[MoFugger21]

Originally Posted by horsetrader

I don't know who you are trying to convince but i'm sure its your self you can go back over anything you what and it will show no different then it did the first time I'm sure he was an innovator in tournament fishing as the pres. of SAWT. Unfortunately that is the same reason why there was a conflict of interest By also being the Pres. of Walleye Unlimited where he should have been fighting SAWT not to hold their tournament in the west arm but did not.
So thank you for bringing this point back up so people can see the issue again.

Originally Posted by huntsfurfish

sorry horse you are right as always. I should have known by now.lol

Sigh... He(horsetrader) is not wrong....

Hunts... It's becoming abundantly clear that trying to explain this 'conflict of interest' issue to you is as hard as explaining linear algebra to a 6 year old child.... I just don't understand how you don't/can't/won't/refuse to see it, when so many people can, and have asked about it. There's really no point even trying any more, because anything you try to argue has nothing to do with SAWT and WU sharing the same President being a conflict of interest with regards to Travers.

Exhibit A being:

Originally Posted by huntsfurfish

Quote:
Originally Posted by huntsfurfish
There was no conflict of interest. Brian was working on protecting the fish for walleyes unlimited. The arm was shut down in the first place by their work.

As president of SAWT he and other presidents have had tournments on Travers which included all open waters.

It would have been a conflict of interest had he not had the tournaments there! More info has come to light in the last year or so which influenced the changes for this year. I suspect that SAWT will follow the rules this year as well! And I believe Brian has lobbied for the changes for this year as well.


And I bet it could have been closed earlier if SAWT had made it off limites for their tournaments it would have shown SRD that even fishing groups were in favor of the closer to help the fishery.I don't see how the SAWT can't follow the rules this year like every one else. You know there is a saying that rings very true "A BAD VOLUNTEER IS WORSE THEN NO VOLUNTEER" think about it.
__________________
Straight from the horses mouth!

You would probably lose that bet then. The later spawning/staging just occurred the last 2 years. Not all changes are going to be as quick as you demand! Information comes in from the tournaments as well, not just weekend sport fisherman. Its easy for you to sit back and criticize and stir. SAWT has been a leader and innovator in Tournament fishing and “being better for and wellbeing of the walleye”. Many trails have since adopted methods we started. An example would be on the water measurements and release rather than transport back to a fixed weight station. I believe much of the SRD recommendations on tournaments were adopted from us. Info is collected in the form of catch rates and other studies. I will go through my other posts on here and try to simplify them so you might understand. Hope this helps! (I hate typing). I can talk about it better than I can type it.

Does anyone else not understand what Im trying to say? Or is it just horse?

What exactly does being a tournament innovator have to do with the conflict of interest issue?? The fact remains WU has apparently been pushing for this closure for 2-3 years for the sole purpose of protecting the spawning walleye, and SAWT continued to fish this area during the proposed closure, in the proposed area, when the same guy running SAWT was running WU who was pushing for this closure.......

Ugggg.... Oh, and I'm not sure if you removed my name for the bottom of the above quote cause you hoped I wouldn't chime in, but I think I give up trying to explain this fact to you... Somebody else willing to give it a go?