ANY RESPONSE TO FELLERY IN ODN?

[fishgutz77]

I couldn't help but chuckle over reading Joes artical in the outdoor news this week. Is it so slow over there that he needed to write about internet forums? I know that Joe likes to rock the boat but that fact is if you spend enough time behind your electronics you will make it a science and you will be able to determine MOOD and SIZE based on experience and MATH!

I don't pretend to have near the expertise that Joe does but I can't help but think " more time on the ice and less time behind the keyboard make Joe a better writter" god bless ya Joe I do love your articals and nobodys is more on top of the tribal issues than you so thanks again.

[Steve Foss]

I wrote a weekly column that appeared in weekly and daily newspapers for years. It's hard to find material week in and week out.

I read O.N. each week and find solid value there.

Joe's antipathy to Web sites such as this is clear, but we all have our prejudices, and it's worth noting that he didn't single out HSO/FM but lumped the sites together.

One of the reasons print media circulation continues to drop/stay flat over time is the proliferation of sites like HSO/FM, where you can get info moments after you ask for it instead of hoping someone with a newspaper/magazine will decide to cover what you're interested in — and cover it soon enough to do you any good.

On the face of it, what he says about Internet fishing forums is pretty accurate. Perhaps less on point with HSO/FM than some other sites, but that could just be my loyalty talking.

As for posts that tiptoe around site sponsors and push the products they offer, newspapers/newsmagazines try to hold the high and mighty ground that they write what they write regardless of whether it angers their advertisers. Well, I've worked at five newspapers as a reporter or editor, including three dailies, and when a story that's unflattering is going to deal with a key newspaper advertiser, it's not at all unheard of for there to be some pressure filtering down from the publisher and top editors to the reporter level to "take things easy."

Here, we work hard to give solid, timely, honest information on the full gamut of outdoor activities and gear.

As for the spiel on flashers, I can't tell how big a laker is on my flasher, but I can definitely tell the difference between a laker and other fish. Not because of the size of the mark, but because of the behavior of the fish.

In the end, the best Web forums do a much better job of delivering timely info than any print publication. Note I said "the best." Good reason to stay the best, IMO, and to keep pushing to make the best better.

[fishgutz77]

Catfish, sounds like we won't be short on anything to talk about when I come up to deal with some more lakers with ya.

[Steve Foss]

gutz, when is a former newsman and current laker fanatic EVER short on something to say? Doesn't mean I can predict tomorrow's weather or laker bite with any accuracy.

[hanso612]

I read Fellegy's article yesterday and immediately thought of you guys talking about lakers chasing lures up and down the water column but not biting. There are a lot of fisherman who haven't seen a fl8 work in winter water, yet alone the new models and marcums. People who use wide transducers and try to read through all the summer clutter are often sceptical of the level of detail modern ice rigs can be adjusted to. No moving boat up and down, back and forth, less current, algea and planton and fish for that matter, to give false readings.

I watched Ted Capra (of sporting good fame) load a pool full of targets and run a bunch of the, just released, lcd scrolling locaters over them. The results were dismal. Only the first row of pixels could be trusted, and the cone angle made it imposible to tell what was on the edge of the cone or middle. He explained it as if it were a flasher laid flat and turned on end. Only the first row was real time. Regardless of wich way you moved the graph continued to scroll right to left. Very counterintuitive to first time users. By the time "fish Id" came out the jig was up. The fish pixels continued to move right to left and spanned many rows of pixels even though the boat was moving back and forth. Any self respecting flasher user was rightfully judgemental. I think Fellegy is one of these old school guys and I think he would be amazed at the level of detail and target seperation posible in a stationary finely tuned modern unit with a narrow cone.

What I would like to see is a contest among manufacturers staged at the Duluth aquarium. Rig two cameras and a locater to fire simultaniously, one camera taking a picture of the real fish from the side, and the second camera taking the picture of the screen on various models at the very same instant as the first. Compare what unit most accurately paints the picture of what's below and declare a winner. Stfcatfish, I heard you know a little about cameras-maybe we can get Fellegy to pull some strings and manufacures on board. Nothing like challenging B.S. with hard evidence.

I refuse to acknowelegde all this other stuff of blabbers. It hits to close to home-and I can't think of a scientific test to prove him wrong. Keep up the good work guys, regardless of what anybody else says.

p.s. There are no fish in Burntside and anybody trying to fish it for the first time will be skunked for days. Seriuosly, Don't even think of trying to be able to catch a fish in a canoe. It's just way to big and deep and what little fish are there are all spread out or eaten by smelt. The water is so clear the fish see you coming from miles away and it's so close to town all the locals have it all fished out(no permit needed) If you want to catch fish try a more remote lake up the gunflint. Good luck, Hans.

[Steve Foss]

Hans, I echo your condemnation of Burntside. No fish in THAT lake, for sure!

[Surface Tension]

I have to respect a guy that has had the experiences that Joe has.

I'm not a Spring chicken myself but I am at that age that in the age of electronics I'm on the top of my game. Seen it happen from its infancy to where we are now. In that time I haven't resisted that technology, in fact I've eaten it up.

Can sonar tell the size of fish? Yes it can, in fact that ability at times is a huge plus. Now I'm not talking the difference between a 2 lb eye and a 4 lb eye.

What it can tell you is the difference once your tuned in.

Once your tuned in? Whats that?

Its the gain game, it years of experience of using sounders.

If your new to sounders it will take you years to get to that point, you might not even get there.

When you see the Ford vs Chev threads, its not about brands.

The technological advances have surpassed the user.

Want to get better, get the best.

You own a MarCum? The technical advances in that sounder is way over the heads of most. That could be said for Vexilar as well.

Still its ease of use is there for the beginner but more importantly the ability to learn.

Forums being babble. I can relate to that. Outdoor News and their writers have the stage. They are very good at what they do. They can focus on the informative side, some the provocative side, and some its just the stories. I like that.

Here at HSO/FM you can be all that. Its up to you.

From the long threader to the one liner, you are published.

Makes you think doesn't it?

Here you have a forum that you can at anytime put your thoughts out there for the whole world to see.

You have no editor, no spell checker, its raw you.

Well as long as its within forum policy.

Think about the last paragraph and that policy might seem like a good idea, if it were your site.

So there are outdoor publications out there, other outdoor sites.

Some might name this one and grip about us. We shrug those off and keep on keeping on.

This is a perfect opportunity to thank all the HSO/FM members and those looking in for your contributions!

[chris63]

Hans,first thankyou for spelling Joes last name.IMHO ,I think Joe writes the way he does partially for ratings.He's always written(or speaks)his mind no matter what anyone thinks.I respect anyone for doing that!As long as a writer makes us think about the topic he has done his job.c63

[tunrevir]

I enjoy reading Joe's articles every week. He is a tell it like he sees it kind of guy and somewhat of a cromudgeon but entertaining nonetheless. I do think that some of the internet chat goes a little to far with giving away spots but with all the electronics these days there aren't many secret spots left. I find this site very informative from a techniques perspective and have gained alot of insight from it plus there is the comraderie of being part of this site. So, I for one will continue to blabber on because I enjoy sharing the outdoors while indoors when I can't be outdoors

Tunrevir~

[blackdog1101]

I'm a huge fan of internet forums like this. IMO our collective knowledge and experience is far greater than one, however knowledgeable, columnist. There are a few risks to be conscious of with forums though. I think you need to read one for a little while to get a sense of which posters know what they're talking about.

I'm also not a fan of overtly commercial sites which push certain products. I think the owners of this site do a good job of making their products known without pushing them too hard.

And third I'm not a fan of "kiss and tell" posts about the latest hot spot. But to be fair to we internet posters, there are plenty of newspaper columnists who "kiss and tell" every week. There are some newspapers worth reading simply to know what is the latest spot to have been "outed", so you know to go fish somewhere else unless you want to fish with the masses following the latest "expert's" tip.

[fishgutz77]

miss spelling Joe's name, thought that might get some attention.

surface, nice post I couldn't agree more. It takes years! and I just got a new FL-12 ultra w/dual beam to figure out over the next couple of years.

It is true that you need to follow his articals over the years to get a sense of the man, and his is the first artical I always read.

After listening to the Lake Detective for years on the radio it will be great to see his articals in the ODN.

[hanso612]

Any manufacturing reps up for the Duluth aquarium challenge? If Joe is right, I know your watching this thread closely. Here fishy, fishy, fishy. Hans

[IFallsRon]

Joe must not have gone to St. John's for the education. He sometimes writes like a guy who has spent a career editing chicken dinner news at the local weekly.

[not_nuf_time]

Just a follow up. I just got the recent ODN today and gave a quick glance through, and saw Shawn Perich had a little follow up on internet fishing sites and defending Fellegy against the know it all info sharing web fisherpeople. He made it sound like everyone was attacking Mr. Fellegy, I read through all of the post and very little animosity was directed compared to some other topics. Anyway, I do like ODN, yet find it very hippocriticle for any of their writers to be condemning internet sites for giving out info on fishing. Thats their job, and they do it weekly. Ever notice the increase in fishing on those lakes that they post on the back page or when they do a top crappie, walleye or muskie lake. I like to know if fish are biting and appreciatte it when people do post if getting some action. Don't care about specifics just a little yes or no works. My thoughts are that periodicles are feeling the preasure of competition of free networking. We aren't being paid therefore our opinions and input should be silenced.

[Steve Foss]

We don't know that Shawn was directing his comments at this site. His description of the treatment Joe Fellegy got on some Web sites does not match what happened here, so I don't think we were the target.

At any rate, it serves no purpose to attack writers of long established print media publications for looking with a certain amount of skepticism at online outdoor forums. Most forums haven't been around that long at all compared with the newspaper/magazine trade, and many of the less populated forums really do resemble clubs.

I don't think this site fits into the "club" category mentioned by Shawn. With more than 36,000 members and a vast reservoir of knowledge on a huge variety of subjects, as well as a certain degree of expected professionalism, HSO/FM is a great resource.

Let's not assume comments made are necessarily directed at us, and even if they were, let's not allow that to get our danders up. There are more than 36,000 of us who know the value of what's on this site, not to mention the countless thousands more who visit to get great information but don't register.

[not_nuf_time]

True, I guess I did jump, assuming(whoops) that it was directed at this site, because it is so popular.

[Fish&Fowl]

I guess I assumed Joe was talking about this site too. Is there more out there? I love the site and have both given and recieved what I feel is some very valuable information on anything from different species of fish to the hunting forums. I check the site multiple times a day to see what I can find out or if I can contribute to topics I'm familiar with.

However, as the site gets bigger there are a lot of people who fit Joe's descriptions. There are quite a few sections I don't even bother reading anymore because I can't stand "Hey I went out did this and caught fish" and "Wow good job" in one form or another, and it seems to be endless. If people want to post every time they leave the house and respond to every post no matter what, more power to them.

Mr. Fellegy is only pointing out the negative parts of these sites and leaving out how much good information is actually available. Fair or not, I have to agree with him on some of those negative viewpoints. There seems to be a lot of "experts" and "pro-staffers" these days in both hunting and fishing.

[fishgutz77]

It's always been my view to be quick to see where people like Joe are right and make use of what they have to offer. Odds are with 36,000 people on one site there could be some indifference.

Like my original post,I got a chuckle out his artical and only wanted to see what others thought. I also think that the quality of print articals is usually better than the net because it is edited and more time is spent on research instead of off the cuff like most of my stuff.

[Deitz Dittrich]

Fgutz-- Most of my articles I have written are on the net.. I would hope they are not worth any less just because they are "net" articles...

I think that pages like this are here to stay, I also feel that print papers are here to stay as well. I respect JF for his writing, just dont always agree with him.