Why Are Some Members Deathly Afraid To Say Where They Fish?

[stlfisher]

I didn't realize the difference between bragging and dispensing useful information was simply inserting a stream name.

Silly me, I figured you could brag just as easily saying "I caught a 20 inch smallie fishing yesterday," as you could saying "I caught a 20 inch smallie fishing Deer Creek yesterday." If the concern is braggarts, should we omit numbers, poundage, and lengths of fish caught too? Shortening all future reports to "went out," would avoid these sorts of issues in the future. Although that may upset folks who didn't get to go. And out is a preposition.

Anyone who fishes regularly ought to know things change quickly- information from one person on one day may not be all that helpful the next. Similarly, you can have a dozen folks fishing the same stream with different techniques, and all be successful. There's not always a single answer. Sometimes you can be more successful if you pay no attention to the reports- on some well-known western trout streams I've had banner days fishing an elk hair caddis or beetle when every other angler, and every other fishing report, says to use a #6 Chernobyl Ant.

Point is, I personally don't put much stock into fishing reports. They're reports, not tutorials, and the only thing that matters is that the author is satisfied with them. If they want to divulge location information, or stream flow data, or what wildlife they saw, or what the stomach contents of the fish they caught were- go for it. But leaving any or all of that out is alright, too. Like Eric, I enjoy the story reports more than the nuts-and-bolts, "went out at 5:30 and fished gitzits among chunk rock in 18 feet of water for three hours, caught four smallies 14-17 inches before moving and vertical jigging in 80 feet of water and catching two spots, 15" each," type stuff. That doesn't mean I'm going to start a thread lamenting how people write down their experiences, and wishing more folks were better at writing prose, though.

I think the whole "just because you write about it online doesn't mean it'll get more pressure," argument defies logic. If you value big stream smallmouth, and someone posts a report where they were catching big stream smallmouth, you're going to be curious. If you weren't, this topic would not exist.

The folks who are so up-in-arms about the lack of sharing information perfectly illustrate why I don't do it: if you're more inclined to sit at a desk and whine about how the other kids won't play fair and divulge their secrets, as opposed to using the resources at your disposal (Gazeteer, Google Earth, county/plat/USGS Maps, MDC biologists), then yeah, I don't want to share my information with you. It's taken a fair amount of time and effort for me to cultivate that information, to learn that stream/fishery, and I simply don't give it away freely, much less to strangers. The knife cuts both ways- withholding information may seem selfish or vain to you, but expecting everyone to provide you hard earned knowledge to make your life easier smacks of arrogance and entitlement to me. Where else in life do you expect to be rewarded fully while putting in practically no effort?

Personally, I think an excellent angler doesn't need to be constantly spoon-fed information- the wheres and hows in particular. A good angler ought to know enough about the biology and habits of his quarry, as well as the place he is fishing, to be at least moderately successful regardless of what information he has beforehand.

Well said. I don't understand all the complaining and this is kind of a mute point for me simply because I wouldn't consider any stream I fish a secret and certainlty not any that are located on this site. Therefore, I don't have any problems giving a report and location.

However...

I can't understand why a location would be necessary to enjoy a fishing report. It is almost like people are begging for information because they don't want to put forth the effort to find the location and learn it themselves. It is kind of pathetic actually. It is the anlgers right to share the information with whomever he/she chooses. It makes those that complain sound jealous.

Secondly, some reports do have an element of bragging involved, but I have never met an angler that didn't want his/her friends to share in the excitiment of a big fish or a big catch. For some, without buddies who fish, this board might be the only outlet they have to share these experiences. It is always better when you can share that with friends.

Thirdly, to call those that don't provide a location as selfish doesn't make sense. If the location is the reason you read a fishing report then you are after information that can be of use directly to you right? If the location is not found then it a useless report right? Therefore, you read reports for information that you can use. Sounds pretty selfish to me.

[Chief Grey Bear]

A couple of observations from this conversation. There have been some great post. eric, Outside Bend, Wayne, siusaluki, and others(sorry those are just the ones that I can remember at this time, I know there were some others)that have made compelling statements in support of anonymity.

On the other side, those that contribute the least are complaining the most. I will make one exception to that in the Gotmuddy and FT57 are relitively new but, are posting all there trips.

Now on another side note, those that choose not to divulge where they are fishing should not be villianized for not doing so. It is all a matter of choice. You may choose to let the world know, others may not. Just let is go at that. You certainly will not be getting a flood of info taking this approach.

[gotmuddy]

I just replied to a post from a guy asking about access points on the Sac/ L. Sac rivers. I gave him directions right to a bridge that has good fishing up and downstream. Now on this same river, I do have a "secret spot" or Honey Hole or whatever you want to call it, it's a long wade from any access. It's not accessible from this spot I divulged, but if the guy who is new to the area puts in the leg work and stumbles upon it, and is using the right tackle, then more power to him.

This is the first time on the forum I've been in the position to give some local knowledge to someone who was asking. I understand the Little Sac isn't as fragile as some of the creeks we all love to fish, but it is somewhat scarce due to its location between Springfield and Stockton Lake.

What do yall think of this approach?

That is exactly how I feel. I dont care to tell anyone that I fished from snow to the slab, but I wont tell anyone where I caught the biggest fish.

[gotmuddy]

Back when "Trophy Trout" was posting his "reports" which said he was catching tons of big fish, but with no pictures, no sort of specificity to a location(which I can understand coming from a guide), and not even a hint of what color they were using makes his "report" useless.

Now that I have made this post I imagine none of you will go fishing with me.

[ozark trout fisher]

This is not an issue that I feel particularly strongly about. If for example, someone writes a fishing report on Blue Springs Creek, that makes some people cringe because it's a small stream. But I don't think it's a big deal. It's a well known stream, been written about in Missouri Game and fish, and it's name is in the fishing regulation book that is distributed to every person upon buying their fishing license. It has special regs, is publicly owned, and is meant to be fished by the public. Period. Special regulations guarantee that it's not going to be fished out by legal anglers, and I don't buy into the conspiracy theory that a bunch of poachers are reading OAF to get fishing tips. If someone wants to write a report on it that's their own darn business, and no one really has any right to get all up in arms about it.

There is another side of it too. If you know of some really great (but small and fragile) trout or smallie stream that is not listed in the reg book and has no special protection, for the good of the fishery, please don't go blabbing about it on a public forum. If there are no special regs to protect the fish, your post could easily cause more meat fisherman, and in the end, less fish present in the stream.

And I also don't find Al Agnew's or other's posts about nameless streams to be useless. Far from it. While I may not learn about a new sweet spot, I get to read an excellent, well-written account of a day on a stream without even having to pay for a book or a magazine. I don't find that to be useless at all.

[Chief Grey Bear]

Now that I have made this post I imagine none of you will go fishing with me.

Nope you will still get an invite, along with FT57 to our fall float. I hope you will attend.

This is not an issue that I feel particularly strongly about. If for example, someone writes a fishing report on Blue Springs Creek, that makes some people cringe because it's a small stream. But I don't think it's a big deal. It's a well known stream, been written about in Missouri Game and fish, and it's name is in the fishing regulation book that is distributed to every person upon buying their fishing license. It has special regs, is publicly owned, and is meant to be fished by the public. Period. Special regulations guarantee that it's not going to be fished out by legal anglers, and I don't buy into the conspiracy theory that a bunch of poachers are reading OAF to get fishing tips. If someone wants to write a report on it that's their own darn business, and no one really has any right to get all up in arms about it.

They do not issue a copy of the Wildlife Code book with every license purchase. There is a copy at most vendors for you to pick up though.

And special regs will not guarantee that it will not get fished out. I am assuming that there is some reg there saying something like 1 trout over X length may be creeled. Well, if say 5,000 showed in a years time and kept their one trout, if there is 5,000 in there, that would most likely wipe it out. Now of course this is all hypothetical as is your guarantee but, I think we can both agree.

But lets turn this a few degrees and look at a slightly different anggle. You said this not an issue you feel strongly about. But didn't you just post plea a few weeks ago for everyone to lay off of the trout due to hot weather? What if a report came in and the trout bite was really hot(no pun intended)? I am thinking you would get a little miffed that someone posted that. Or lets say your your favorite brownie stream just got hit and a post was made about limits of 20"'er's were coming out of there. I don't think you would be so nonchalant.

[ozark trout fisher]

Chief, when I made that post a couple weeks ago asking folks to give Little Piney a break, I was just saying that the water temps were likely very high, and it would be irresponsible to fish it at that time. And yes, I would be a bit upset, if the day after I posted that, someone came on and gave a glowing fishing report about Little Piney, saying that they had caught trout in conditions in which they likely can't be released alive.

But in all, I don't mind folks posting reports about Little Piney or other relatively well-known small streams when the conditions are such that the stream can handle a bit of pressure. I've done it myself, and I have no right to criticize others for doing the same thing. When I write a report or give someone advice about a stream like Little Piney, I trust that those who read it will show enough respect to release the fish they catch and otherwise use the resource wisely-if someone takes advantage of that trust, shame on them.

As I already said, I don't talk about the truly fragile, secret streams (and there are a few of them out there if you're willing to do what it takes to find them) with anyone besides my closest friends. There does come a situation where basic angling etiquette demands that we have to keep a secret. There is a difference between say, Little Piney, which is a relatively well known Blue Ribbon trout stream, and a tiny tributary creek deep in the Ozarks that holds just a few nice smallmouth and that only I and a couple buddies know about.

[Mitch f]

The reason above HWY 8 sucks now is because way too many people are hitting it all the time. I use to catch many 18 and over every year up there, it's not like it use to be at all but what river is??? I know where Al went and caught 683 smallies over 17 inches, I can tell by the gravel that he mistakenly allowed us to see by his paddle

Hey I have tried to take OAF guys on the river to no avail and expose my supposed secret spots.The only one on here who will go with me is MOsmallies and he has reaped the rewards.I have no problems showing people where I go but, you have to go with ME.Not many guys on here are willing to go where I go and do what you have to to get way out into the dung. Go on a 12 mile float and have to drag your canoe three miles of the twelve.I will give props to Fishingcricket he is like me willing to hit the river with ya and have good time and not be so pretentious about it.I don't need the Smallmouth Alliance to show me how to catch smallies or Chuck Tyron to show me where to go.

Hey Smallie, I want to go with you but I'm totally booked and can't find time to tie my shoes....maybe we'll get a break soon

[gotmuddy]

Nope you will still get an invite, along with FT57 to our fall float. I hope you will attend.

give me the details and I will make plans.

[Al Agnew]

Well, sorry to those who want the locations, but I ain't going to change. Ask yourself this...would knowing the creek where I caught that bunch of fish earlier this week help you catch more fish yourself? ONLY if you wanted to go to that creek! So there you have it...if you want the name of the creek, it is probably because you want to go and fish there. I posted enough info about the type of creek I was fishing...small, very clear, rocky. I posted what I was catching fish on. I posted a lot about the kind of spots where I was finding the bigger fish. Posted about the times of the day when the fishing was best. And here's the thing...those who know a lot about fishing this type of Ozark creek will have already known a lot of that stuff about lures, presentations, and locations within the stream where the fish were, but might still find it interesting about some of the somewhat offbeat places I was catching fish. Those who don't know as much about fishing small, clear, marginally floatable streams might just learn some things about good lures and good spots within those streams. And all without posting the actual stream name, which, like I said before, is ONLY useful if you want to go to that specific stream. Which means that you would be doing exactly what some are saying won't happen!

Some of you may figure out which creek it was. Fine. You've done the guesswork and you've also done some research. In my opinion, that means you earned it. And even if you guess wrong, you're probably going to be guessing a stream that is just as good, and if you go there you'll probably find good fishing.

Was I "bragging"? Well, how many of us would have that kind of a fishing trip and NOT want to tell people about it? And it's not like it took a lot of special skill to catch those fish. If you only took one thing from my "report", it was probably that the fishing was easy. The only special knowledge I needed was that the creek was there, it was marginally floatable, and there were a lot of fish in it. I know of a couple dozen creeks just like it scattered throughout Missouri and Arkansas, and many of you probably know some as well.

But while I post such reports partly to tell of my own good fortune, it's also partly to tell people that such fishing is possible, and to tell them the ways I go about fishing Ozark streams. And I think most of my reports tell of things about the fishing that day which I found interesting and perhaps educational...I often learn new things myself on those trips. I also post reports at times where the fishing is mediocre or worse, if I learned something during the trip.

I could go into a lot more depth about some of the things I learned on that trip. In fact, I did a little of it over on Riversmallies.com, and I'd be happy to do so here. After all, when the big fish are as active as they were those days, it is a great learning environment. Most of the time you might only encounter one or two big fish in a day at best, and catching them, or even seeing them, can be almost accidental. When you hit a day or a few days when the big fish are really active and you see, hook, or catch a bunch of them, you begin to see commonalities in their locations and behavior. It may not translate well to streams with very different characteristics, or other seasons of the year, but it should be pretty useful for fishing clear, rocky, marginally floatable streams in the summer.

But to me, the useful parts of a fishing report are what the fish were doing, what you were doing, and what kind of water you were fishing. Weather and river conditions are useful as well. The exact stream you were fishing is only useful for somebody who lives close enough to go fish that stream in the next few days, anyway...but with the info on stream characteristics and water conditions, even if you live 200 miles away you can translate that info to streams close to you that have similarities.

So I guess that if you don't like it that I won't post exact locations in my reports, don't bother to read them, because I won't change my mind about it.