Quick Quip...

Ahh... The Finicky Trout: I've often seen trout anglers ask a fellow fisher "What're they bitin' on?", to which the reply has been "Worms!". Those wary warriors will then attach a nightcrawler to their hooks and wait for that first bite long after many others have filled their creels and headed home. The key is that Trout are unbelievably spooky. Place only a small portion of a worm on your hook. The larger bait, although more of a meal, will often scare away your quarry rather than attract it. The only exception to this rule is when fishing muddy water, when only a small part of your offering will be seen at any one time as it floats past.

What's New...

The first of our major projects has now been more or less completed and is on-line as the new TFN Fishing Travel Directory. We have completely scrapped the old system and replaced it with a new, interactive database. There are currently over 5,000 listings in place (primarily in North America although there are others from around the world) and we still have a hundred or so to put in that have been requested over the past 2 months. We'll soon be entering a few thousand additional listings from other places around the world. This directory is already the largest fishing travel directory on the Net, and by the time we're finished, you won't have to go anywhere else to find that destination for your next fishing trip!

After being told 4 months ago that a new server had been donated and was to arrive in order to alleviate the processing crunch of this, our current computer, we're still waiting. Therefore we have no alternative but to spend additional time arranging for another system. If you happen to be in the hardware biz, and would like to contra an NT server, an Ethernet (RJ45) 8-port hub, Ethernet Cards, software, etc. against advertising, let us know (email me). We'd certainly appreciate it!

This Issue...

Well, the snow's finally gone (other than a few flurries here and there), as is the ice, and with this issue, Volume 3, Number 12, we start to get back to providing you with the tips and tricks you'll need this season to keep on top of the fish (so to speak)! In particular, there's a great article on buzzbaits from Just Fishing, and some reminders from Fish/Tec and Eric about how to be better prepared. And if you're still hunkered down waiting for the seasons to open in your area, this issue's installment of Rod-building by Jason Bowker includes some handy info to keep in mind when purchasing a new rod, even if you're not going to build it yourself. In addition, there's a new contest from the CDRomCo people (who sponsor the Way Of The Walleye Contest), and this time it's for Bass. They've recently released their 'Hooked On Bass' CD-Rom, again featuring information provided by the folks at In-Fisherman™.

Comment...

There has recently been a well publicised series of court cases here in Ontario, Canada, stemming from allegations that the Canadian Sportfishing (TV, Magazine, Books, Seminars, etc.) team of Henry Waszczuk and Italo Labignan caught fish illegally (by foul-hooking, fishing out of season and by fishing in sanctuaries). Many of the charges have already become convictions as of the time of this publication, and a few are still outstanding matters before the court.
There are two questions that should be raised concerning these occurrences:

1. Why were the penalties so low; and,
2. What happened that prompted these anglers to flagrantly disobey the laws?

To the first question pertaining to the penalties. In Ontario, those caught disobeying the Canadian Fisheries Act or the Ontario Game and Fish Act can be fined up to $500,000, have there equipment (including vehicles, boats and motors) confiscated, be incarcerated for up to 24 months, or all three. Waszczuk and Labignan have so far been fined as follows:

• $800 each for snagging (foul-hooking) as many as 30 whitefish for the purpose of re-hooking them in the mouth and catching them on film;
• $200 (Labignan) for failing to release a lake trout caught out of season; and,
• $800 (Waszczuk) for catching 10 bass on a lake out of season.

With so many seemingly un-related incidents, I'm confused about the weight of these sentences. Canadian Sportfishing is one of the most widely seen television shows in the country (as well as in the US). The viewership, young and old, look up to and often try to emulate the personalities they see on these shows. What sort of an opinion are these viewers, and particular the younger crowd, going to develope regarding the obedience of conservation laws when such publicly visible personalities receive no more than a mere slap on the wrist for multiple cases of displaying flagrant disregard for the very laws which they espouse?

I can only think that since all the fish were eventually released, and because Waszczuk and Labignan promote conservation on TV and in their magazine, combined with the obligatory 'heart-felt' apologies both in and out of court, the judges in their infinite wisdom decided that the offences were not serious. Indeed, in a statement read outside of one of the court on one occasion, Waszczuk said "The recent events are deeply troubling to us. We would never do anything that would deliberately endanger the concept of catch and release or endanger the stocks for future generations. This simply is not us."

Hmmmmm... Sounds, well, a bit fishy to me. The public statement did not say why they engaged in these illegal acts to begin with. As is most often the case, the legal system has merely reacted to the affect rather than concentrating on the cause.

There is certainly a problem when two publicly respected anglers insist on breaking the same laws that they endorse and promote for everyone else to abide by. Indeed, the reason why Waszczuk and Labignan were caught was due to these indescretions having been recorded on videotape. One might wonder what has occurred off-camera... But I digress.

In this writer's humble opinion, the problem is a combination of laziness and the evolution of new technology. Let me explain.

In the Canadian Sportfishing case, laziness was present by the fact that fish were snagged first and then re-hooked in the mouth and fought a second time rather than using only the footage of legitimately hooked whitefish. In addition, fishing for bass that are out of season is easy because they are on the spawning beds protecting the young. It is well known that taking bass off the nests leaves any fry that might be there particularly vulnerable to any and all predators in the surrounding area. It only takes a few of sunfish less than a minute to clear out an entire nest. Again, laziness is the culprit.

But the more interesting 'problem' is the recent proliferation of inexpensive technology. All promotional media properties, be they television and radio shows, newspapers and magazines, Internet sites such as this one, or even movies to a certain extent have two separate groups of customers to which they must sell their product - consumers like you and advertisers. Everyone is aware of the advertisers, but few think about the impact of you, the consumer. For instance, if TFN doesn't offer you the type of information and interactivity you want, you'll try to find it somewhere else and our number of webpages served will decrease as will the value of potential advertising. That's why we always provide a means on each page of the Web-zine to send in your comments. The same concepts hold true for properties in other media.

With the advent of Specialty channels dedicated to outdoor recreation, and the development of 'Outdoor Blocks' of programming on sports and culturally linked television stations, not to mention the growth in the number of fishing books, videos and magazines, it's easy to see that it has become more difficult for any established property to expand, or even maintain it's consumer base and value to advertisers. The competition is great for more content, better information and a flashier presentation. And yes, bigger is better when talking about the number and size of fish you catch or show. When the opportunity presents itself, many otherwise scrupulous anglers might take the opportunity to generate 'good content' whenever they can - regardless of the rules.

And then we must add the cost of competition into the mix. As recently as five years ago, the cost to get into the 'fishing game' was high. For example, to produce a season of ½-hour, high quality TV shows (roughly 25 episodes), the cost could have been as much as $150,000. The same can be accomplished today for almost ¼ of that amount due to the introduction of low-cost digital video recording and editing equipment and software. The result has been a proliferation in the number of media wannabes. This technology-based proliferation of media properties results in a dilution of market share for each one, resulting in an even lower value to the advertiser

When I first entered the fishing industry in 1993, there were, perhaps, 5 major players, and maybe 15 smaller outfits in terms of media properties in Canada. Today these numbers have at least doubled. And the international import of electronic media, by satellite, cable and modem has resulted in double that number again of properties available to the Canadian consumer. In fact, not only are there over 80,000 fishing pages on the Net, but there are also over 50 hours of fishing television programs now available each week in the Toronto market alone.

However, the number of advertisers has not changed substantially, and those that are around have cut costs like any other business, reducing the amout that they spend to promote their products and services. Five years ago, it was not uncommon to charge as much as $75 per one-thousand advertising impressions for a title sponsorship of a program. Today that number has generally been reduced by about 35%.

The result has been that there are fewer dollars available to be spread out over twice the number of media properties, which has forced many of them to do everything in their power to produce more for less.

So you can see see that even though the costs for an outfit such as Canadian Sportfishing may have gone down over the years, the pressure is substantial for them to produce more content and better information with a flashier presentation and more images of bigger fish.

Do these problems and the associated pressure to produce excuse them for breaking the laws? No. But at least it might offer some food for thought when considering the penalties Waszczuk and Labignan received (not to think that a judge might have thought about this big picture).

My thoughts are that there will have to be a shake-down of sorts in the fishing industry. It cannot (or at least will not) support the number of media properties out there in the long term. However, and with your input, I'll do my best to make sure that TFN survives and grows ethically to be what YOU want.

Until next issue...
(tight lines, get it wet, good fishin', see you on the water, etc., etc.).

Scott M. Binnie, Managing Editor