CBF BOD meeting?

BassinColorado · July 02, 2011, 12:38:04 PM

The email letting presidents know that there will be a proposal for a new format presented at the next BOD meeting has been sent out. Don't panic! That just means it will come up for discussion, at least. We need to get the presidents to at least discuss the potential of a new format to their members, so we can get things rolling on the format discussion, no matter which way it goes. The BOD can decide when a vote will take place when they "finally" all get together, soon, someday, hopefully. lol

Now, the BOD needs to put together a phone conference, or a face to face, or some kind of BOD meeting, before the planned scheduled BOD meeting in later August, so we can get some items to be presented, off the table and not have so much to chew at one time.

There is much to go over, nominations for all positions, state team issues, STQT formats, spending audits, cost analysis of web site, etc., etc. We do not want to have to be on the phone or meet in person for 4 or 5 hrs, so we need to split the meetings up and get things moving soon.

The CBF is alive, but barely. Time to get a transfusion and get some new blood flowing through its veins!

longdraw · July 04, 2011, 08:29:17 PM

http://www.gotomeeting.com/fec/

Since we have a hard time getting full representation @ the Board Meetings, if they are held at all, this is our best bet. It has been brought up before but never has anyone taken action. I'm not saying we take all four meetings online but maybe just one or two a year. This is one way to eliminate travel expense to an exent.

Each club has to buy a subscription to GTM on one computer. Then you just meet up with your reps at your favorite pub or basement and we get after it...

There s a 30 day trial that we can use and see if the format works and chit can get done.

Maybe do it for the 2nd and 4th qtr meetings and keep the 1st and 3rd face to face. We can still rotate locations just would be every other year your regions hosts.

These are just thoughts but we NEED to incorporate online meetings and it needs to happen this year...

Jon Webb

BassinColorado · July 05, 2011, 05:53:48 AM

Good to see folks are still interested in keeping the CBF active and want to help get things back on track. We do need something to take place soon to get things in line for next year. We can not have another year like this one, with members hoping things will take care of them selves....as some have suggested we let happen. Not a good idea. Terrible idea, actually.

I have been told that we have some things that the CBF has voted on that will have to be in place for the next few years, and that is that. Bull! We do not have to stay "stuck in this mud" as I have been told we are to be. That way of dormant thinking is why nothing is happening to date. Obviously, it is time for some movement in the ranks to get this ship's sail up, catching a breeze, and get the CBF cruising somewhere again, anywhere again, instead of just bobbing around out here like we have been.

Anything can change with a vote from the BOD and members at any given time. Maybe that is why we haven't been directed into having any meetings; fear of the inevitable "change" that unfortunately needs to take place. It is just a normal cycle of any organization when it goes into limbo from the top down.

Hopefully, there will be enough chatter to at least get some presidents "talking" about a meeting anyway.

coloradoman25 · July 05, 2011, 02:45:47 PM

Okay here we go....

People in the majority i have spoken to over the years that FISH THE CURRENT FORMAT have not wanted the change. I thnk your getting crickets at the moment because MANY like it the way it is. Look at the ones that post on here and I think you will see...

From past readings I see that...
Ed
Allen
Dave Gerhardt
Myself
Mike Garrett

ARE IN FAVOR OF THE CURRENT FORMAT

I have seen
Jon Webb
Chris Mazich
Frank
Joe Conway

As the ones that want a local circuit deal

And I have seen
Jeff Jones

as the up in the air answer but wanting later in the year tournaments so he can attend.

We are the majority of posters on here. We are the only ones really getting this message...

what do we see

5, 4, and 1

Thats 10 guys...or roughly half of what is showing up to most STQT's lol

We 10 are the most active part of this federation whether anyone wants to argue it I dont care. We 10 are the ones that are actually discussing this stuff...so YOU 9 if you want something done need to do it...I dont think you want meetings to be held in Tx...though we could have one heck of a tournament and BBQ at the meeting.

So what are you gonna do...I dont think the majority wants change in the format...I dont think the majority wants to put much into the BOD level of the federation either... You need to find a way to fund the webmastering, pay for travel costs to meetings, and provide a reason for people to come...I suggest you hold a meeting that questions the folding of the Colorado Federation...That should get some attention I would think.

Mike Garrett · July 05, 2011, 06:21:18 PM

Now that was about as reasonable as my suggestion to make the STQT boaters only

It's really time for some new blood on the BOD and hopefully it will be some people who are very interested in promoting the federation and the STQT.

I would be willing to serve but since we already have two members of Pikes Peak on the board that wouldn't be a good idea. Additionally, after my CT results today I might not even be able to fish the next STQT. They are trying to move up my colonostophy right now. I want to at least fish Trinidad which is this weekend. Sitting here waiting the call from the doctor. If I have to have surgery will be out for the rest of the summer.

CHRISMAZICH · July 06, 2011, 09:21:41 AM

Im in favor of doing whatever it takes to get more people fishing the STQT , weather it be the same format, or changing it, I dont think changing it or leaving it the way it is, is going to make more people fish the STQT. The real problem is the economy.... Most people cant afford to do what we do. weather its a week tournement or 3 tournements... gas,oil,maintnence on boats,trucks, fishing equipment,time off of work, motels, it all adds up to a ton of money, Joe has a great idea, but I for one will not be able to attend the 3 tournements to make the state team, way to much time off, My Job will not allow for that at all, So I am in Favor of leaving it the way it is....

on Durango time · July 06, 2011, 06:23:09 PM

Southwest had there monthly meeting last night, it was unanimous to stay with the one tournament format, the payout portion of the tournament was something that most everyone liked, most didn't think that the six boater and six non-boater positions would make for a STRONG stat team, recomended that the non boaters either got it together to take there half of the day or just enjoy a week of fishing the choice is there's to make RC.

BassinColorado · July 06, 2011, 10:59:00 PM

First off, Chris M......we only have to fish two to make the team!

Second.....keeping things status quo isn't working. Not sure why guys aren't eager to try something new, but I have been there before. I changed up how the tournaments ran in our local club against all kinds of resistance. Once I got the guys over the hump and they tried it, they embraced the format and are using much of it in the other clubs today.

If we tried it one year, what would that hurt. I doubt participation could be much worse and it could be fun, exciting, and maybe gain what we are looking for.....maybe.

coloradoman25 · July 07, 2011, 01:14:11 AM

Joe I am sorry but I really have to say this again..

COULD IT BE THAT THE STQT AND THE FORMAT AS A WHOLE ARE NOT THE PROBLEM....Wait I think I should bold this...

COULD IT BE THAT THE STQT AND THE FORMAT AS A WHOLE ARE NOT THE PROBLEM

Could it be the economy, the other circuits, and the management within the federation coupled with MAJOR PERSONALITY CONFLICTS are the problem....

I think someone stated it best a ways back...and it wasnt me....

Not sure if its worth trying anymore...I commend you for tryin to promote change...but your changin the rear brakes when the front ones are the problem...

Mike Garrett · July 07, 2011, 08:14:10 AM

So far it appears that the majority of those who have posted are not in favor of making a change in the format of the STQT. I guess we will have to wait for the next meeting to see what happens. Since it does not involve a bylaws change it's not necessary for it to go back to the chapters so we should be able to vote right away.

We have been hit with with I believe to be a triple whammy

. First off, I concur with Chris..."It's the economy!". It started going south in 2007 and really hasn't really gotten better yet. I promise you this will be the theme of the next presidential election too. Just look at the cut backs in federal and state funding when it comes to fishing. A good indicator here in Colorado has been the raising of fees, including boat registrations, trailer license fees, parks passes, and hunting and fishing licenses. The state has even reduced the senior discount on the parks pass and is considering taking away the free senior fishing license. Include the combination of the DOW and Parks Department on that list. The state is really struggling because there isn't enough income (tax money).

Next, and I know you are probably tired of me saying this, Two federations in Colorado are not in the best interests of the Colorado Bass Federation. Didn't this occur around the same time as the recession? The formation of the TBF seemed to many as..."just allowing more choices for us to fish" when in reality it drew away from the Colorado Bass Federation many who would fish our STQT. It also had another affect...it started new clubs, many of which that drew their membership directly from our chapters. It caused personality conflicts and hard feelings too. It's my opinion a lot of guys felt there would be easier over on the TBF side and that just might be the case.

Next, add to that, the 5280 Team circuit. This also drew away people who would have normally fished our STQT and as the economy soured people needed to make choices...."do I fish this or do I fish that?". Too many choices. While this might have been good for the angler IT WASN'T IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE COLORADO BASS FEDERATION. There is only so much money for most of us to be used for tournament fishing.

So, we have the economy and we have an expansion of events and venues as contributing factors to the decline of our STQT. At the same time all of this occurred there was one more factor that, in my not so humble opinion, also contributed and possibly is the worst of all. Apathy! When we needed leadership to step up and shout...We are the Colorado Bass Federation! We are part of B.A.S.S. and our tournaments are a path way to the Bassmaster Classic. What we got instead was apathy! Almost silence. An attitude of ..."can't we all (two federations and another team circuit) just get along?". Well, folks...that hasn't worked. What we need is someone or a group of people to step forward and revitalize the Colorado Bass Federation. We need new leadership and a spark plug to fire us up.

This should be the real issue before the BOD. Who is going to lead our state organization. It really needs to be someone who is died in the wool B.A.S.S. it should be someone who has management and people skills. It should be someone who has a passion for bass fishing and for our federation. It needs to be someone who has the time and the energy to get the job done. That person needs to have a team of other officers who will be willing to commit to the task at hand and then do the job. Lets build our federation up...once again, into a first class organization. It starts at the chapter level. Talk it up in your clubs. Find those there who are willing to a working part of the Colorado Bass Federation.

BassinColorado · July 07, 2011, 08:32:45 AM

Sure, it is always usually an issue from the top down. The Federation needs some activity and the once a year does nothing for the communication of clubs around the state. More activity gains more visits to our site and more chances for local sponsorship to take care of some expenses that we may need for the STQT event/events. More activity in the state events will get our own members to be more active within the Federation as a whole, which will compute into more participation. The format shouldn't matter to those guys that feel they are good at this sport.

If we tried it one year, why would that be a big deal? What could it hurt? I will fish whatever is decided, because I am not afraid of any format. Top 6....yea, I could do that over a potential 3 tournament format. I would challenge any to try and prove me wrong.

Maybe a change creates more competition and the guys that have a tendency to make the team regularly (mostly Boaters) feel a little threatened by the possible "shrinking of their opportunity." Maybe making it more challenging scares some guys. Otherwise, what difference would it make what the format was. If you are really good, you'll make it. If you are just good, you may not.

The "we wont get the best team" cracks me up and is an excuse to avoid crushing the opportunity. We have only won one Divisional in how many years? 21 yrs! We only took 2nd in what....2 of those? lol Those years were our "best possible team" with this format we have now. Obviously, someone on those teams wasn't our best choices for the year or we would have been in the top 2 more often. How did they ever get on the team in the first place if our format works to get the better guys? Open the chances for others and watch the participation and skills improve. It is up to us to create better fishermen in the state, not hope they are good fishermen when they make the team. We would probably get some young boaters to go over to the non-boater side if we opened up the opportunity for them to make the team from the non side. That creates better non-boaters and boaters in the future. That should be our goal.

There seems to be a fear that having 6 non-boaters make the team would be a detriment to the team. A "Boater Mentality"
once again. That is what keeps the Federation from growing. Unknowingly, we shut out the guys that are up and coming and take away the possible excitement they would get from fishing in our STQT events. Those are the guys that would actually be excited to be on the team and do their homework, making them one of the "best guys."

Part of the Federation dwindling support is because all that is left with interest in fishing our events is our boater core. Why should non-boaters participate at all when they barely have a chance to make the team anyway? That is where we are at today. Maybe guys like having less competition.

Unfortunately, the way it is set up now, boaters are the majority that fish the STQT. That is evident by the boaters that couldn't fish the last event. The thought that you have to be a boater to have a decent chance to make the team is something we created by the way our STQT is set up. We have nothing designed to draw in the new players, yet the boater core wants to keep it the same... hoping, I guess, that we get down to 12 people fishing the STQT, so chances to make the team are at there best. $:-\$

Mike Garrett · July 07, 2011, 08:45:33 AM

I concur! While I wasn't part of the 2010 team I certainly felt pride in it's accomplishments. Our team won because they acted as a team! That is what is also needed at the Federation ...team work. Every team needs a captain too. who is willing to step up and lead our team?

coloradoman25 · July 07, 2011, 05:08:05 PM

I call sheannigans....

A non boater has THE SAME CHANCE OF MAKING THE TEAM IF THEY TAKE THEIR TIME AND BOAT CONTROL. They choose not to. So in turn you think we should reward the lack of effort, time, investment, and knowledge with taking slots away from those that place ahead in the tournament.

This isnt for a pro am divisional, and it sure isnt a pro am national or classic. THAT is why it should be the way it is. You are playing for the same pot but then the boater gets to invest 3x as much as the non boater for the same prize.... How does this not translate.

If its 6:6 ratio then the non gets no say and it should be the rules of the Bass opens...Cast over the motor if you have to but you arent required anything more than "water" to fish.

Is it crappy SURE but if I am going to spend a ton more money to invest in winning the same prize why should I give way to someone.

I have NO problem giving up 50/50 right now infact I am happy to do so..But cutting my odds in half while keeping my investment the same is a joke.

I would just go as a non boater...hell whats the difference and then i dont have to pay for boat gas, oil, trailering, wear and tear etc....

As for just trying it....WHY the people that participate and are ACTIVE are the ones telling you that they want it the same as it is now.

You want to pander to new and "prospective returning" members...Then let them join up and earn a voice. I would rather have a state qualifier with 24 guys than fish one with 6 because these mythical members dont step up.

I understand you are prospecting here and that there is an X variable of the unknown. But IMHO you need to FIX the car before you try to haul the goods.

All these members that left because they wanted change should seize the opportunity to take over the BOD...Seems like it would be attacking Canada...a little to easy??? I think it amounts to they have made their change of direction and they dont care anymore.

BassinColorado · July 08, 2011, 07:30:25 AM

Sorry guys. I have a strong gut feeling about how this change would help our Federation, so I am staying with it until we budge somehow, someway. Everything everyone is saying is good stuff and are good possible theories as to what is going on, but as you...I am not sure what the total package of problems could be. I have my guesses and I think one of the issues, after chatting with many non-boaters, is that it has to do with non-boater opportunity. The other issue will handle itself as time goes on this year.

The voices we are hearing from on here are part of the "majority" at their club meetings for that night, I would bet. I would like to know who the folks were that showed up and discussed the possible format change at the SWB meeting. Not because I want to know the guys present, I can guess that part, but I want everyone in their group to realize how many were boaters at that particular discussion. I would bet money that it was almost all boaters in that discussion. A perfect example of how most of our clubs are now designed, because we have stepped away from any ideas to growing ourselves with non-boaters.

The regular non-boaters already feel they don't have a voice in the Federation, why would they step up to mention something at a meeting where they are a minority voice at the time? That couldn't be good for their status at the club level by going against the stronger voices and would be very uncomfortable. Have our clubs forgotten what keeps a group balanced in membership. We all need the "green" guys to want to participate. We need to make it affordable and exciting for those newcomers. Having a shot at 6 spots just for them would be the best opportunity they ever had in Colorado.

The "X" factor is the key, as you say. I believe the folks that could make the difference on how things run are out there reading, watching, and waiting to see how things go. It is up to us guys directing the traffic to get things going in a direction they feel comfortable becoming part of again. Let's take a chance and make an opening for them to come in. If they do not show up, then we can say it didn't work and go back to the same ol' same ol' again. But what if they do show up?!

I still say, "What is wrong with taking a chance to see if we can get more participation?" It can't hurt anything-only help us. Let's throw the non-boaters a bone for a year and see if they round up their own core group. I believe we would see a transformation in the Federation. If it doesn't happen, no harm done, just the education of where we are and we can go from there.

We lost some boaters at this years STQT to other plans and a major "lack of non-boater participation." Would those boaters still have been able to compete to make the team had they the chance to fish 2 other tournaments to qualify? I would say yes! The expense last year was ridiculous for the average guy wanting to try to fish the state level. The new guys in our club, that I spoke to, were totally intimidated by the event, the expense, and the time away. We need to open the door, even for one season, to ease guys into the challenge of the STQT and see where the Federation really stands. Then we can make decisions after we know the facts.

Right now, we do not know if changing the format would work; the "X" factor as Chris says. Why not take the chance for the possibility of growth, when we have nothing at all to lose? Unless folks feel some boaters would drop out, because the challenge is to great to make the top 6. Yea...right. Not the Colorado boater core I know. Competition is what feeds our souls! Making it tougher would do nothing but bring out the best in everyone that participated. Those that made the top 6 on both sides would truly be the best of that division for that year. Isn't that what guys are saying they want?

Mike Garrett · July 08, 2011, 09:51:38 AM

Last post leads me back to what I posted early on in this thread...one of the choices would be to make the STQT boaters only. Until we, as a Federation, make the decision to continue to have non-boaters as part of the mix we are at a stand off. As I see it, there are really two issues in Joe's proposal. First is changing the format from a single tournament to a three event qualifier. The second issue is...how we increase the non-boater participation IF we want to keep the boater/non-boater format.

Question one. Are the non-boaters dissatisfied to the point they are not willing to participate?

Question two. Would allocating slots to non-boaters on the state team increase participation?

Question three. Would changing to an allocation of slots to non-boaters alienate boaters to the point of lessening participation on the part of boaters?

What is the purpose of the STQT? Is it to provide an opportunity for members of B.A.S.S. and the Colorado Bass Federation to qualify for the divisionals, national federation tournament, and the Bassmaster Classic?

Or, is it to field a team that represents the state in competition with other states? Could it be both?

There are a lot of questions to be answered and this requires discussion and communication to the Board of Directors (BOD). It should start at the club level. This was not even brought up at our club meeting on the 5th. The chapter presidents and federation representatives should then bring their chapters wishes to the federation meeting. Three votes per chapter. This issue is going to require considerable discussion at the next BOD meeting.

Once we have decided the boater/non-boater issue THEN we need to decide on the format, IE., one vs a series of tournaments. Once that is settled the last part should be the location and time(s). I would propose this meeting be held in Pueblo which would be a little closer for the southwest contingent. The state park facility was used before and it is well suited for our meeting. We could have a mini-tournament either before or after the meeting. I would also suggest a BBQ much like what the southwest guys have done when the meeting was at Navajo.

You all know I have strong feelings about the format (one tournament) and I am in favor of fishing quality fisheries such as we have in the past. From a selfish stand point having some non-boater only slots on the state team would be a benefit to me. Would I not participate if things were changed? Most likely not. As stated in prior posts, I am facing some health issues which might not even allow me to participate next year. Hopefully, that will not be the case and I just might be the oldest participant at 70.

Thanks to all of those who have expressed their opinions. Encourage your fellow chapter members to get on this site and talk it up. Plan on sending a full contingent to the next BOD meeting. Lets get some energy going in the federation.

The Old Guy

coloradoman25 · July 08, 2011, 10:49:03 AM

I remember someone else campaigning on the basis of change in recent memory....Who was that

Change for the sake of change and speculation on the outcome to me is a mistake. If it were me I would fish as a non-boater without a doubt UNLESS you were in my back yard.

No reason to bare the extra expense when I will ultimately get the boat for half the day at divisionals.

So you WOULD lose me as a boater in this format or I just wouldnt come. UNLESS your in my back yard eg. Texas...

If I were in Colorado you would lose me in a 3 tournament format MOST LIKELY because I would rather spend my money with 5280 or Sun Country in these times than spend 3 weekends running around to the same lakes I fish anyways.

I would rather pony the big bucks and fish the opens and other stuff.

AND lastly...IF you implemented a 3 tournament format AND the 6:6 you would never see me out there for an STQT. Whether I was there or not.

Too much time not enough benefit. I dont care what you say to have even HALF the shot you would need to fish all 3. No thanks too many ridiculous variables at that point. If I have something come up and I cant make one tournament I feel I am SOL. That leaves you NO room for error I mean look at what happens if you have a boat issue one day and you cant make the 3rd Tx your screwed. At least with the current format I am in a place were I can get a rental like I did this year and keep my head above water.

You can say that at that point I am not consistent but honestly I know overall I am and have been for years. One bad tournament or a bad day is not the end all be all of consistency and is surely not a show of ability. You can take from that what you will but I feel that your getting the best overall team in this format year after year. The guys that are on these teams are generally boaters that is correct. Your basing that on them NOT GIVING anything to the co-anglers...>When in reality I have fished with these guys and cmon Joe you and I both go out of our way to help our co-anglers...and I know these others guys do as well. Co-anglers have the same shot as we do...Take your boat time not sure where the confusion is...THEY ARE BOATERS 50% of the time if they choose to be....Where is this being lost in translation..I still say if they are UNWILLING to put the time in at the front of the boat due to their fears or whatever the hangup may be we should not reward that by holding their hands and giving them a spot. They at that point are choosing NOT TO BE active competitors in the tournament. This format almost reminds me of the current state of the US School System. Grade on the curve so you drag the top down to bring the bottom up. I by no means am trying to take away from our co-anglers. HOWEVER I also don't feel that we should be pandering to fisherman that arent putting in the time, effort, and RISK into catching their fish.

Grass Roots is meant to BUILD fisherman eg. clubs. The federation is the pathway for the everyday angler to get to the Classic. Should we be taking away from the everyday anglers that are doing better overall at these tournaments to help make person X pass on to the next level. I as a boater would feel slighted honestly. Again I am not taking away from Co-anglers...You take your time or not and you weigh in more than me CONGRATS I will be there to hand you a beer, shake your hand and help you in any way I can for divisionals. BUT if you come in 19th and I come in 7th I am not gonna be happy to watch you fish the divisional while I am home.

Blaming the vote on the "Boating Majority" is a joke IMO. People arent as spineless as I feel you are making them out to be. IF they wanted to be heard or they were the voice of change they would be standing up and agreeing with you. They are showing you that that is not the feeling of the active federation.

The idea that hey lets make these changes and alienate the feelings of the active majority TO SEE if we bring in new blood is funny IMO. Reminds me of throwing things at the wall to see what sticks...Only difference is your throwing the same thing over and over again and the wall is covered in Teflon. It is not what the federation wants not sure what else I can say..They have told ya this on here and the last time you made this proposal. Sure there were some different variables in the other proposal but ultimately its the same thing in the grand scheme.

Guys this stuff needs to be taken back to the club level. Get a vote and see what happens.

Lastly I want to state again: I do not feel co-anglers are lesser anglers than anyone else. I also dont feel that you should HAVE to be a boater to have a shot at the team. What I do feel is you have the ability to be for all practical intents and purposes a FREE BOATER 50% of the time. YOU have run of the ship. It is YOUR choice to shoulder that responsibility and make your tournament happen. The tools are already at your disposal in this format. Hiding behind the statement that well I don't have a chance because I am a non boater is a cop out. If you do not know how to run the trolling motor or your afraid of the financial responsibility of running someone elses boat then that again is on you. This is the way the sport is when you are not shouldering the payments on the watercraft. It is what it is and have the ability to step up and make your tournament happen. I can tell you that I am not gonna scream and yell if you rub some trees, drag a skeg, or grind the trolling motor (barring you don't cause catastrophic damage). Id wager to say that most guys feel this way. As long as you operate the boat in a logical manner you will be safe from hurting it. It for me is a tool not a 62 Vette. Its meant to be used. You have choices whether or not your choose to exercise them is on you.

BassinColorado · July 08, 2011, 06:31:49 PM

All of the points throughout this discussion, non-boaters as well as boaters, are well taken and absorbed. The 6 and 6 would not be a welcome part of any format, at this time. I get that from the readers that respond regularly, although those readers are not the majority of the members.

I also get that the 2 out of 3 format could still be a possibility, so long as it stayed the Top 12. I am game for trying that and seeing how it alone works for participation. The format alone might create more non-boater activity in itself. What we have now doesn't appear to be working for participation growth and something different should be worth at least a try.

I would like to see the majority of members have a voice on the format subject from within their clubs. Usually we get the votes of what the majority in a club wanted, even if it is only a 1% split.

When it comes time to vote on things in the federation, how does a club bring in a vote to the BOD when they have 20 guys with 11 yes and 9 no votes. That is a 55% to 45% split within the club members. Seeing how they can only have 3 members vote, how would they vote in this scenerio? A 2 yes to a 1 no vote would be a 67% and a 33% split. Not a true representation of their club's votes. 1 yes and 1 no is closer, but still not a true representation of the member's votes.

I have seen it happen within our own club where the 3 votes all went one way because it was a 60% to 40% split in the members. It is assumed that the club will vote 3 in one direction because of the majority. That is not a true representation of what the members had said.

I would like to see everyone's vote count for once, to see where we sit in percentages of the membership. I am not saying send out ballots....heck no! I am saying to get the presidents to get a tally of their members and present the percentage total to the BOD. It would be great if guys could actually put their name to their vote, so folks could see who is wanting things to change or to stay the same.

coloradoman25 · July 08, 2011, 07:38:02 PM

Heres my vote:

Chris Dombkowski PPBM: Keep it the same and fix the cart before we haul the mail with it...

Would not what your asking for require a change in the by laws on how things are passed within the federation.

Seems the representation is done as so for a reason and is set somewhere. Kinda looks like were reaching..

Winning is winning whether its an ounce or a ton. Majority is being shown.

In no way can I understand how say 60/40 in one club and 70/30 in another is going to make it seem like we should change the format.

Ballots would be the only "logical" and I use that term loosely...way to make this what your looking for..

And still this is what I see it as....

Remember I said if you can prove to me that you can get THE SAME odds at making the team in your 3 tournament format and still make it TRULY CHEAPER all things considered for everyone that I would stop posting on these....

longdraw · August 19, 2011, 10:20:32 PM

3Q C.B.F. Board meeting will be held tomorrow (8/20) at 1300 - online through GoToMeeting.com

Please contact your club reps for information.

mullet80 · August 30, 2011, 12:52:35 PM

I have never read through these forums; found out about them through Todd as I fished with him at Conchas this past weekend. I just thought I would share my opinion on the STQT. I am a new bass fisherman and have only lived in CO for 3 years. I fish mostly as a boater with PPBM but I did fish the STQT this past April for the first time as a non-boater. I really liked the format: a 3 day tourney with the top 12 making the team.

Fishing as a non-boater has its disadvantages regardless of a 50/50 split. If a non-boater wanted to fish 20 miles away from where the boater had in mind, I don't see the boater making that run. Also, as a rule of thumb, there is usually better opportunity for quality fish in the first few hours of the day, depending on the season. The boater will 99.9 percent of the time be making the casts to the quality spots during those hours. These are just a few, but truly, no matter who the boater is, the boater almost always has the advantage.

I have also observed when I fish as a boater in tournaments, my non-boaters typically put in little to no research or ideas into fishing areas/techniques/patterns until we are on the water. This only solidifies that boaters overall have more of an advantage.

That being said, it is my opinion, to keep the STQT a 3 day tournament with 12 members making the team, but I'd like to present the idea that the top 9 boaters and the top 3 non-boaters make the team. I believe this would pull the strongest fishermen from each group (boater, non-boater) and allow Colorado its strongest chance of doing well at the Divisionals.

I'd also like to see more formal functions at the STQT, such as a BBQ. Though there weren't many guys there this year as past year's, I feel like I barely got to know anybody. We had our pre-tourney meeting and then everybody went to their hotel rooms and hung out with their known friends. There was no real opportunity to meet and hang out. If we had a BBQ or two it would allow us to mingle and strengthen our camarederie, only helping us grow stronger as a team going into Divisionals.

Another idea I have is fishing the STQT where the Divisionals will be fished shortly after. For instance if the STQT were on Navajo this year, rather than Truman, that could have only helped the prior year's state team learn the lake, conditions and patterns before fishing the Divisionals. If there is an "off-limits" time for Divisionals of 2 or 3 weeks, then make the STQT 4 weeks before that.

Anyways, I thought I'd throw some ideas out there; again, I'm new to the sport, but I'm really enjoying it and can only see myself becoming more involved as long as I'm living in Colorado.

Take care.

Tim Cooper
Pikes Peak Bassmasters member

Mike Garrett · August 30, 2011, 01:05:18 PM

Good points, Tim.

I'm glad you are posting here and hope you will continue to be involved at both the chapter (club) and Federation level.

The non-boater really needs to become more assertive and take his/her time on the water. I would suggest there be a coin flip for who gets the first shot at the front of the boat. I know, from fishing, 11 STQTs, I'm not nearly aggressive enough when it comes to my time on the water. As you said, many times the non-boater doesn't have any area's considered "his water". Typically, on the practice days, the boater makes the choice of where to fish and then proclaims..."my water, don't want to see you fishing here during the tournament!".

The solution is for the non-boater to request half the time during the practice days and then take it. If we don't get a fair shake then it's our fault. Remember you can protest too.

I'm with you, we need to have some social event the night before the actual tournament days. Having a cook out or BBQ is usually done. This year things were pretty much screwed up from the start and Larry Krueger stepped in at the last minute to insure we would even have a tournament. Hopefully things will be better next year especially if we get some new blood on the BOD.

Not sure I will even be able to fish the next STQT but it's on my schedule as something to do. Been thinking about fishing Pueblo on September 10th IF I don't have to start chemo. Getting a little stronger each day and think I might be able to handle a one day. Might have to sit down a lot but I really need to go fishing just to get my head straight.

See you at the meeting,

The old guy