10-08-2010, 09:54 PM
Im just saying if we open it up to Wyoming and Idaho, I don't know if they have any Pike or Musky in those states and I know that three different species of panfish would be difficult for anglers in Idaho and Wyoming. I am fine with the way the rules are just for Utah (even though I can't figure out how to catch pike/musky through the ice - mostly because I don't want to devote the time to do it).
I think the current format discourages many anglers from joining the competition because it takes fishing several times per week all over the state to really compete. I would propose simplifying the tournament to make it more fun for the average angler and to increase participation:
2 panfish (perch, crappie, bluegill, etc.) - instead of 3
1 bass or walleye (LM,SM, white) - takes the place of the third panfish
5 of any species but only 1 can be musky, pike or mack, and you can have up to 2 of any of the other species count (brown, tiger, bow, cutt, splake, etc). Every year the winner catches a large mack and or pike/musky. SO even if anglers tear up with huge cutts, bows, tiger trout or browns, they are quickly surpassed by one large mack and pike/musky. Only allowing one of these bigger species would at least allow the hardcore trout ice fishermen to compete.
This would allow anglers to compete without having to travel all over the state chasing fish that they don't know how to fish for.
What fun will the competition be if only 5 people sign up and only 2 have the time, money and energy to fish 3 times per week all over the state?
I enjoy ice fishing in Idaho and Wyoming and last year found myself staying in Utah for the competition rather than fishing where I actually want to fish. Many other members expressed the same behavior last year. That is why I suggested adding Idaho and Wyoming.
Just thoughts. Either way, I have definitely had fun in the past competitions.
[signature]
I think the current format discourages many anglers from joining the competition because it takes fishing several times per week all over the state to really compete. I would propose simplifying the tournament to make it more fun for the average angler and to increase participation:
2 panfish (perch, crappie, bluegill, etc.) - instead of 3
1 bass or walleye (LM,SM, white) - takes the place of the third panfish
5 of any species but only 1 can be musky, pike or mack, and you can have up to 2 of any of the other species count (brown, tiger, bow, cutt, splake, etc). Every year the winner catches a large mack and or pike/musky. SO even if anglers tear up with huge cutts, bows, tiger trout or browns, they are quickly surpassed by one large mack and pike/musky. Only allowing one of these bigger species would at least allow the hardcore trout ice fishermen to compete.
This would allow anglers to compete without having to travel all over the state chasing fish that they don't know how to fish for.
What fun will the competition be if only 5 people sign up and only 2 have the time, money and energy to fish 3 times per week all over the state?
I enjoy ice fishing in Idaho and Wyoming and last year found myself staying in Utah for the competition rather than fishing where I actually want to fish. Many other members expressed the same behavior last year. That is why I suggested adding Idaho and Wyoming.
Just thoughts. Either way, I have definitely had fun in the past competitions.
[signature]