Fishing Reports Stink

[QUOTE=MagikSmallie;322348]not to bash fishin dot com but... why are almost all of the reports outdated or non existing I do understand that they rely on individuals to report but I feel a better report can be attained by using other sources such as guides and marinas. how does everyone else feel about this issue.[/QUOTE]



Well here is my non-professional report. Barren 4/5/2008. 12 boats. weather cold with a cold wind. Water was muddy over most of the lake. Water temp was 47 in the morning and 55 at the end of tournament. First place 15 lb., second 14 lb., thrid 12 lb. and fourth 9.86 lb. These weights came from 2 boats. Beg fish was 5.65 lb. All of the fish were caught in the waters near the **** area as it was not soo muddy just stained. I know spinners were used as were cranks. Also 1 good fish was caught on a drop shop rig. I hope you all enjoy this report from a rookie.

[QUOTE=peter;322439]The reports are crucial in my opinion. Reports are the largest search category.

I know there are a lot of IT folks on the board. How can it be done easier? It could probably be done from within vBulletin with ratings and all that, but then it would be hard to ad anything else to the page.

If I ever go fishin I always print out a report to take with me. It is a real good starting point.[/QUOTE]

I think the solution is quite simple. Have two reports areas. One as it has always been handled, and another by setting up a reports only board. Set up a thread per lake and allow people to post REPORTS ONLY under the thread. I don't know about your board software, but maybe you could require posters to request access before they post, with the understanding they can not respond to a report. Then reports "from the average Joe" like myself can all be organized together by lake. The reports by the guides have their place. I don't think it should be diluted with non-professional reports.

Fishcatcher. I think you may be on to something here.
If I can set it up that way maybe we could start with 3 popular lakes and ad on if it goes well.
The reports form the guides and bait shops and other featured reporters could be remamed from "reports" to "reports from the pros", to borrow a line from Dave Steward, "Fish with a professional"

I think the key would be, as you say, to have the discussion board area for reports be post only so we don't get a hundred fragmented discussions going. Not sure if that can be done. Maybe just certain people have access to post.

If it was possible, what 3 lakes would be good to start with. I vote for
Taylorsville because it has been difficult over the years to get that report.
Maybe one in each part of the state (Western, Louisville, eastern or south central)?

Any thoughts on this?

[quote=peter;322653]Fishcatcher. I think you may be on to something here.
If I can set it up that way maybe we could start with 3 popular lakes and ad on if it goes well.
The reports form the guides and bait shops and other featured reporters could be remamed from "reports" to "reports from the pros", to borrow a line from Dave Steward, "Fish with a professional"

I think the key would be, as you say, to have the discussion board area for reports be post only so we don't get a hundred fragmented discussions going. Not sure if that can be done. Maybe just certain people have access to post.

If it was possible, what 3 lakes would be good to start with. I vote for
Taylorsville because it has been difficult over the years to get that report.
Maybe one in each part of the state (Western, Louisville, eastern or south central)?

Any thoughts on this?[/quote]

What about a northern part of the state for those of us that were not given such gifts as those from the western part of the state? LOL

Sure

It was I that made the suggestion.
And we are on the same page. You don't want a 100 none report posts. If the board can't be secured, mods are to delete non-report posts on the spot, without warning and without any notification. That way reports through the year(s) can be easily searched.
Reports of what didn't work, without reporting what did should also probably be deleted as well. While it does help with trial and error, it isn't something people would want to read next year at the same time.

As for which lakes, ask for volunteers and take the three that:

Catch fish
post often
Are on different bodies of water.
maybe even one for streams

You don't have anyone that does a report for streams on the "pros" pages, and many fish them so there is value added right there.

You can PM me or email me and I can get you my number if you want to talk on it further.

I just want to make sure I'm clear I love fishin.com and I really enjoy all the discussion, I don't want it to look like I was bashing this forum, just trying for a little constructive criticism. And I don't rely on fishing Reports I just feel its a good source to get general ideas about fishing conditions. It becomes helpful especially with rising costs of our beloved sport, if you can check a report and make a decision on whether or not to drive the two hours to your favorite lake and find out its flooded or muddy or the fish aren't biting. But anyway just wanted to clear up that I am dearly grateful for our fishing dot com.

This topic rolls around at least two or three times a year. LOL

I wouldn't worry about it. If you had not started the thread, someone else would have. Let's face it, the Pro reports are spotty at best by some.

What should be clear is we do appreciate the reports from those that come in regularly. And I think they provide more merit than some will admit to. For those of us that only get a day or two, its nice if we can narrow in on what has worked and remove some trial and error.

The positive reports from us regulars anglers also has lots of merit. Weeding through everything to get to them is the pain. And then there are those that start a thread with "Fishing report" only to open it to find "Whats biting on what?"
Those kill me.. :)