I have to admit I am a little chokes as well. Now instead of walking 15 mins from my house to an un-crowded spot I will have to walk 1+ hour to get to an area with few other people around. Just my $0.02.
Don't be choked ED, you'd live longer and have more time to fish like Chris.
I think you are better off walking 30 minutes instead of 1+ hour. With 1+ hour of walking, you'd be standing right in the crowd at the Crossing.
I made a conscious decision to share these photos with full awareness that some who I fish with also utilize these areas frequently. After operating a fishing discussion forum for 6 years, I would like to think that I am just as concerned about hot spotting as other readers. Several things to consider before engaging in these discussions which come up from time to time.
The fishing report section is limited to a small percentage of all website visitors. The access changes made last year are intended to make this section more enjoyable for both reporters and readers. Those who take the time to contribute in the discussion forum gain the privilege to access the fishing reports. It is set up as a mutual exchange system so all can benefit. By suggesting that a run mentioned in the report has been transformed into a meat hole, wouldn't that be insulting contributors/readers of this section?
The day in question is the first Saturday of October. It is rather inaccurate to make a correlation between a report and a spike of angling pressure, because every other run is just as busy, if not busier, on this day. If the increase rate of angling pressure was significantly higher at this run than other locations (ie. fishing pressure at other runs remain low or unchanged), then the concern would actually be valid. Unless each angler at the run was surveyed and asked why or how they ended up fishing at this particular location, this discussion should not even be had, because both view points would be defended based on theories, not statistical facts.
Here are two photos of nearby runs on October 2nd 2004, first Saturday of October. With six vehicle access points nearby, somehow I think that a sudden increase of angler numbers on weekends is caused by factors greater than a fishing report in a private board.
What is somewhat humorous is the reported catches that the photographs accompanied were not exactly productive. A few missed bites and two landed adult chinook salmon do not exactly translate into a hot spot. I would like to think that most readers with some intellect have actually taken the time to examine the story behind the photographs. If that was the case, I cannot see why anyone would aim to fish it based on the report, unless they were fishing it because I did, which would be quite flattering, or, disturbing.
By following up with responses such as the above would only fuel up curiosity among readers, which was probably not there in the first place. What has caused more harm? The actual report or the suggestion that the report has exposed a hot spot?
Why are people jumping on me because Im showing the effects of what the internet does?
I'm just expressing my thoughts here on a public forum (which is my choice as well and what the forum is for isn't it?) on how the internet affects fishing. Yes BoBo even on busy flows like the chedder. Why never any pics from you over there on the rock? No fish? You must catch fish, you do have an idea of what youre doing right?
Perhaps the method used to deliver the view points should be polished, so the reception would not be as negative like some of the responses in other threads. Are the postings done this way deliberate, or simply due to inexperience in communication? I only question because they lack respect, which is why they are deleted from time to time. Keep in mind that the moderators' duty is to maintain a discussion forum so it sustains an atmosphere that all users can enjoy. The discussion forum is not public, but privately owned and operated. The registration agreement clearly lays out what are acceptable in here. Opinions are welcome, but members should have some self reservation when expressing them. When posts are deleted, they are most often done due to the approach, not the view point. As I pointed out in a fishing report earlier last week, if deletions become repetitive, then further actions such as ceasing of posting or registration privileges would be used. On Friday, we did just that to two members who couldn't seem to contribute anything but negativity.