 walleye and 350 sauger. Clearly - they did not need "more" fish to make this a successful tournament. They wanted to be more showey and bring in larger fish and higher weights to the scale.
C- This is the only tournament that has requested rule waivers (they did so last year and were denied). At the most recent Cabela's Championships in Dubuque (over 100 boats and 200 anglers), the tournament directors extended the slot rule to cover Pool 11, even though the regulation was not in effect on this Pool as it was on the other 2 pools open for the tournament (Pools 12 & 13).
D- The tournament anglers are professional anglers, they deal with all different kinds of regulations on the circuit (slots, minimum length limits, cull or no-cull, reduced bags, etc)so this slot regulation was not anything new to them (and it was in effect for this tournament last year).
E- The slot limit applies only to walleye, tournament anglers can weight in sauger of any length (with exceptions of what the tournament imposes on them).

Our Fisheries Chief presented the request for the slot waiver to our regular IA DNR Commission montly meeting and the Commissioners voted to deny the request for rule waiver.
Our Central Office staff and Commissioners supported field personell's position on this request.

I also got the feeling that as a field biologist, I got "back-doored" by the FLW Directors. Their initial application for this tournament made no mention of a request for rule waivers. Then they went to the head of the Illinois DOC to do their work or request for rule waiver for them. It also makes we wonder what was going on when anglers in this tournament last year were "promised" a year ago that the slot rule would be waived. What kind of deal had FLW directors struck with the Director of the Illinois DOC?

After we learned of the restriction to only IL waters for this tournament, the Iowa Department of Natural Resources recinded the tournament permit based on my recommendations. Tournament anglers may not fish in Iowa waters, nor may they be in possession of fish in the slot regulation as they motor up and down the river. And yes- our Conservation Officers will be on duty during the tournament.

Sorry for the length post - but I thought all should know how events transpired to get to where we are now."

----------------------------------------------------------------------

[JLDII]

I posted the same question on a different site, which has more of a regional following, and here is a copy/paste of a response that explains alot about how things got to where they are today.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

"Let me try and shed some light on how all of this controversy began. When FLW applied for a tournament permit in early to mid summer, I signed and approved the permit to allow the tournament (there was no request in the original application to waive any regulations). Then the following events occurred.
1. I received notice from the Iowa Chief of Fisheries that the Director of our Department had received a letter from the Director of the Illinois DOC requesting that the slot limit be waived for this tournament. I was asked to respond with my recommendations to this request.
2. I recommneded the slot regulation not be waived for this tournament based on the following:
A- All anglers should be treated the same. Non-tournament anglers already are at odds with tournaments, in addition, many non-tournament anglers see our Departments "catering" to tournaments.
B- At this tournament last year (then RCL) they weighed in over 300 walleye and 350 sauger. Clearly - they did not need "more" fish to make this a successful tournament. They wanted to be more showey and bring in larger fish and higher weights to the scale.
C- This is the only tournament that has requested rule waivers (they did so last year and were denied). At the most recent Cabela's Championships in Dubuque (over 100 boats and 200 anglers), the tournament directors extended the slot rule to cover Pool 11, even though the regulation was not in effect on this Pool as it was on the other 2 pools open for the tournament (Pools 12 & 13).
D- The tournament anglers are professional anglers, they deal with all different kinds of regulations on the circuit (slots, minimum length limits, cull or no-cull, reduced bags, etc)so this slot regulation was not anything new to them (and it was in effect for this tournament last year).
E- The slot limit applies only to walleye, tournament anglers can weight in sauger of any length (with exceptions of what the tournament imposes on them).

Our Fisheries Chief presented the request for the slot waiver to our regular IA DNR Commission montly meeting and the Commissioners voted to deny the request for rule waiver.
Our Central Office staff and Commissioners supported field personell's position on this request.

I also got the feeling that as a field biologist, I got "back-doored" by the FLW Directors. Their initial application for this tournament made no mention of a request for rule waivers. Then they went to the head of the Illinois DOC to do their work or request for rule waiver for them. It also makes we wonder what was going on when anglers in this tournament last year were "promised" a year ago that the slot rule would be waived. What kind of deal had FLW directors struck with the Director of the Illinois DOC?

After we learned of the restriction to only IL waters for this tournament, the Iowa Department of Natural Resources recinded the tournament permit based on my recommendations. Tournament anglers may not fish in Iowa waters, nor may they be in possession of fish in the slot regulation as they motor up and down the river. And yes- our Conservation Officers will be on duty during the tournament.

Sorry for the length post - but I thought all should know how events transpired to get to where we are now."

----------------------------------------------------------------------

[WAZZZ]

The slot limit is an arbitrary number decided by those in power. This guestamation I assume is to protect the prime spawning fish from the frying pan. Thus to prevent them from dissappearing from our waters. ILL DNR decided that changing the rules for this tournament would not adversley effect the delicate balance that ILL and Iowa decided would protect the fishery. Tournaments are not out to kill these fish. Only to catch, admire, weigh, photograph and release these fish alive. Again the slot limit is to protect the fish from permanetly leaving the waters. The FLW will not only try to release all fish alive they also contribute to local enviornmental groups to protect and enhance our fisheries. This is not about depleting our resources. I believe because of tournament trails like the MWC, PWT, FLW.... we have enhanced our lakes and rivers, with $$$ left behind and invested, also through public awareness.

Again slots are in place to keep the fish swimming in the river. The FLW's goal is the same.

[WAZZZ]

The slot limit is an arbitrary number decided by those in power. This guestamation I assume is to protect the prime spawning fish from the frying pan. Thus to prevent them from dissappearing from our waters. ILL DNR decided that changing the rules for this tournament would not adversley effect the delicate balance that ILL and Iowa decided would protect the fishery. Tournaments are not out to kill these fish. Only to catch, admire, weigh, photograph and release these fish alive. Again the slot limit is to protect the fish from permanetly leaving the waters. The FLW will not only try to release all fish alive they also contribute to local enviornmental groups to protect and enhance our fisheries. This is not about depleting our resources. I believe because of tournament trails like the MWC, PWT, FLW.... we have enhanced our lakes and rivers, with $$$ left behind and invested, also through public awareness.

Again slots are in place to keep the fish swimming in the river. The FLW's goal is the same.

[Fishing Insider]

"Non-tournament anglers already are at odds with tournaments"

I beg to differ. It appears to me that the Iowa DNR personnel is the one at odds with tournaments.

Jack does the post say who wrote this?

[Fishing Insider]

"Non-tournament anglers already are at odds with tournaments"

I beg to differ. It appears to me that the Iowa DNR personnel is the one at odds with tournaments.

Jack does the post say who wrote this?

[JLDII]

His handle is "fishsqzr", and the post is signed, "John".

[JLDII]

His handle is "fishsqzr", and the post is signed, "John".

[Nick(Ia)]

Jack, Could this be John Pitlo? He would be one of the senior fisheries biologists in Iowa along the Mississippi River. He is a well regarded expert and a walleye fisherman. He would be one of the Iowa DNR people that might be expected to resist any change in the slot as he was instrumental in establishing the slot. I find his initial comment to be telling:

"A- All anglers should be treated the same. Non-tournament anglers already are at odds with tournaments, in addition, many non-tournament anglers see our Departments "catering" to tournaments"

All anglers should be treated the same...was that happening before the waiver? Anglers at odds with one another? If this is the case then the DNR has helped to fosture this type of environment both formally and informally. Have you ever heard an fisheries biologist say anything positive about a walleye tournament?

I just got back from a couple days in the Quad Cities and I now believe that the political fall-out from this waiver will be greater than any gains from the waiver. I know the tournament anglers I spoke with were concerned about the waiver and the impact it has on public perception. This is a case of management by politics rather than science. It's all about perception. I don't think anyone has indicated that the fishery will be harmed by the waiver for 50 boats spread over 3-4 pools on the Mississippi. This is all about politics and the fisherman, both non-tourney and tourney will be the pawns.

Good discussion by all.

[Nick(Ia)]

Jack, Could this be John Pitlo? He would be one of the senior fisheries biologists in Iowa along the Mississippi River. He is a well regarded expert and a walleye fisherman. He would be one of the Iowa DNR people that might be expected to resist any change in the slot as he was instrumental in establishing the slot. I find his initial comment to be telling:

"A- All anglers should be treated the same. Non-tournament anglers already are at odds with tournaments, in addition, many non-tournament anglers see our Departments "catering" to tournaments"

All anglers should be treated the same...was that happening before the waiver? Anglers at odds with one another? If this is the case then the DNR has helped to fosture this type of environment both formally and informally. Have you ever heard an fisheries biologist say anything positive about a walleye tournament?

I just got back from a couple days in the Quad Cities and I now believe that the political fall-out from this waiver will be greater than any gains from the waiver. I know the tournament anglers I spoke with were concerned about the waiver and the impact it has on public perception. This is a case of management by politics rather than science. It's all about perception. I don't think anyone has indicated that the fishery will be harmed by the waiver for 50 boats spread over 3-4 pools on the Mississippi. This is all about politics and the fisherman, both non-tourney and tourney will be the pawns.

Good discussion by all.

[Prchjerker]

If i were a tournament angler fishing pool 14, Id be sure to check the boundaries for the Leclaire recreational lock.I believe the looking at the Corps navigationl chart show the recreational lock at Leclaire as out of the channel and in Iowa waters.That would be a really good place for the DNR to check everyone coming out of 14.Anyone over there prefishing better get that clarified if you read this.

[Prchjerker]

If i were a tournament angler fishing pool 14, Id be sure to check the boundaries for the Leclaire recreational lock.I believe the looking at the Corps navigationl chart show the recreational lock at Leclaire as out of the channel and in Iowa waters.That would be a really good place for the DNR to check everyone coming out of 14.Anyone over there prefishing better get that clarified if you read this.

[messy]

This whole thing sounds like a big mess...I'm not a tournament director, but the all this stuff would keep me from scheduling any events at this location again. It just seems like a big problem could explode any time.

[messy]

This whole thing sounds like a big mess...I'm not a tournament director, but the all this stuff would keep me from scheduling any events at this location again. It just seems like a big problem could explode any time.

[easy fix]

Sure would of made sense for the FLW to say thanks but no thanks to illinois lifting the slot and have the guys fish the event the same as last year.

But I suppose making their anglers have to worry about such things as which side of the lock they are on when they have fish in their livewell is a good thing.....sure is easier than having to fish in a slot limit......right?

[easy fix]

Sure would of made sense for the FLW to say thanks but no thanks to illinois lifting the slot and have the guys fish the event the same as last year.

But I suppose making their anglers have to worry about such things as which side of the lock they are on when they have fish in their livewell is a good thing.....sure is easier than having to fish in a slot limit......right?

[hgmeyer]

I very carefully read the (purported, since I assume Jack is just as sure as can be, but I didn't post it so I can be safe)official Iowa response.

Reminds of the "my football... I'm going home so you can't play".

This "official BS" of recreational fishermen and tournament anglers being at odds has got to stop. Almost every one that I know that is not a tournament fisherman who is a recreational fisherman have no problem with tournaments. A few vocal "squeaky wheels" (likely jealous and or hurt egos that someone from out of town can outfish them on their home waters) get heard and policy gets made to pacify these "wheels". And, you know what... I might just trust the judgment of some of our sports super stars more than the politically correct bioligists. My uncle has lived on the banks of the Mississippi River his whole life and he knows a whole lot more about that river than any ten "engineers" I have listened to from the Army COE.

Finally, the tournament is catch and release, 50 boats... how is lifting the slot going to harm the resource. It won't. It will help the tourism draw for the communites... it will help ther local bait shops, motels, restaurants, etc.

All one has to do is travel to Spring Valley, Il and talk to the local business and commerce leaders to discover how tournament angling can have a major positive impact on a community.

Why should tournament anglers be treated differently? Easy, its entertainment and business... Just like the baseball and football franchises that are recognized as business boosters and get concessions on financing and taxes... Many times "practical" decisions can be good for everybody. You and I can't block Main Street and drive down the middle.... But, various civic organizationa all over this country apply for permits and hold parades... You and I can't setoff big league fireworks... but the local Kiwanis or city council can, with a permit. All because "someone" with some vision and not just "PC-BS" can see the big picture and realize that rules exist for reasons... If the reason is not served by an applicatuion of the rule... it is reasonable to examine the rule and consider an exception.


Small minded people are generally always at the root of most mistakes that are deliberately made. I think the Iowa DNR is being small minded.

[hgmeyer]

I very carefully read the (purported, since I assume Jack is just as sure as can be, but I didn't post it so I can be safe)official Iowa response.

Reminds of the "my football... I'm going home so you can't play".

This "official BS" of recreational fishermen and tournament anglers being at odds has got to stop. Almost every one that I know that is not a tournament fisherman who is a recreational fisherman have no problem with tournaments. A few vocal "squeaky wheels" (likely jealous and or hurt egos that someone from out of town can outfish them on their home waters) get heard and policy gets made to pacify these "wheels". And, you know what... I might just trust the judgment of some of our sports super stars more than the politically correct bioligists. My uncle has lived on the banks of the Mississippi River his whole life and he knows a whole lot more about that river than any ten "engineers" I have listened to from the Army COE.

Finally, the tournament is catch and release, 50 boats... how is lifting the slot going to harm the resource. It won't. It will help the tourism draw for the communites... it will help ther local bait shops, motels, restaurants, etc.

All one has to do is travel to Spring Valley, Il and talk to the local business and commerce leaders to discover how tournament angling can have a major positive impact on a community.

Why should tournament anglers be treated differently? Easy, its entertainment and business... Just like the baseball and football franchises that are recognized as business boosters and get concessions on financing and taxes... Many times "practical" decisions can be good for everybody. You and I can't block Main Street and drive down the middle.... But, various civic organizationa all over this country apply for permits and hold parades... You and I can't setoff big league fireworks... but the local Kiwanis or city council can, with a permit. All because "someone" with some vision and not just "PC-BS" can see the big picture and realize that rules exist for reasons... If the reason is not served by an applicatuion of the rule... it is reasonable to examine the rule and consider an exception.


Small minded people are generally always at the root of most mistakes that are deliberately made. I think the Iowa DNR is being small minded.

[djpape]

A Quad City paper reported the last RCL there, had a 10 million economic impact. The Dubuque paper reported the Cabela's NTC had a 5 million economic impact. The economic benifit was spread throught all three states. Again, if the Wisconsin DNR, Iowa DNR, Illinois DNR, and the US Fish and Wildlife, could really work together on the Mississippi we could have the best Walleye fisheries around. Please call your state and federal personnel and ask them to work together in making boundry water regulations and ask for the stocking of fingerlings in each pool. Thank You

[djpape]

A Quad City paper reported the last RCL there, had a 10 million economic impact. The Dubuque paper reported the Cabela's NTC had a 5 million economic impact. The economic benifit was spread throught all three states. Again, if the Wisconsin DNR, Iowa DNR, Illinois DNR, and the US Fish and Wildlife, could really work together on the Mississippi we could have the best Walleye fisheries around. Please call your state and federal personnel and ask them to work together in making boundry water regulations and ask for the stocking of fingerlings in each pool. Thank You

[bigfish]

From the latest posts, I have come to the conclusion. Lifting the slot limit is more of a social issue, as one has put it, then a resource management determent, catch and release does lesson the negative effects. Too bad we can't be in a ideal world where money or politics doesn't sway a position one way or the other. Everyone on here has very valid points, the exchange between competive anglers and noncompetive anglers is not "official BS" it is for real accept it and minimize it by "not allowing exceptions." As logical it may seem to lift the slot limits it is equally as logical to keep them as they are for all. I really doubt that leaving the slots the way they are would, negatively effect the economic benefits derived from competive angling.

[bigfish]

From the latest posts, I have come to the conclusion. Lifting the slot limit is more of a social issue, as one has put it, then a resource management determent, catch and release does lesson the negative effects. Too bad we can't be in a ideal world where money or politics doesn't sway a position one way or the other. Everyone on here has very valid points, the exchange between competive anglers and noncompetive anglers is not "official BS" it is for real accept it and minimize it by "not allowing exceptions." As logical it may seem to lift the slot limits it is equally as logical to keep them as they are for all. I really doubt that leaving the slots the way they are would, negatively effect the economic benefits derived from competive angling.

[true]

True, but all of this thrashing will in the end, deter big tournaments from coming here again...so, who in the end gets the short end of the stick?

[true]

True, but all of this thrashing will in the end, deter big tournaments from coming here again...so, who in the end gets the short end of the stick?

[JLDII]

I believe it is, but I am not 100% certain.

[JLDII]

I believe it is, but I am not 100% certain.

[Kolby]

I think most folks concerned about the resource are referring to Iowa's lakes and reservoirs, which happen to be fairly small, extremely warm, shallow bodies of water. The other referals have to do with this:

Effective organizations set and maintain standards and fail to make acceptions unless the acceptions benefit the central idea. If the Iowa DNR opened the floodgates for a few waters, chances are good other organizations or the general fishing public would use the, "acceptions" for an excuse. I could just see a bunch of locals going out after the tourney and keeping slot fish because they heard the regulations were lifted. LOL, that's just people for you. Not to mention, selling out would be a sign of some weakness in the departement. "Hey, these guys aren't serious about the resource, let's just keep these fish or fish where we're not supposed to." Again, that's people for you. Who cares if an idea is small minded, if it works - go with it. Do you think the Canadian organizations aren't serious about their resource? Mess with their walleyes and you're in deep do-do. Those guys have a military type presence. I don't fish the Mississippi system very much, but I'm glad the IDNR has the reputation of being tough. Maybe other fisheries organizations need to get tough and get back to the basics, because allowing anything, but what's best for the resource, to effect decisions is careless. You leave yourself open to suggestion, so to speak. And I think the IA DNR's stance on tournaments injecting money into the local economy on a short term basis is "SO WHAT, That's not what we're here to do." They are here to provide and maintain healthy fishing, a well balanced economy is a result of that cental idea.

Kolby Kester

[Kolby]

I think most folks concerned about the resource are referring to Iowa's lakes and reservoirs, which happen to be fairly small, extremely warm, shallow bodies of water. The other referals have to do with this:

Effective organizations set and maintain standards and fail to make acceptions unless the acceptions benefit the central idea. If the Iowa DNR opened the floodgates for a few waters, chances are good other organizations or the general fishing public would use the, "acceptions" for an excuse. I could just see a bunch of locals going out after the tourney and keeping slot fish because they heard the regulations were lifted. LOL, that's just people for you. Not to mention, selling out would be a sign of some weakness in the departement. "Hey, these guys aren't serious about the resource, let's just keep these fish or fish where we're not supposed to." Again, that's people for you. Who cares if an idea is small minded, if it works - go with it. Do you think the Canadian organizations aren't serious about their resource? Mess with their walleyes and you're in deep do-do. Those guys have a military type presence. I don't fish the Mississippi system very much, but I'm glad the IDNR has the reputation of being tough. Maybe other fisheries organizations need to get tough and get back to the basics, because allowing anything, but what's best for the resource, to effect decisions is careless. You leave yourself open to suggestion, so to speak. And I think the IA DNR's stance on tournaments injecting money into the local economy on a short term basis is "SO WHAT, That's not what we're here to do." They are here to provide and maintain healthy fishing, a well balanced economy is a result of that cental idea.

Kolby Kester

[Marv Sandbek]

Kolby . . .Very well said! You inject the oft-overlooked aspect of state and/or local fisheries management requirements into what has become a regional/national discussion!!! You appropriately illustrate the unique characteristics of Iowa fisheries . . . which mirror other fishery-unique requirements in other states (like Illinois). For example, consider the adjustments made by the South Dakota Department of Fish and Game when the forage base collapsed on Lake Oahe? How about the slot limits imposed on Minnesota's Lake Mille Lacs? This list of special requirements (and adaptations) goes on and on. You are right on the money when you mention the "people factor" surrounding these regulations and special requirements! Give and inch . . .and a yard is taken! And, you accurately portray the vast majority of DNR officials as dedicated conservationists who seek to benefit all who utilize the resource, including tournament and special event participants! Of course, there will be those who take liberty with their position and power. As mentioned in a previous post, I suggest adaptation and versatility to overcome or lessen the effect of these folks! Eventually, they will go away . . . avid anglers live a long time . . . (we get "Bonus Days" for fishing!) Ha-Ha!!! And, as I close, you could not have done a better job in describing the "enthusiasm" that Canadian MNR officials use when enforcing their regulations!!! Even when in compliance 100% with their regulations, they have a way of making a person feel guilty (of something)! They are tough, tough, tough!!! Do not even think of breaking a slot or limit up there!!! Thanks for the commentary, Kolby! Good reading!

[Marv Sandbek]

Kolby . . .Very well said! You inject the oft-overlooked aspect of state and/or local fisheries management requirements into what has become a regional/national discussion!!! You appropriately illustrate the unique characteristics of Iowa fisheries . . . which mirror other fishery-unique requirements in other states (like Illinois). For example, consider the adjustments made by the South Dakota Department of Fish and Game when the forage base collapsed on Lake Oahe? How about the slot limits imposed on Minnesota's Lake Mille Lacs? This list of special requirements (and adaptations) goes on and on. You are right on the money when you mention the "people factor" surrounding these regulations and special requirements! Give and inch . . .and a yard is taken! And, you accurately portray the vast majority of DNR officials as dedicated conservationists who seek to benefit all who utilize the resource, including tournament and special event participants! Of course, there will be those who take liberty with their position and power. As mentioned in a previous post, I suggest adaptation and versatility to overcome or lessen the effect of these folks! Eventually, they will go away . . . avid anglers live a long time . . . (we get "Bonus Days" for fishing!) Ha-Ha!!! And, as I close, you could not have done a better job in describing the "enthusiasm" that Canadian MNR officials use when enforcing their regulations!!! Even when in compliance 100% with their regulations, they have a way of making a person feel guilty (of something)! They are tough, tough, tough!!! Do not even think of breaking a slot or limit up there!!! Thanks for the commentary, Kolby! Good reading!

[Nick(Ia)]

Kolby, I was about to leave this thread alone and let it die a natural death but I'm a little concerned with some of the comments in your last post. This "central idea" theme is interesting but what is the charge of the Iowa DNR:

"To conserve and enhance our natural resources in cooperation with individuals and organizations to improve the quality of life for Iowans and ensure a legacy for all generations."

Their charge is not just to maintain a healthy fishery but is much more (enhancement, quality of life, legacy)and it is to be done in "cooperation with...organizations". The arguement is that they have chosen to be arbitrary and capricious in their regulation of walleye tournaments and that they have failed to demonstrate that the exception in this case, the waiver, would have any impact on the health of the fishery or in the pursuit of their mission. I don't personally believe that the appearance of the agency as a "tough guy" is central to their mission and in fact is contrary to their mission.

The idea that the waiver will lead others to somehow break the law and ignore the law is belittling to the average recreational angler, citizen, and the agency. We have free fishing days where anglers are not required to have a license (a waiver of the rules) but that doesn't mean that the majority of people believe that the DNR is not serious about requiring fishing licenses or that there is a large increase in unlicensed fishing. The people that will harvest slot fish after this tournament are the same people that harvested slot fish before the tournament...they don't care about the law or the resource. The idea that this waiver may lead to others seeking waivers is probably true. However, if there is no scientific basis to reject a waiver why wouldn't the DNR consider additional waiver opportunities?...they codified the waiver of the no-cull rule for bass tourneys so they apparently felt there wasn't sufficient evidence that this waiver would harm the resource.

What is "best for the resource"? I agree that most fisheries decisions should be made on the basis of sound science and not on external influences. That is how we conserve our resource, meet the DNR mission statement and keep politics from becoming the driving component of resource management. How do we enhance the resource and improve the quality of life for Iowans? I believe that is where the DNR's position regarding walleye tournaments runs afoul of their mission statement. They are supposed to be concerned about the economic impact that these events have on the communities surrounding the fisheries. The health and development of these communities allows access to the resource for all Iowans. Ask the business people around Rathbun, Little River, 12-Mile and other "off the interstate" spots what impacts tournaments have for them.

There is a healthy compromise for these problems but I believe that blind and unquestioning devotion to the Iowa DNR's position regarding walleye tournaments is myopic and unhealthy for everyone, non-tourney anglers, tourney anglers and the citizens of Iowa.

When's the next issue of Iowa Walleye to be published? Maybe you can give us a little background on you and your mag?

[Nick(Ia)]

Kolby, I was about to leave this thread alone and let it die a natural death but I'm a little concerned with some of the comments in your last post. This "central idea" theme is interesting but what is the charge of the Iowa DNR:

"To conserve and enhance our natural resources in cooperation with individuals and organizations to improve the quality of life for Iowans and ensure a legacy for all generations."

Their charge is not just to maintain a healthy fishery but is much more (enhancement, quality of life, legacy)and it is to be done in "cooperation with...organizations". The arguement is that they have chosen to be arbitrary and capricious in their regulation of walleye tournaments and that they have failed to demonstrate that the exception in this case, the waiver, would have any impact on the health of the fishery or in the pursuit of their mission. I don't personally believe that the appearance of the agency as a "tough guy" is central to their mission and in fact is contrary to their mission.

The idea that the waiver will lead others to somehow break the law and ignore the law is belittling to the average recreational angler, citizen, and the agency. We have free fishing days where anglers are not required to have a license (a waiver of the rules) but that doesn't mean that the majority of people believe that the DNR is not serious about requiring fishing licenses or that there is a large increase in unlicensed fishing. The people that will harvest slot fish after this tournament are the same people that harvested slot fish before the tournament...they don't care about the law or the resource. The idea that this waiver may lead to others seeking waivers is probably true. However, if there is no scientific basis to reject a waiver why wouldn't the DNR consider additional waiver opportunities?...they codified the waiver of the no-cull rule for bass tourneys so they apparently felt there wasn't sufficient evidence that this waiver would harm the resource.

What is "best for the resource"? I agree that most fisheries decisions should be made on the basis of sound science and not on external influences. That is how we conserve our resource, meet the DNR mission statement and keep politics from becoming the driving component of resource management. How do we enhance the resource and improve the quality of life for Iowans? I believe that is where the DNR's position regarding walleye tournaments runs afoul of their mission statement. They are supposed to be concerned about the economic impact that these events have on the communities surrounding the fisheries. The health and development of these communities allows access to the resource for all Iowans. Ask the business people around Rathbun, Little River, 12-Mile and other "off the interstate" spots what impacts tournaments have for them.

There is a healthy compromise for these problems but I believe that blind and unquestioning devotion to the Iowa DNR's position regarding walleye tournaments is myopic and unhealthy for everyone, non-tourney anglers, tourney anglers and the citizens of Iowa.

When's the next issue of Iowa Walleye to be published? Maybe you can give us a little background on you and your mag?

[Kolby]

I think the tournaments held in Iowa during the spring and fall are great, great events for Iowa. And I'm sure the tournaments draw people (or money) in to fish the lakes after the guys reveal their programs. I agree that tournaments do have a strong place in the big picture of economic impact and fishing awareness. But what I think doesn't matter, it's what the DNR thinks that does matter. And most folks here, including myself are speculating on what the IDNR's reasons are. Most folks assume negatively when they don't understand a situation. I'm just trying to think of some positive things that could be motives for the DNR's stance. Things tend to get distorted as these conversations grow, so here's a recap of some main points.

1. Iowa DNR getting some heat since they do not allow summer walleye tournaments to happen. They take a tough stand against summer tournaments because of possible high mortality due to our boiling lakes during these times. Tournaments held every other weekend by guys who know what they're doing would make our little lakes tough to manage if in fact mortality was high. Which I don't know how it couldn't be with fish riding around in a 90-100 degree livewell, that one needs addressed by a biologist.

2. Iowa DNR getting some heat for not lifting slots. Some say it's because they hate tournaments, others say it's foolish because of a missed opportunity $-wise. I'm offering the DNR is erroring on the cautious side and they want absolutely no indications of being soft-just in case any one else is getting some ideas.

You know, I decided to start writing about walleye fishing in Iowa strictly out of passion for the fish and all the hub bub that comes with them. I charge enough to cover some of my expenses and as some of you know - I have no advertising to clutter the articles or to confuse a passion with money. Also, I can say what I want to in the pages and not worry about political correctness. If someone doesn't like it, I'll give them their money back. Don't want any unhappy walleye campers out there.

Every month we feature a lake or lakes that hold walleyes in the state. Interviews are conducted with the fisheries biologist for that body of water, and we try and get out and fish the lakes either that month or the following month. Also, we have a column, "understanding forage" that alot of folks enjoy. Here we talk about things like, when and where certain baitfish species spawn, what their seasonal habitat preferences are, or maybe what they eat and whether it's found in the weeds, rocks, wood, or open water. Other than that there are lots of tips folks can apply to most bodies of water in the Midwest that have walleyes in them.



Kolby Kester

PS, done with this one, need my deep thoughts and typing fingers for other projects, LOL!

[Gary Korsgaden]

I recalled yesterday, while reading these posts, a time I stayed with Joe Fellegy at Mille Lac's to do some ice fishing. He had just finished taping a series of conversations with the Lindner's for the first issue of the InFisherman. Joe shared with me then he was very concerned on how the knowledge to be shared in the In-Fisherman Magazine would change the face of fishing. It certainly did looking back. I feel anglers have responded very well some have abused but not many. When I read Kolby's post one point stands out. IF the Iowa DNR made a exception to the slot rules it would diminish anglers respect of this rule, in a nutshell. I really feel Kolby hit it right on. Secondly, one post said a riff between competive and noncompetive anglers on tournaments is "BS", this riff, perhaps now, it is very low. Why risk increasing this riff by allowing tournaments to have exceptions to the rules? It would just fuel the flame,causing it to increase. I am done now I hope to get out do some fishing

[Gary Korsgaden]

Marv, Have we changed the sport of fishing to the point that we are guilting each other in to thinking that it isn't right
to keep fish for consumption anymore. That "politically correct" one should release their catch like the "pro's" do. After all that is real reason we have fish in our rivers and lakes. Just a thought.

[Fish_on]

Kolby you said one thing that really bothers me:
"But what I think doesn't matter, it's what the DNR thinks that does matter."

Kolby you couldn't be more wrong. Please do not forget that the DNR employees are your employees. They work for you. What you think not only matters, it is the only thing that matters. You don't have to be a biologist to have an opinion on what you care about and that is what is important. Of course, you have a responsibility to have an informed opinion. The DNR is charged with managing the resource for the will of the people. And you are one of the people.

"And most folks here, including myself are speculating on what the IDNR's reasons are."

There are a few of us here that are not speculating. Myself included. I have been dealing with this issue for over a decade and I am not speculating about the attitudes of some of the biologists towards walleye tournaments, they are well known to me. There are three in particular that are VERY anti-tournament. In some cases they have made specific statements regarding that. In some cases their feelings are philosophical, but in some cases I think they are just irritated by the extra work tournaments create for them.

"1. Iowa DNR getting some heat since they do not allow summer walleye tournaments to happen. They take a tough stand against summer tournaments because of possible high mortality due to our boiling lakes during these times. Tournaments held every other weekend by guys who know what they're doing would make our little lakes tough to manage if in fact mortality was high. Which I don't know how it couldn't be with fish riding around in a 90-100 degree livewell, that one needs addressed by a biologist."

I have run more than 200 tournaments in nine states and Iowa is the ONLY ONE that doesn't allow tournaments during the summer. Most states have reasonable restrictions regarding summer tournaments because mortality can be high during warm water conditions. It is time Iowa gets with the program. And why does this issue need to be addressed by a biologist only? Here's some food for thought. There are some tournament directors around this country, and I count myself among them, that know far more about mortality in relation to water temperature, weigh-in procedures, etc. than the biologists do. It is time the Iowa DNR opens their eyes and accepts that they are not the only experts. ANd some other experts may disagree with them.

"2. Iowa DNR getting some heat for not lifting slots. Some say it's because they hate tournaments, others say it's foolish because of a missed opportunity $-wise."

You cannot lump the DNR into a category and make sweeping statements about how they feel. There are fisheries biologists who are tournament fishermen and there are there are biologists who hate tournaments. The DNR is not a whole, it is made up of individual people who have different beliefs and desires. You also have to realize that biologists tend to be technical people. That's why they chose the field they're in. ANd that is why they have risen to the level they are. Technically oriented people are not always the best at dealing with the public. Some are a great mix of the ability to work with the everyday numbers and details of being a biologist and with people. Some are not. I'll just leave it at that.

"I'm offering the DNR is erroring on the cautious side and they want absolutely no indications of being soft-just in case any one else is getting some ideas."

I think the case was made very well by Nick and HgMeyer that this is not the case. Remember, we are talking about fisheries biology here not law enforcement, they are two separate departments.

I have a lot of faith in the Iowa DNR. I know the biologists personally and have met with most of them several times. Generally they are good people, educated and knowledgeable. And in most cases, their intentions are good. They have been very helpful in many ways. Each of them had an important part in helping me compile the Iowa Fishing Atlas series of books and I feel that I have a good relationship with each of them. There have been a couple who feel differently than I do about tournaments, and couple that are a little hard to get along with, some are arrogant, and a couple have said some very mean-spirited things about me because I disagree with them and they see that as a challenge to their authority.

I believe that what has happened in the Quad Cities is a continuation of what has been going on for several years. It is just getting a lot more publicity than it has in the past. I hope that it will be a catalyst for some change.

[Prchjerker]

Very nicely put Bernie!Its hard for some people to understand the frustration of us Iowa walleye anglers without having experienced it first hand.

[Kolby]

1.Kolby you said one thing that really bothers me:
"But what I think doesn't matter, it's what the DNR thinks that does matter."
Kolby you couldn't be more wrong. Please do not forget that the DNR employees are your employees. They work for you. What you think not only matters, it is the only thing that matters.



They are paid to work for us because of their knowledge, education, resources, and constant attention to the product. I trust the DNR's practices based on their qualifications. I suppose It is possible that the DNR is not equiped to handle some of the situations that arise with tournaments and public perception. Is it possible their educational system and in-the-field growth has not kept up with the evolution of the walleye tournament scene? You and a few others are more aware of fish tolerances due to your tournament experience - I can see that and I understand "street smarts" vs. "book smarts". Could it be that with the growing interest in walleye tournaments that the DNR needs to meet the new demand by possibly adding a new level to their organization and to their educational requirements. Maybe a "tournament relations" type of curriculum and position. I can't imagine this type of structure isn't in place already, I honestly don't know. Just thinking with the keyboard here. Everything is constantly evolving, and more times than not hard feelings will slow the process, try to stay positive - even if someone makes strong statements against you.

2.Remember, we are talking about fisheries biology here not law enforcement, they are two separate departments.

Yes, but they have one central idea and belief - protect and maintain the resource. Biology governs law enforcement through their sampling and creel surveys, etc. Sloppy law enforcement would skew the biologists goals, and sloppy biology would make law enforcement a potential negative to the fishery, through improper harvest regulations.

I normally don't get to involved with discussions on the walleye boards unless they're actual fishing types of questions. But with this case I sense mass hard feelings and walleye fishing in Iowa - those two together trouble me. I feel fortunate that we even have some walleye fishing around Iowa and it's hard for me to show sympathy for those that complain about the frosting on the cake when they've got plenty of cake to eat. It is good, I suppose, that everyone isn't complaining about not about having walleyes to fish for in Iowa.

Kolby Kester

[JLDII]

Could someone please tell me what the Iowa walleye slot regulations are on the Mississippi?

It will be interesting to watch the weights that come in during this tournament to see if Iowa's stance on the slot actually have any bearing. I suspect that we will see that most of the fish weighed would have fit within the Iowa slot.

Thats just a guess on my part though!

[Nick(Ia)]

Jack, You may keep fish 15" to 20"-can't touch the 20" line and one 27" or over, if it can touch the line it's good to go. nothing between 20 & 27.

[Fish_on]

I think we are pretty much on the same page Kolby. I am just trying to make the point that if we blindly follow what they say it may be a case of the blind leading the blind. I may have a degree in journalism, but I did ace my college biology and conservation courses and I got a healthy dose of skepticism while doing it.;)

There are times when we need to be cheerleaders for the DNR and ther eare others when we need to hold their feet to the fire.

Here's something for you to follow up on... and it might be a good thing to send a writer out to do this story... Why did Iowa discontinue its stocking of saugeye in southern Iowa reservoirs? I asked this question of one biologist and I was told that they simply didn't do well. There must be more to the story than this.

Ohio has had remarkable success with saugeyes in reservoirs nearly identical to many of those in the southern 1/3 of Iowa. Saugeyes are a lot hardier, more aggressive, take warm water better, survive weigh-ins better and are easier to catch (IMHO) than walleyes. This is worth looking into. Maybe they made a premature decision to go back to stocking pure walleyes.

[djpape]

Many of you have said “no exceptions” and I agree with that when we are talking interior lakes and rivers. But here we are talking about boundary waters. I to would have preferred no exceptions in this case too. But when you are talking boundary waters we must come to agreement with our neighbors. It should not be three hocks on one side of the Mississippi and four hocks on the other side of the river. The Iowa DNR itself treats the Mississippi River (boundary water) different than its interior rivers and lakes. The Iowa DNR stocks walleye fingerlings into its interior lakes and rivers, but has a different policy for its boundary rivers. So these “no exceptions” is not practiced by the IDNR itself. The IDNR raises and stocks more fingerling for the Turkey or the Maquoketa River than it does for the Mississippi. The stocking of pool 14 comes from Quad Cities Spray Canal (The power plant south of Clinton on the Illinois side of the River) The IDNR may get some left over fingerling from the power plant and haul them to Pools 13 or even 12 for stocking. The IDNR does not raise and stock fingerlings for the Mississippi as it does for its interior rivers. If the Wisconsin DNR, Iowa DNR, Illinois DNR, and the US Fish and Wildlife could really work together on the Mississippi it could be the best Walleye fisheries around.

[Finally]

You request for all to call the state officials and urge them to work together makes the most sense out of any in this thread! So, who here is going to call their states people?