How to win friends and influence people

[djkimmel]

by Dan Kimmel

So I went to 3 meetings today. I was feeling productive and good after the first two though they started at 7:30am this morning... then I decided to go to the 3rd meeting. The Natural Resources Commission meeting. Then I figured since I'm there I might as well tell them what I'm thinking...

So I write a speech on the spot and it turns out what I was thinking is that they are not going by sound science but running popularity contests and using weak 'science' to justify preconceived notions or the easy way out...

I reminded them that we worked really hard to give them the authority to regulate hunting and fishing with sound science AND we expect them to do it. I gave a couple examples of how they aren't doing it. I didn't watch how they took my speech but I don't think there were lots of smiles...

Maybe I should have stopped after two meetings?? Of course, they have told me they are done with bass, and that if we just stop having weigh ins we can fish all the 'tournaments' we want. I've taken offense that I don't think they should be telling us to fundamentally change how we do things just to make their job easy... I've also taken offense that they said they are done with bass...

Am I wrong in wanting real, honest, sound science? Should I go back next month and say I'm sorry for telling you you aren't doing your job right??

[21XDC]

Done with BASS?  The most sought after gamefish in the USA?  Un-Real. 

[Team houston]

Do not apologize for being right. Imagine if one of the Southern states told their constituents they were "done with bass". They would be broomed out.

[21XDC]

Please remind them that the Biggest fishing store is not..

Crappie Pro Shops
Walleye Pro Shops
Pike Pro Shops
Perch Pro Shops
Bluegill Pro Shops
Trout Pro Shops
Salmon Pro Shops
Musky Pro Shops




Instead it is BASS PRO SHOPS

[djkimmel]

Great points! Thank you!

[Cy]

Please don't go back and apologize for anything!!!

I think you should ask them:

If they are "Done with Bass", what are they spending their time on?  I can only assume they are more concerned with the Salmon fishery and alewife population?  It's too bad that we, as a state, have to spend money to make money on salmon!  Unlike the non-invasive species we have that naturally reproduce just fine and if LEFT ALONE would continue to thrive for the next several generations, much like have for the previous generations.

I would like to know exactly why they would like us to stop having weigh ins?  What is the EXACT issue with weighing fish and releasing them?  Would they prefer we weigh them and fillet them, like they do with Salmon?

I would like to know how they propose we decide the winner of a tournament, that they said we are welcome to have as many we like, without a weigh in process?

I would also like to know when can we have the dismantling of the NRC put on the ballot so we can try something different until we find something that works?!!!

[djkimmel]

Some good questions. I won't apologize. I may ask them some of your questions. I think it is completely unacceptable for them to tell us to change how we do things just to make their situation easier.

I'm working on writing up some plans for the next steps. Talked to MUCC about it already. We should be more involved with MUCC too - https://mucc.org - to make sure we have as much influence as possible. I will try to go forward with one or two ideas to push for more bass fishing opportunity.

The things I have to defeat is the NRC thinking they are done with bass, the NRC not wanting to look at bass fishing again soon, the MDNR Fisheries Division thinking more bass tournaments does NOT equal more opportunity because we can already catch-and-release fish (I keep reminding them every spring anglers are running down to Indiana to fish bass tournaments in the spring because they can), the MDNR Fisheries Division saying they will not do another study of our own to prove anything about bass AND saying our bass are so different that we can't go by what other states do (didn't stop the NRC from using 1 single study from ILLINOIS in their dissent though!! ) and of course our enemies who think we will destroy the bass fishing if we can have more bass tournaments in the spring even though the MDNR Fisheries Division admits we already fish 70% of the spawn legally under the EXISTING HARVEST SEASON!

That's 45 years of fishing 70% of the bass spawn under harvest without harming our bass fishery including 100% of the NORTHERN Michigan and UP bass spawn under harvest without harming our bass fishery. Even the MDNR Fisheries Division told me they are sick of people bringing up protecting the spawn. WE DON'T PROTECT THE BASS SPAWN NOW! All we are talking about is bass tournaments during prespawn and some of the Southern Michigan spawn where bass are their most prolific of all.

[Mojo]

Dan, I'm going to assume you posted this because you want critical input, not a bunch of cheer leading (That's what face book is for).

I believe, the MDNR believes, that by opening C&R year round for bass, they gave "enough" toward our position. Maybe they feel they gave too much, but cannot retract without reason. You're going to have to assume  they want to observe the effects on the affected fish populations and probably won't get back into this for a 3-5 year period?  For the time being, they are simply saying, "We're done for now".  MDNR is being conservative here.

Just be careful here. Nature is working against us. The example will be LSC, where we've had a boom of Smallies last 10 years. The boom of goby populations gave an new easy nutrient. Weights went up! Weights are staying up.. But just for the very best of the tournament guys. These last 2 years, The summer Smallies have really moved around. Maybe the gobies have been gobbled up ? Maybe at about the same time, we are seeing the effects of less plankton which reduced the populations of  bait fish (thanks to the zebra mussel population). I haven't seen Black Shad balls on the river in years.  This has caused a change in the Smallie habits, with FAR FAR greater effects than the C&R changes. I really think the MDNR needs to study the bait fish population on LSC........

So Unfortunately, it will be WAY too easy for the people in the guided services and other opposing forces to blame any change in the bass habits on the changes  to the Bass laws.  They will bring in their reduced catch rates on their guided services and it will be considered "real data".  Understand here, I'm not looking to convince or be convinced or convicted for my thoughts. Just giving you food for thought on the "resistance to common sense" you received.

I'm also here to thank you for year round fishing. I think it's the best conservation law  change in 20 years -

[djkimmel]

Yes, the new season is a good start. Just not enough for all my friends who love bass tournaments.

I have to think about the points you brought up all the time. What I need to do is come up with a way to combat them and not have to wait another 5 to 10 years.

I want to be done with this for good before I'm too old. I have two ideas I'm working on and will share as I flesh them out with the appropriate people to share them with. MUCC for sure because we will need their help. Who else and how I share them depends on what seems to be the best strategy to have a shot against the haters and the people who just don't know science if it bit them in the behind while shouting SCIENCE!

[djkimmel]

One thing I know for sure right now is the MDNR is stating they will NOT do our own study to prove we can fish more bass tournaments yet many people are demanding that we have our own study before they will believe what I already know from the wealth of studies in Michigan and outside of Michigan already. So there is the main catch-22 to overcome.

[Mojo]

Now that is a shame..... They should conduct a study on northern, mid and lower Michigan lakes, smallie and largie. They have the natural resources, but not the funding nor is there an emergency on this topic. It seems if we had an abundance of either, we would have our study.

Maybe ..... its good we don't have an emergency on our hands. And if they said, "We need a $1 million dollars to fund the study", then we have our field of play set.  ??

[djkimmel]

Some have said we should pay for our own study but that is hypocritical and ridiculous. Bass anglers have been paying for tons of fisheries work for years and years that directly benefits OTHER types of anglers.

The MDNR says something like 70% of surveyed Michigan anglers now identify primarily as bass anglers. That means we have way more than paid our fair share of the Fisheries Division budget and we deserve our fair share of the resources.

Of course, saying we have to have our own bass study that would take 10 years and cost beau coup bucks to prove what all the other studies and actual experience already show, is ridiculous. It's a crutch for some who fear change and an poor excuse for those who just don't like bass tournament anglers and don't want them getting their fair share of time with the same resource. This is really about fairness to all bass anglers, and fair, equal opportunity to the resource for bass tournament anglers barring proof (that doesn't exist) that they can't have it.

[robhj]

Dan, I know this topic has come up frequently and I really do applaud your efforts to get year round CIR. I've fished tournaments for several years and would agree that our bass fishing seems to be better than ever. However, saying that our DNR doesn't use "sound science" or implying that people who would want to see additional studies are somehow ignorant to your point of view doesn't help to advance your position. I can't recall ever seeing a comment on a fishing or hunting website that has stated how our DNR has done a good job on anything. The MIDNR has to manage our resources with limited funds all while trying to make the many different shareholders in our state happy. I have a hard time faulting the fisheries biologists for wanting to do the right thing for bass management. I found several studies that show negative effects on the impact of fishing for bass during the spawn and I didn't have to look very hard. I remember seeing a video several years ago that showed someone catching a smallie off of her bed, and then showed the fish get released immediately and swim right back to her bed. Then commenting on how fishing for smallies during the spawn has no negative effect because the fish swam right back to her bed. If he would have caught that same fish, put it in the livewell for several hours, drove all over the lake, released it at the weigh-in site, and then showed the fish swimming all the way back to her bed, I would have been more convinced. There's no denying that tournaments cause increased mortality, delayed mortality, and fish displacement. You significantly reduce all of that by catching a fish, weighing or measuring immediately, and releasing it where it was caught. I know our fishing seems to be better than ever, but I for one would rather err on the side of caution and let our fisheries biologists regulate our fisheries. I brought it up last year and remember getting negative comments immediately, but we have the technology and year round CIR season (thanks again Dan) to have tournaments year round for any anglers that choose to participate, however, you would have to have a format similiar to MFL. Kayak tourneys do it, so why couldn't the same be done in bass tourneys? I am probably in the minority of bass fisherman who agree with our MIDNR on this one, but I have to respectfully disagree with statements that our DNR is not using "sound science". And this is from someone who loves fishing for bass and competing in bass tournaments. My point isn't to rile anyone up, but if the end game is to be able to have year round bass tournaments, that opportunity is already here, just not the "typical" tourney we're all accustomed to.

[dartag]

The one problem i have always thought about with CDR is the fact that anglers in a tournament will be putting fish in a live well where other angles fishing can not legally do this.  I see on the water confrontations that will just increase negative impact on tournament fishermen.   Imagine 30 boats at the Mile Roads and 5 keeping fish.    Maybe I am wrong but it seems there could be trouble.   Since Ice Out is around April 15th on inland lakes there is about 6 weeks until tournament fishing starts.

The bigger problem I see is to many tournaments on Michigan waters.The DNR data show there were 2085 registered tournaments last summer.  The inland lakes in the Metro Detroit area are hit pretty hard all summer. 

[Manxfishing]

I'll throw this out there
Maybe add slot limits
Any fish that didn't fit in there would be CIR
That way if there was early tournament it would mean the fish in the slot limit would spawn on there beds

[thedude]

Dan - you can tell them we (west michigan bass) were just contacted by a not-to-be-named-at-this-time local tourism board to discuss options of hosting a large tournament there.

Tourism is one of michigan's top industries, and local communities are realizing the benefit of filling campgrounds, restaurants, hotels and so on lower-volume weekends with BASS fisherman.  This particular request was completely unsolicited.

Our classic has been a great example of this and garnered some great positive local attention. We hope to continue this in spite of the NRC.  Early may is one of the periods these communities are low on tourists and have already expressed the desire for more tournaments. I've had to tell them initially that its a non-starter because there's nothing we can do then at this point.

[TimH]

The biggest issue in my opinion is and continues to be the MDNR's unwillingness to properly address the question.  They show their true colors as a government agency by bowing down to "special interest" (professional guides, lake associations, etc) instead of spending the necessary time and resources to collect the data and make an informed decision.  As Dan has been saying all along, they need to use science and not raw emotion or skewed opinion influenced by those who feel that their opinion matters more because they earn their living showing people where and how to fish, or because they own lakeside property and therefore feel entitled to decide who uses the lake and for what and when.  Even if the MDNR doesn't want to spend money on a study, why not learn by doing?  The only cost involved there is the ink to print up some new regs in the annual fishing guide.  If they allow early tournament fishing for a couple of years, they can easily see the impact it has on the fishery by doing creel surveys and just seeking feedback from anglers.  If it is determined that it is having an adverse effect on the fishery, then revert it back to the old standard.  If things look to be OK, then keep it going.  I know they are already doing creel surveys on a regular basis, because I barely got out fishing this year, but twice had the MDNR do a creel survey at the launch.  The reality is that no matter how good we think we all are as anglers, we are never going to catch all of the fish.  Plus it has been proven that is only takes a couple of bass over several acres to not only maintain the population, but to grow it, which clearly works in our favor.  The worst case scenario with learning through doing is they find out it is having an impact on the fishery, they revert back to the old standard, and those effected lake have a slower couple of years as the population recovers. I just really wish that the MDNR would listen to bass anglers for once and start to take our requests seriously, instead of continuing to give us the proverbial middle finger every time the topic of tournament bass fishing appears on their agenda.    Nevertheless, thank you Dan for all of your efforts and vigilance on bass fishing related issues.

[AMSDJS]

Dan, I know this topic has come up frequently and I really do applaud your efforts to get year round CIR. I've fished tournaments for several years and would agree that our bass fishing seems to be better than ever. However, saying that our DNR doesn't use "sound science" or implying that people who would want to see additional studies are somehow ignorant to your point of view doesn't help to advance your position. I can't recall ever seeing a comment on a fishing or hunting website that has stated how our DNR has done a good job on anything. The MIDNR has to manage our resources with limited funds all while trying to make the many different shareholders in our state happy. I have a hard time faulting the fisheries biologists for wanting to do the right thing for bass management. I found several studies that show negative effects on the impact of fishing for bass during the spawn and I didn't have to look very hard. I remember seeing a video several years ago that showed someone catching a smallie off of her bed, and then showed the fish get released immediately and swim right back to her bed. Then commenting on how fishing for smallies during the spawn has no negative effect because the fish swam right back to her bed. If he would have caught that same fish, put it in the livewell for several hours, drove all over the lake, released it at the weigh-in site, and then showed the fish swimming all the way back to her bed, I would have been more convinced. There's no denying that tournaments cause increased mortality, delayed mortality, and fish displacement. You significantly reduce all of that by catching a fish, weighing or measuring immediately, and releasing it where it was caught. I know our fishing seems to be better than ever, but I for one would rather err on the side of caution and let our fisheries biologists regulate our fisheries. I brought it up last year and remember getting negative comments immediately, but we have the technology and year round CIR season (thanks again Dan) to have tournaments year round for any anglers that choose to participate, however, you would have to have a format similiar to MFL. Kayak tourneys do it, so why couldn't the same be done in bass tourneys? I am probably in the minority of bass fisherman who agree with our MIDNR on this one, but I have to respectfully disagree with statements that our DNR is not using "sound science". And this is from someone who loves fishing for bass and competing in bass tournaments. My point isn't to rile anyone up, but if the end game is to be able to have year round bass tournaments, that opportunity is already here, just not the "typical" tourney we're all accustomed to.

Gentlemen,

IMO, robhj has the best reply, not only because I agree with it : ) but because I am a fellow life scientist. Let's not get emotions involved because as passionate as bass anglers are (of which I am one), especially tournament bass anglers (of which I am not one), - one has to admit that here in the great state of Michigan, the coldwater fisheries are "king" when it comes to annual dollars generated. I used to spend a week every Summer (usually in August) vacationing in Ludington and I have seen first hand the number of boats that go in and out of that single port on a daily basis, just for that one week I was there. We all know the average salmon boat (charter or private-owned) dwarfs even high-end bass boats as far as net worth invested and gas money needed per outing. Therefore the salmon fishery probably gets more focus and attention from the MDNR and rightly so. I have salmon and steelhead fished in WA state but not in Michigan, thus I have seen the decline of some great salmon fisheries and it seems Lake Michigan's coldwater fishery is in need of some immediate attention. Imagine the loss of annual revenue if there were no salmon/trout fishery?

As much as this may ruffle some feathers, I see no need to make any changes to what the MDNR has recently granted to bass anglers since they/we can CIR (emphasis on the Immediate part, which many don't seem to understand or follow) all year long. Go back and count the number of bass tournaments that were held on LSC alone last season from Father's day weekend until now - bet it's close to 100. If you can 'scientifically' demonstrate that every one of these tournaments had >95% pre-release survival rate (overlooking delayed kill), then I'm sure the MDNR might listen. But to ask MDNR to spend their limited resources on doing a longitudinal multi-lake study on bass survival including delayed mortality, well that's simply unrealistic at best, IMO. Unless you're willing to pay a lot more than what we do for annual licenses.

I don't belong to any organized bass club so I don't have the network to reach out but, in my opinion, the best use of time and effort towards improving overall bass/warmwater fishing would be to target the legal and illegal killing/spraying of aquatic vegetation on inland lakes. Although the majority of lakefront residents probably don't care about the fishing, I would bet that there are enough property owners that do care about the bass/bluegill/pike fishing enough to sign petitions or legislation to make changes in this regard. Bottom line, more weeds mean less jetskis and waterskiers, lol!

[thedude]

I think you guys are missing the point -

The NRC was put on the ballot with the specific purpose of granting the NRC game management / law making rights. It was done so and worded to the voter explaining that the NRC would use "science based management". This was to protect our hunting and fishing rights from being influenced by law makers who want to socialize and politicize game management. For instance - wolf hunting, dove hunting, bear hunting - things that the public would (or did) shoot down even though there's no actual scientific reason behind banning it.

I voted YES on this. I did so, because science based management is what i want. That means if some potential opportunity exists, i expect the NRC to perform the due-dilligence to legitimately qualify the opportunity and assemble that as evidence to either accept or reject it.

Just like in 3rd grade. Find a problem, form a hypothesis, test the hypothesis (Experiment), curate and present your results. That's science, that's how you make informed, defensible decisions.

So its very clear what powers we voted to give the NRC and what they are supposed to do with them. In the case of the bass season, we presented the problem: Longer seasons, more opportunity.
They formed a hypothesis - OMG NO WAY THAT'D BE BAD
They skipped the EXPERIMENT part.
They curated opinions from:  TV fisherman, a handful of guides, some lady at a newspaper, and some lake associations, surveys of opinion, public meetings to gather more opinion.
They presented a conclusion of: "OMG NO WAY THAT'D BE BAD"

The presented no defensible proof, performed no studies, and otherwise put forth no other effort other than to find OPINION that already supported their preconceived notions.

I can easily accept NO as answer - i can't accept conjecture as the basis for that answer.  This is not science, this is just unchecked politics and is directly contrary to reason they even exist.

HOW TO FAIL 3rd GRADE SCIENCE FAIR:
Problem: Is Fire Hot or Cold
Hypothesis: FIRE IS COLD
Experiment: Ask a bunch of people if Fire is cold
Conclusion: Some said yes, so FIRE IS COLD

[robhj]

I agree that science based management is what most would want. I merely stated that there is evidence that shows that fishing for bass in northern waters during the spawn may have detrimental effects on the fishery. I also know that public opinion is built into many management decisions. I'm not saying I necessarily agree with this, but to state that the decision to not allow CDR was only based on opinion/emotion would not be true. Once again I ask, what would be stopping a bass club from having a tourney in early May with the current guidelines? If we wanted to have a tournament, we would just have to change the format. MLF has done it for years, and BASS did it in a tournament last year. It doesn't have to be done exactly the same way, but it could be accomplished and would be a win-win for fisherman and the bass.