October 05, 2006
Crappie Creel Questions
Several weeks ago Chattanoogan.com Outdoors asked TWRA, and various Wildlife Commissioners, to provide a "user-friendly" explanation of why a reduced crappie creel limit is necessary for some reservoirs, but not for others.
They have done so, partially. They have provided data explaining their reasons why Kentucky Lake and Reelfoot Lake crappie anglers should not be subjected to a lower creel limit. However the release provides no data regarding the other reservoirs that will be "excepted" from the reduced creel limit. (Barkley, Cheatham, David Crockett, Percy Priest, Old Hickory, and Pickwick)
I've spoken with Mike Jolley, the primary, public force behind the proposal in the Chattanooga region. There is absolutely no question in my mind that Mike has the best interests of the fish, and the best interests of the fishermen at heart. I respect him for it.
Yet I still believe in my heart-of-hearts that the proposal is not being proposed equally across the state for social (i.e. political) reasons.... not biological. The Chief of TWRA Fisheries is on record saying he felt the proposal should apply statewide (with the exception of Reelfoot) and he admits he "was out-voted."
Regional Biologists point to the fact that anglers surveyed, support the reduced creel limit. However they admit that anglers on the "excepted" lakes were not surveyed. Biologists apparently didn't want to know if anglers there would support reduced creel limits or not.
I have little doubt that if backed into a corner, respective biologists on the other excepted lakes would come up with data to support the exceptions. The majority of us, with our limited fisheries knowledge, and access to data, could hardly argue the point.
Yet every biologist agrees that the reduction will NOT help the crappie population... it will only disperse the available legal catch among more anglers.
I believe the exact same would be true on the "excepted" reservoirs... and for all we know, crappie anglers there want that as well.
But they weren't asked.
I believe that the Region III biologists want what's best... even if we might disagree on "what's best."
I also believe that biologists in other parts of the state knew that to broach the issue would stir up a hornet's nest of controversy... and they simply "didn't want to go there."
My prediction is that the reduced crappie creel limits, and exceptions, will pass the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Commission as presented.
And different portions of the state will have to abide by differing, confusing creel limits with, in my mind, questionable justification. It is an almost identical scenario as has existed for years for sauger fishermen.
It makes me wonder what's next?
| By rsimms | 04:17 PM | Comments (2)
August 24, 2006
Goose Hunting in the City
I will not tell I lie. I was the one who asked Matt that question. After fishing on the river, and watching geese galore... seemingly more than I've ever seen down there before, I couldn't help but wonder about helping thin out the over-population when early goose season arrives.
After reading Matt's answer, I won't be there however.
Simply knowing that it has already caused friction in the past is enough to keep me away. Hunters need to be part of the solution, not part of the problem.
Some might remember a situation a few years ago at Baylor School. Duck hunters "tested" the exact waters we're discussing here in a slough adjacent to Baylor School.
Bottomline - the hunters in that case were perfectly within their legal rights. But the ensuing controversy that received widespread media attention gave every hunter a big blackeye in the eyes of the non-hunting pulblic.
I care too much about the sport, and other hunters, to risk bringing on such another debacle. I would ask you to do the same.
| By rsimms | 11:44 PM | Comments (1)
Crappie Creel Limit Questions
I'm having a hard time with this proposal to reduce the crappie creel limit. It has always been my strong belief that on a mainstream Tennessee River Reservoir, the limiting factor on fish production is environmental factors... NOT fishermen.
On the other hand, would a lower creel limit spread out the available catch to more anglers?
Possibly....
What I do HATE is the fact that once again East Tennessee reservoirs are being treated differently than the more popular West Tennessee Reservoirs. For years Kentucky Lake anglers have had a 14-inch size limit on sauger while in East Tennessee it is 15-inches. Reliable biologists have told me directly that difference is political, not biological.
I wonder if the same is true for the crappie proposal?
I have requested specific crappie data comparing any differences between Chickamauga Lake and Kentucky Lake. I'm told it will take about a week to pull those numbers together.
We will see how I feel then.
But for now, I have voted that I do NOT support the limit reduction.
| By rsimms | 01:30 PM | Comments (2)
August 22, 2006
Have PETA & Hunters Joined Hands?
For months the Outdoors community has raved and raged about a plan put forth by the World Hunting Association. The group is on track put on a televised, webcast hunting competition. In the beginning, eight selected professional hunters would have used non-lethal tranquilizer darts. Sportsmen and sporting organizations across the country freaked out... saying the "hunting competition" and the use of non-lethal tranquilizers was just simply, a bad idea.
Brian Murphy, the Executive Director of the Quality Deer Management Association was quoted in Outdoor Life magazine, saying, "the deer are confined to pen operations and we know the stigma associated with that. I don't believe our noble game animal deserves to be placed in a target environment for a contest. Hunting is a very individual, a very spiritual activity. Deer deserve better."
But the hunt is still on, except today the hunt's brainchild, David Farbman, announced they'll use real bullets and real arrows rather than tranquilzer darts... what Farbham calls "traditional harvest formats," (i.e. hunters will shoot to kill).
He said, "everyone associated with WHA wants what is best for hunting. We feel confident we are now on the right path."
So will this make the critics any happier?
I doubt it. I suspect while many of them used the tranquilizer darts as their scapegoats, most really object to making "hunting" a commercially competitive business... complete with hidden cameras monitoring deer and hunter movements, live webcasts and tentative TV deals.
I just don't understand why we haven't heard similar objections to bass tournaments?
Even among the anti-crowd... hunters are the primary target. PETA and others offer up a token "anti-fishing" campaign, but the true focus is always on hunters. Now it appears the exact same thing is true among the hunting community. Imagine that... PETA and hunters have in essence, joined hands.
Anybody who objects to a hunting competition, but doesn't object to fishing competitions, is a hypocrite.
In the beginning I was turned off by the "competitive" aspects of fishing, and I myself am not a competitor. However I quickly came to recognize the incredible attention bass tournaments have brought to the sport, even among the non-fishing crowd. Such attention generates recruits, which ultimately help us protect our natural resources (read previous Outdoor Blog Entry about how we're a minority).
I'm looking forward to the WHA competition. I'm a bit of TV tech geek and it's going to be fascinating to me to see how they combine state-of-the-art monitoring technology... cameras, GPS tracking devices, and tranmitters... in a hunting environment. What does a deer really do, or how do they react when a hunter moves into their territory. I want to to watch and learn.
The hunts will be held in large, high-fence enclosures... 1,000 acres-plus. Wildlife researchers have conducted hunting experiments under such conditions, using telemetry equipment to track deer movements with hunters in the area. It has been proven time and time again that a wily buck can have no problem evading hunters when he's got 1,000 acres to roam.
So I think I'm going against the sporting grain when I say, bring it on.
But I'm also a realist and believe that in today's social environment, if there is money involved, we can't stop it anyway... or if it is stopped, it will only be because of the lack of money.
Several high-profile outdoor sporting goods retailers such as Bass Pro and Cabelas have gone on record, saying they won't sponsor the event. So if the WHA hunt goes away, that will be the reason.
It seems that in this day and age, even when you're hunting deer, you still have to "follow the money."
| By rsimms | 07:53 AM | Comments (1)
August 16, 2006
Paving Paradise
Well here goes, my first effort at blogging. I'm not sure I fully comprehend how this works so bear with me. My interpretation of a blog is an electronic diary, except everybody has one of those little gold keys to open it up and read.
My name is Richard Simms and I am a freelance Outdoor Writer. Yes, this is an actual "thing" for those who don't know.... writers who specialize in providing information to folks who enjoy the outdoors. We even have professional organizations such as the Tennessee Outdoor Writers Association and the Southeastern Outdoor Press Association.
In the early days Outdoor Writers wrote almost exclusively for "consumptive users," the folks who like to hunt and fish. In the last decade or two however, the definition of "outdoors" has changed. This comes with the growing popularity of "non-consumptive" pursuits... hikers, bikers, paddlers, birdwatchers, wildlife photographers and others who thoroughly enjoy life away from the concrete jungles. But they have neither the need nor desire to catch or kill anything while they're doing it.
Some outdoor writers, and hunters and fishermen, look down at those folks. I hear many complain that former Mayor Corker's "Outdoor Chattanooga" venture is catering only to the hiking and biking crowd while ignoring, or even discouraging, the hunting and fishing crowd. The complainers hold fast to the belief that only hunters and fishermen truly understand what the "outdoors" is all about. While I will quickly admit an affinity for the hunting and fishing demographic, I recognize and welcome all outdoorspersons... whether they carry a gun, a fishing rod, a camera, a paddle or a water bottle. I embrace all comers because there is strength in numbers.
Hunters and fishermen are a minority. Hunters especially are taboo in some circles. I frequently point to a high-dollar TVA publication called Tennessee River Country... billed as "a Glovebox Guide to TVA places for Family Fun," there are hundreds of pages filled with fancy photographs bragging about all of the fantastic outdoor opportunities available on TVA public lands. Throughout the entire publication hunting was NEVER mentioned. It completely ignored a favored pastime for tens of thousands of TVA customers. When asked about the omission of hunting the TVA spokesman said, "the guide is not meant to be an in-depth, exhaustive inventory of all recreational activities available on TVA reservoirs and recreation lands." I've tried hard and I can't find anything missing besides hunting. And for those who don't know, hunting is perfectly legal on TVA land.
I guess you could call it discrimination of sorts. Hunters are often barraged by direct assaults from radical anti-hunting organizations; as well as indirect assaults by those who are scared to publicly acknowledge our rights and our worth.
Through license fees and excise taxes hunters have single-handedly paid for the overwhelming majority of professional wildlife and fisheries management in the Tennessee Valley. In the State of Tennessee that's more than $40,000,000 every year! We have paid for the conservation of most of the wildlife that the bird watchers, campers and hikers visit TVA lands to see. Over the years, the "non-consumptive" users have been offered numerous opportunities to open their pocketbooks and help. Tennessee specifically has offered voluntary "non-game permits," a mechanism to allow non-hunters to help fund wildlife management efforts. Other states have offered "income tax check off's" so non-hunters can help enhance wildlife funding. Most such efforts have failed, and in many cases, been abandoned.
So yes, like most hunters and fishermen, that bothers me a little bit... but not so much that I don't welcome and encourage every hiker, biker or paddler we can recruit outdoors. If we accept and include everyone who likes the woods and waters, for whatever reason, the better we can battle the people, developers, politicians and others who look for every opportunity to "pave paradise and put up a parking lot."
| By rsimms | 09:41 PM | Comments (2)