More spotburns
[4. "Spot burning is not an issue here, but complaining about it is. Any posts here complaining about spot-burning will be deleted, and the complainer may be removed from the site. "]
For a whole week now, the site above, known by the editing policy I noted in bold, has been letting the members reports name various towns, streets, and specific locations in Ocean county, NJ. In several instances these were small towns with limited parking and small streets. There is public access, but access can easily be lost if hordes of people converge upon one area because of an internet report. People have been sending me the links to those reports.
Here's one report I wrote a reply to. It was moderated, and my reply deleted by the moderator except for the first 2 lines.
( I wonder when we're gonna fish together, Jess?
)
I'm not trying to single out the guy who wrote the report, as he's a visitor from another state here for the fall run.
He was merely trying to help his fellow anglers, I get that, that's admirable.
However, it should be the moderator and site owner's ethical responsibility to moderate posts that are too specific. Why is that not being done at this particular site?
What are some possible answers?
Greater ad revenue?
The desire to add to the membership base, no matter what the consequences to the fishing environment?
Pure arrogance?
I don't know what their answer is, but do know that some of the more popular fishing website owners, like Rod Redington from Bassbarn and Striperjim from Stripers247, have recently shifted their policy where they edit posts and don't permit specific spot burning. Kudos to them, for recognizing the problem that existed and trying to do something to alleviate it.
Yet this other site plods along, like an ostrich with its head in the sand, incorrectly claiming that there is no harm coming from its policy of listing specific sites and streets, even when the areas can be negatively impacted by too many fisherman at once.
I thank all you other fishermen for posting these examples up as well, as I can't be everwhere at once. As we do lose more access, I believe sites like that should bear a greater responsibility for the actions set in place by a spot specific internet report.
**************************************************
Here's the edited fishing report, I took out the location info:
Fished off *** Ave. ****** *****last night 12-4am, 2 shorts on clams just after mid-night. Blowing sand sent me home.
Back 8am-12pm, caught 13 (12 shorts mostly in 23-26 range). Must have missed 6-7 more.Saw others taking fish. Here's the deal ---- green tailed AVA 27 with white bucktail teaser. About 1/2 of fish taken on teaser. There are three shallow holes lined up at ***, *** Ave and another at ***. I was hooking up by standing on south side of hole as far out as I could manage in surf (not far) and casting as hard as I could to about 10 o'clock (facing ocean), reeling in wind slack as fast as possible, then continuing with fast retrieve. Most strikes happen within first 15 seconds while AVA was as far out as I could get it. A couple taken by throwing almost sideways into hole. That might be the trick a high tide but I left. Sore as $#@*.
Here's my response which they decided was too inflammatory to post?
Thanks for your detailed report, ***, glad you got some fish. It's quite an accomplishment to get into a hot bite.
I wonder if you are aware if you don't have a 4 wheel pass and have to walk on, parking isn't the best in that area. Also, I wondered if it was in the best interests of the fishing community, and the homeowners who live in that area, to expose that area to thousands of lurkers on the internet.
"Fish move", it's no big deal, I've been told.
When sandeels are set up in a place, fish might not move for weeks. I can guarantee solely because of this info on a public forum, there will be double the number of people cruising that area now.
I realize the intent of your post was to help your fellow striper anglers, and that's admirable.
To anyone who fishes a lot, I ask if you remember the great fall fishing we had at St Aphonse's in Long Branch, and how parking was closed down because a guy trespassed into the rectory to use their toilet, got caught, and argued with a priest.
Or the heavy concentration of people on the jetties on Deal in the spring, a town with 1 mile of shoreline that has restricted parking specifically because of the hordes of people that descended there. Much of this poor behavior is fueled by strangers reading internet reports of large fish caught.
I do enjoy reading your reports ***. It seems you want to help your fellow anglers and make it easier for them. You tell them how you caught the fish, which is a great component of any report.
But the "where" is the point I feel strongly against, especially on an open forum. There are plenty of ways to back-channel that kind of info. My reply may be censored here, but if anyone gets a chance to read it before it is, I ask that you at least consider these points.
We are all collectively responsible for the fishing access lost or problems created by loose lips on the internet. Saying it isn't an issue, and censoring someone from speaking about it, isn't the best way to deal with the big picture of more anglers fishing with real time info.
Thanks for reading this, guys.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by rockhopper
