Gigging vs Smallmouth conflict

[MoCarp]

Forsythian, egad man "fight tooth and Nail?" I do not know of many if any HARDCORE giggers,

Do you guide folks on such trips? why so defencive?--most folks I know who gig only go once or twice a year and would give it up to catch 4 or 5--5 pound smallies in a season--who wouldn't????

Mo

[Gavin]

Ban gigging? I dont think that needs to happen but there ARE a lot more people using our rivers these days.

Personally, I think its time to take a look at how were using our streams. Bad land use practices and rental canoe operations have always been a nuisance, but its the jet boat & MDC's boat ramp building binge that really opened up a lot of previously inaccessable water to mass recreaton as well as gigging.

Local folks always gigged, but gigging is accessable to anyone with a jet rig now. Since gigging has become more accessable, and presumably more popular, I think we need to take a closer look at it. If MoCarp is correct that most giggers are casual participants (once or twice a year), I think that a lot of them would be likely to mis-identify their fish. Maybe we need to institute an annual gigging permit tied to a gigging education course in hopes that it might keep casual giggers from wacking the wrong fish. Cheers.

[gonefishin]

Quiet a hot topic for sure. I like hot topics, I like the debate (I might learn something) I dont like it when it gets down to name calling. When it gets down to name calling it loses its debate status and becomes a senceless brawl.

Someonw mentioned that this was a "disagreement between users". To an extent I agree with that but, as usual there are exceptions. I am an exception this time. I am not a gigger. I have never gigged a fish, frog or anything else in my life. So why am I in this debate? Because I think some people are unjustly accusing giggers of being the root of all evil on Missouris streams. I believe our time would be better spent addressing more serious problems with our streams than trying to start a hate group against giggers.

What are some of the problems I am talking about?

-people who discard their old fishing line in our streams/lakes

-people who throw trash, batteries, old tires and other pollutants in our streams/lakes

-Warning! Pregnant women sould not eat bass in any quantity from any water in Missouri because lead contamination could damage your developing baby

-Erosion filling up our streams

-Dont eat carp/suckers from certain streams/rivers/lakes because pollutant contamination of the fish make it unhealthy for you

These issues and more are serious and are in need of our attention. More so than discriminating against a small group of people who are pursuing a legal sport in the state.

[ColdWaterFshr]

It seems to me that the bad apples need to be caught. Increasing the regulations isn't goint to stop poachers from poaching. In fact, I could see it having the reverse affect short-term . . . only make them more mad about a new regulation and increasing their activity just to spite. That may be some of whats happening.

Heres the way I see it:

1. If poachers are gigging bass for meat, their livewells could easily be checked at boat ramps by agents. Pretty soon the risk of getting caught wouldn't be worth it. I don't know about you guys, but I've seen an increase in agents the last couple years, I wouldn't want to roll those dice. MDC could focus on the problem areas and step up their efforts.

2. If poachers are intentionally gigging bass and then tossing them back in the water -- thats just idiocy, got to be a small percentage thing. Like punk kids vandalizing a school for the fun of it . . . doesn't make much sense. Making vandalizing any more illegal probably not going to have any effect. Catching the vandals will.

3. If they're accidentally gigging bass because they don't know any better . . . can't tell a sucker from a bass or whatever, this also has to be a small percentage thing because we all agree that bass don't typically hang out in the open water like suckers do.

What do the biologists survey #'s suggest? Are populations of big smallies way down on the rivers in question?

[Forsythian]

Good post CWF... kinda like old times! :-)

I gigged about 10 nights this last season, from a very popular launch on the James RIver. Most nights there were 2 or 3 separate camps. All were Friday or Saturday nights. These camps were NEVER checked all season. I can about guarantee that 1 or 2 visits per season would have a positive impact.

[jscheetz]

Forsythian,

All I can say is of all the posts I've read, yours are among the few that don't seem to have a sense of humor. I wish I could help you with that - I mean when others are sarcastic or funny, just seems to make you madder, I'm sorry if I've done that. Best advice - - Lighten up!!! Chuckle at yourself - or me - for crying out loud - "Calling up a bear with a leg of chicken" - now THAT'S funny!!! Comon -

But since you asked for my ignorant opinions - here goes - Not enough time to discuss all that could be discussed on it, but - I think the tradition of Fox hunting - at least I would expect the kind that you are talking about, being hounds chasing a fox followed by a group on horses, is a social event originally practiced by the aristocracy. Actually the English foxhunt was originally done mostly on King's land where others weren't allowed to hunt. Eventually less land restrictions allowed the commoner to act like the important people by partaking in some of their activities. Rich people have always amused themselves with activities that aren't particularly difficult or dangerous for them, but are made to make them look somehow important in the eyes of their subjects and or peers. Much like the Tiger hunts that took place in India in the 1800s - I actually have a book describing the hunt of King George V as late as 1911, in Nepal where they killed 39 tigers from the safety of the backs of elephants. Of course we can see the upper class attitude on "sport" as far back as the Roman Coliseum. So I think the fox hunt is about as sporting as watching 10,000 people fight each other or various animals to their death on a Saturday afternoon. They don't need to eat the fox - the fur is too damaged to use, so there is no "hunter/gatherer" capitulation to be made as is traditionally argued for in other hunting debates. So it really is a social event. As far as a culturally important historical event, I think that it's "tradition" as you like to call it is significant in many ways. Just like the coliseum - we can learn a great deal about ourselves by studying history. Overall I think you could have exactly the same social experience by taking a bunch of people out on horses on a ride through the country - maybe even take a few dogs along for companionship - nowadays the people could take cameras and get photos of the group and the scenery to last a lifetime - maybe have a picnic and all hang out together. See I think this would completely satisfy the social side of the human psyche - as to the darker side, I don't know, history has also taught that maybe only bloodshed can do that.

History is packed with traditions and ways that at the time were completely accepted and fought for by the faithful - whether it be Killing tigers by the dozens, buying and selling slaves, not allowing women the right to vote, or even disco. But the beautiful thing about it, is the ability of the collective human thought to sway the world to the proper moral and ethical position. Doesn't always happen, and certainly doesn't happen overnight. But I have faith that good will always triumph over evil.

Sorry this post is long - but not knowing anything and whatnot, it takes me longer to cypher out the thinkin in my head for ya -

JS

[Wayne SW/MO]

" First if it is so damaging why does the fishing here in Missouri just keep getting better?"

I don't believe it does in some areas, for many reasons.

I think much of the problem is an old tendency by some to gig what they want, equipment that takes gigging to new levels, little to no enforcement, and maybe the one key item that binds it all together, low water levels.

My first choice of action would be some serious enforcement, combined with some changes or additions in the law. A change in the Smallmouth limits to increase numbers, closing the season on Smallies during the gigging season would help some, and a limit on lighting to limit the range of illumination. I'm sure there are other things that can limit conflict and I've never advocated banning gigging, but as an old native, I've heard my share of stories.

[MoCarp]

a gigging stamp!--with education!

it could be a win win---but as said before no Enforcement means

no effective rules reguardless of what they might be...

Mo

[Forsythian]

Obviously a hot button issue for me... I look forward to the season all year, I enjoy it legally and ethically, and it takes a beating on boards like this.

Jshcetz has injected morality into the equation... I'll have to smoke a cigar outdoors in public tonight and ponder.

[UAK squirrelpie]

a gigging stamp!--with education!

excellent suggestion, they require it for deer/turkey (unless you were born before 1960 something).

At least this way, ignorance wouldn't be an excuse.