The Word of Gord (I couldn't resist the play on words)
Posted: Fri Nov 18, 2005 9:09 pm
In October there was 49 of us that went to the Bay of Quinte in search of trophy walleye. The anglers in attendance either showed up with keen angling skills or are in the process of developing them (like me - I hope). We had tremendous weather and as luck would have it, our timing was extraordinary as the walleye fishing was unbelievably good.
RJ did some digging (thanks buddy) and learned that of the 45 anglers he was able to collect stats on, there were 328 walleye caught over three days. That number is amazing. Like I said - the fishing was unbelievable. I had the time of my life.
Out of those 328 walleye there were 47 that were kept.
The group of anglers that I know cares very deeply about fish stocks and the state of recreational angling. And as individuals will be individuals - some like to eat their catches (within the regulations) and others like to release all their catches. Some are into angling for the sum-total experience of catching - others are into it for the sum-total experience of catching and eating. The rest of us are somewhere inbetween those reasons.
It has really bothered me that such a great group of anglers could have a black cloud hung over what was the fishing adventure of a lifetime. I'm talking about some rumours that we were made privy to - rumours that were floating around The Bay area that really tried to make us look bad in regard to the fish that were kept. If you ask me, those rumours were a crime!
For starters, the rumours did nothing to put things into perspective. Let's look at our numbers in a different light. What if 45 individual anglers who fished from the shore caught 47 fish and kept them? I doubt that would get the same reaction as our group did. Why not? What is the difference? In reality there is no difference except that we were ONE group, one single ENTITY. And the perception of ONE ENTITY keeping 47 fish is very different from the perception of 45 individual anglers keeping 47 fish.
What follows is going to be a very delicate thing for me to put into perspective so I am going to say right off that I am proud to be associated with all the anglers who hang out on Hawk Talk and who join us for our week-ends. Anyone who is able to spread a rumour about Hawk Talkers that puts us in such a bad light is totally ignorant to what this bunch of anglers is all about. We're gonna have to treat these rumours as if we saw them in the National Enquirer, OK?
All that being said, I am going to boast that I have been trading emails with Gord Pyzer lately. Thanks goes to Big Jim for e-troducing me (is that a new word?) to Mr. Pyzer. Yup - he is Mr. Pyzer to me. I have long been a fan of Mr. Pyzer because for years he has written articles that I read over and over and over again, and years later I pull out a magazine and read Mr. Pyzer's article over again and probably again. Then I read it again. Get the picture? I like his stuff. He is like the Bill Nye (the science guy) of fishing. A biologist, he takes scientific fact and writes it into an article that helps you to catch fish. Beautiful!
Mr Pyzer comes with the following credentials:
- Gord is a retired MNR Manager (Kenora District)
- Fishing Editor, Outdoor Canada Magazine
- Field Editor, In-Fisherman Magazine and Television
- Co-Host, The Real Fishing Radio Show
- President, Canadian Angling Adventures Ltd.
- Outdoor Editor/Columnist, The Kenora Daily Miner and News, The Fort Frances Times, Just Fishing and Grainews
I told Mr Pyzer about our fishing week-end at the Bay of Quinte. I told him about the rumour mill. I told him what a great bunch of anglers attended that Week-end Adventure. And he sent me an article that I have permission to reproduce on Fish-Hawk.Net.
Knowing how sensitive we all can be when it comes to our own opinions about responsible angling, Mr. Pyzer made the following very clear to me - and I don't think he would mind me sharing this with you - he said...
I have to emphasize one thing, however, and that is that nothing the fellows did on the weekend was illegal. They were all totally within their rights to keep the fish they did. So one cannot be critical of them.
The "problem" is that a well written science based fisheries management plan with input from all users - that lays out the fisheries options and the consequences - has never been prepared and approved.
In the end, that is the government's problem and their shame. Unfortunately, as anglers, we may all have to live with the consequences.
In one of our earlier exchanges, Mr. Pyzer and I discussed the interests of various parties when it comes to the Bay of Quinte. Nobody was left out of the discussion and he summed it up nicely - he said
No one is wrong and everyone is right!
We see it all the time on Hawk Talk. We have discussions about fishing topics and the opinions come at us from all ends of the spectrum. On the topic of trophy walleye in the Bay of Quinte, we have not been exposed to a point of view that is as knowledgeable and as steeped in science as Gord Pyzer's. Like anyone else's point of view that gets expressed on Hawk Talk, you don't necessarily need to like someone else's point of view, but it is undeniable that being exposed to them helps everyone to know more stuff. And knowing more stuff is never bad. In the end we all make our own choices.
It is with great pleasure that I give you a link to an article Gord Pyzer wrote in 1999. It appeared in In-Fisherman magazine, won Mr. Pyzer a national writing award, and is reproduced on Fish-Hawk.Net with Mr Pyzer's permission. When I read it my first impression on a number of fronts was - what a balancing act! Here it is...
The Future of Fishing in Canada - Two Paths Converge in the Forest
http://www.fish-hawk.net/hawkshow/wordo ... ofgord.php
RJ did some digging (thanks buddy) and learned that of the 45 anglers he was able to collect stats on, there were 328 walleye caught over three days. That number is amazing. Like I said - the fishing was unbelievable. I had the time of my life.
Out of those 328 walleye there were 47 that were kept.
The group of anglers that I know cares very deeply about fish stocks and the state of recreational angling. And as individuals will be individuals - some like to eat their catches (within the regulations) and others like to release all their catches. Some are into angling for the sum-total experience of catching - others are into it for the sum-total experience of catching and eating. The rest of us are somewhere inbetween those reasons.
It has really bothered me that such a great group of anglers could have a black cloud hung over what was the fishing adventure of a lifetime. I'm talking about some rumours that we were made privy to - rumours that were floating around The Bay area that really tried to make us look bad in regard to the fish that were kept. If you ask me, those rumours were a crime!
For starters, the rumours did nothing to put things into perspective. Let's look at our numbers in a different light. What if 45 individual anglers who fished from the shore caught 47 fish and kept them? I doubt that would get the same reaction as our group did. Why not? What is the difference? In reality there is no difference except that we were ONE group, one single ENTITY. And the perception of ONE ENTITY keeping 47 fish is very different from the perception of 45 individual anglers keeping 47 fish.
What follows is going to be a very delicate thing for me to put into perspective so I am going to say right off that I am proud to be associated with all the anglers who hang out on Hawk Talk and who join us for our week-ends. Anyone who is able to spread a rumour about Hawk Talkers that puts us in such a bad light is totally ignorant to what this bunch of anglers is all about. We're gonna have to treat these rumours as if we saw them in the National Enquirer, OK?
All that being said, I am going to boast that I have been trading emails with Gord Pyzer lately. Thanks goes to Big Jim for e-troducing me (is that a new word?) to Mr. Pyzer. Yup - he is Mr. Pyzer to me. I have long been a fan of Mr. Pyzer because for years he has written articles that I read over and over and over again, and years later I pull out a magazine and read Mr. Pyzer's article over again and probably again. Then I read it again. Get the picture? I like his stuff. He is like the Bill Nye (the science guy) of fishing. A biologist, he takes scientific fact and writes it into an article that helps you to catch fish. Beautiful!
Mr Pyzer comes with the following credentials:
- Gord is a retired MNR Manager (Kenora District)
- Fishing Editor, Outdoor Canada Magazine
- Field Editor, In-Fisherman Magazine and Television
- Co-Host, The Real Fishing Radio Show
- President, Canadian Angling Adventures Ltd.
- Outdoor Editor/Columnist, The Kenora Daily Miner and News, The Fort Frances Times, Just Fishing and Grainews
I told Mr Pyzer about our fishing week-end at the Bay of Quinte. I told him about the rumour mill. I told him what a great bunch of anglers attended that Week-end Adventure. And he sent me an article that I have permission to reproduce on Fish-Hawk.Net.
Knowing how sensitive we all can be when it comes to our own opinions about responsible angling, Mr. Pyzer made the following very clear to me - and I don't think he would mind me sharing this with you - he said...
I have to emphasize one thing, however, and that is that nothing the fellows did on the weekend was illegal. They were all totally within their rights to keep the fish they did. So one cannot be critical of them.
The "problem" is that a well written science based fisheries management plan with input from all users - that lays out the fisheries options and the consequences - has never been prepared and approved.
In the end, that is the government's problem and their shame. Unfortunately, as anglers, we may all have to live with the consequences.
In one of our earlier exchanges, Mr. Pyzer and I discussed the interests of various parties when it comes to the Bay of Quinte. Nobody was left out of the discussion and he summed it up nicely - he said
No one is wrong and everyone is right!
We see it all the time on Hawk Talk. We have discussions about fishing topics and the opinions come at us from all ends of the spectrum. On the topic of trophy walleye in the Bay of Quinte, we have not been exposed to a point of view that is as knowledgeable and as steeped in science as Gord Pyzer's. Like anyone else's point of view that gets expressed on Hawk Talk, you don't necessarily need to like someone else's point of view, but it is undeniable that being exposed to them helps everyone to know more stuff. And knowing more stuff is never bad. In the end we all make our own choices.
It is with great pleasure that I give you a link to an article Gord Pyzer wrote in 1999. It appeared in In-Fisherman magazine, won Mr. Pyzer a national writing award, and is reproduced on Fish-Hawk.Net with Mr Pyzer's permission. When I read it my first impression on a number of fronts was - what a balancing act! Here it is...
The Future of Fishing in Canada - Two Paths Converge in the Forest
http://www.fish-hawk.net/hawkshow/wordo ... ofgord.php