here is something i have been thinking of for a while.. why not have 2 man teams? they can still only enter 8 fish but each person will only be able to enter 4 of the 8 fish.. and if one leg of the team fales then they both do..
that way if the members pick the right team mates then there team should be able to cover a bigger area and target pike, mussky, and lake trout more..
i will say this i’m have a hard time seeing how any of you guy’s can say it’s a big fish icefishing contest but ya want to take the 3 biggest fish out of the contest? i’m not up for that!
I like the team concept to cover more areas but at the same time hate relying on others.
And allowing one of the three species still allows the biggest of these species to count.
And “BIG” is relative. I would rather land a 26" tiger trout than a 32" pike hands down. It seems most ice fishermen would also rather spend the time fishing for large trout and have the gear and opportunity to do so than pike/musky/mac. Allowing only one fish from this group to count is a good compromise.
I also really like the ideas of either removing the third panfish, or allowing all bass and walleye to count.
I also think burbot should be able to count towards the 5 fish.
I also like the idea of allowing one second species to count for the fish fish. FOr example, if you catch a 24" and 23" bows, or someone else catches a 35" and 24" cutt, you should be allowed to keep both to count for your total. We can even increase the number of game fish from 5 to 6 to allow for this change (but still only 1 pike/musky/mack).
I also like the idea of limiting the whole competition to to 15-25 lakes that are most popular and centrally located. This keeps the tournament more fair and equal. I would be more than happy to come up with a list of lakes located throughout the state that consists of the largest and most popular fishing waters.
Just ideas, some not completely thought out so be nice.
We, Silverstreak, Rustyhook and Sewfish like the contest the way it has been. It has pushed us to go to some lakes that we have never been too and try to learn how to catch different species. The three pan fish really aren’t a problem if you can get to Utah lake. As for the big fish, you could always get a big cat out of Utah lake also. For the fee, it gives us a lot of entertainment and some friendly competition. If you decide to do 2 men teams, could we do a blind draw? Other wise, we want Fuzzyfisher to be on our team. lol
a total catch of 6 fish - at least five separate species (which includes catfish, burbot, carp, pike minnow, LM & SM bass & etc.).
get rid of the requirement for 3 pan fish (The angler can include panfish in the six fish if that is their preference).
you can double up on one species (except for requirement listed in item No. 4 below).
only one fish counts from the following group of three - mac, pike or muskie.
include out of staters
I do not like the idea of limiting the number of days fishing (this would ruin Fuzzy’s winter!)
I do not like the team approach.
I agree with Jacksonman, it would be interesting to have more than 2 - 3 guys going into the home stretch. I like the idea that someone can catch two of one species. Maybe someone has a knack for catching a particular species (like Fuzzy & splake) - on second thought, maybe this is not a good idea!
I do not like the wasting my time targeting panfish - that is the reason I did not join the contest last year. I will not join again this year if panfish are included in the total fish count. Just my 2 cents.
Me and you are on the same page. I just don’t have the time or money to devote to pike and musky and I don’t like fishing for panfish that much. But I do like eating perch and crappie so I usually target them once or twice a year.
Ideally, I would like to see the following:
2 panfish (perch, crappie, bluegill, white bass, sunfish, etc., and one of which can also be a SMB, LMB, walleye, chub, but not carp)
6,7 or 8 big “game” fish (only one of which can be musky/pike/mac, one multiple species) (brook, splake, tiger trout, cutt, bow, brown, second of any species, mack/pike/musky, burbot, catfish, chub, carp, etc.)
Must live in Utah but fish can come from neighboring states.
tlspyder thanks for organizing and moderating this fun challenge.
I just wanted to throw in one more post before the rules are posted. IMO, the rules are good the way they are but some small change might be good just for change sake. Here are some of my thoughts and concerns.
· I don’t understand all of the fuss over the three pan fish rule. I really hope that stays the way it is.
· I would also like to see the eight different species rule stay.
· Don’t cut the number of big fish species (i.e. muskie, pike, lake trout etc.) allowed. This is a Big Fish contest.
· I think donating the entry fees to a charity is an excellent idea.
Myself and BIGbites are up for the challenge no matter what rule changes are made.
Thanks again.
I vote to keep it the way it was. Granted someone who lives closer to lakes to target macs, pike, or musky have an “advantage” based on the average size of these fish. But, a decent amount of traveling is necessary to get eight different species of decent size anyways. That said, I hope it stays the same. I haven’t fished much this summer (probably the least this year, out of my entire life) but I had to get on here and see when the ice contest starts. It was a lot of fun last year. Thanks tlspyder13 for organizing it.
