|
|
| WRMA Update
January 16, 2006
Hayward Board Upholds Spray Record
"Some individuals have made the petty, and unfounded accusations that the National Freshwater Fishing Hall of Fame disqualified the Lawton Muskie in an effort to ‘bring the record back home to Wisconsin’. But to anyone knowing the facts, this easily can be dispelled. The fact is, the decision to disqualify Lawton's fish was not made by a handful of "Hayward people," but by a world board of approximately 40 Advisory Governors made up of people from all over the United States, Canada and even abroad."
- John Dettloff
As by now most are well aware, earlier today the Freshwater Fishing Hall of Fame held a closed press conference to announce its decision to uphold the 1949 Louis Spray All-Tackle Muskellunge Record.
While the WRMA applauds the Hall for making their rebuttal available to the general public via its website, we stand firmly behind both the information contained in the original Spray Summary Report, and the scientific methodologies employed by our expert researchers.
In fact, we feel strongly that the Hall’s rebuttal only serves to broaden the controversy regarding the legitimacy of the current record muskellunge.
To begin, we find that Mr. John Dettloff’s personal involvement with key elements of the Hall’s rebuttal of the DCM photo analysis must of necessity raise questions of bias – whether intentional or unintentional - on the part of the Hall. When further considered in light of recent resignations by Larry Ramsell and Brad Latvaitis, in addition to the Hall’s puzzling recent decisions to both deny its own World Advisory Board a vote and impose a $1500 fee upon all future record challenges, it becomes easy to understand why we at the World Record Muskie Alliance simply cannot accept the Hall’s decision at face value.
In brief: the World Record Muskie Alliance spent roughly two years in authoring the Spray Summary Report. Mr. Dettloff and the Hall of Fame spent nearly three months in formulating a rebuttal. As such, we at the WRMA feel it improper to attempt to address the totality of the Hall’s rebuttal at this time.
Instead, we will again turn the matter over to qualified, independent experts, and report our findings to the media and general public as soon as they become available.
In the meantime, we invite the general public to become well acquainted with both sides of this debate, as it would appear that our journey into the muskie record books has only just begun.
Those interested may still visit www.worldrecordmuskiealliance.com to download the groundbreaking Spray Summary Report free of charge, www.freshwater-fishing.org/spray to view the Hall's rebuttal.
| |
| | |
| I was well prepared to congratulate the FFHF for containing their bias and doing the right thing, just as they did with the Lawton muskie and recently retired walleye record, funny how affidavits did little to support those frauds, but so much for Spray.
Frankly, how the FFHF arrived at their decision is near mind boggling to me, they challenged two peer reviewed professionally prepared reports with some bold "one liners", and statements taken out of context.
Why not have another photogrammetric evaluation completed? Seriously, did they even present it to a professional, or just do their own in house unqualified deconstruction? Of which some flaws are apparent at a glance tonight.
How much "shopping around" did they do at universities, and how much information was provided to the professors? Handing out only one "newly discovered" superimposed photo with no back ground is very, very suspect for someone in search of the truth.
We do know that only "one photo" was provided to their own Professor Arnold, and his conclusion supported the DCM findings, yet they chose to discount it? Would we even have known about his work if he did not go public on his own? Why would you discount your own researcher if you were not biased to begin with ... and just how many other "professor Arnold's" are out there?
A giant question is why did they "chop up" the other professors work the way they did (one set doing the calculations and one set doing the perspective). Why not send all the images (as in plural) to one place for both like the WRMA did?
Discounting an expert taxidermists review of the "Frankenstein" mounts, (as Doug called them) is not just a silly fin out of place, amazing!
The mountain of other WRMA documentation and supporting evidence that was of course "just innuendo", they obviously picked threw it and jumped on the things they could and ignored the bulk of it.
That FFHF report is a master piece of only grabbing enough of a statement to twist into something sounding reasonable for the press. These are just some of the questions that we should all be asking ourselves and the FFHF along with the WRMA.
For anyone interested, here is a membership application. Sorry, but there is no fat lady singing!!!
_____________________________________________________________
THE WORLD RECORD MUSKIE ALLIANCE
The overwhelming focus of muskellunge fishing surrounds the pursuit of unusually large fish. Therefore, it is our belief that the task of determining the maximum growth potential of trophy class muskellunge to be of paramount importance to the overall well being of the sport. The WRMA is dedicated toward using modern scientific methods and technology to: (1) resolve the current controversy surrounding the legitimacy of the currently accepted record muskellunge; (2) establish proper controls and record keeping agencies to ensure the legitimacy of all future record muskellunge; (3) library and disseminate scientific data regarding world record muskellunge catches; (4) promote and maintain trophy muskellunge fisheries throughout the species’ native range by supporting ongoing scientific efforts to determine optimal species reintroduction strategies; (5) protect vital spawning and nursery habit to ensure integrity of designated trophy waters.
Membership is a minimum $20.00, due by Jan 15 of each year. The WRMA is an IRS 501 (c) (3) non-profit organization, ID #75884. Our employer ID # is 20-1741826. We have no employees, all-volunteer. We are registered in the state of IL CO#0145457, all donations are tax deductible.
Please consider helping us by volunteering your time, and/or additional money. You can additional earmark a donation toward the Lake Simcoe Muskie Restoration Project. (Ontario, Canada) http://www.muskiescanada.ca/Lake_Simcoe_Project.php
Please direct any questions or information to: worldrecordmuskiealliance.com
General: Rich Delaney, President at [email protected]
Membership: Jerry Newman, Director at [email protected]
World Record Muskie Alliance
PO Box 7622
Algonquin, IL 60102
Dan Koniewicz/Treasurer Make all checks payable to WRMA;
Name ____________________________________
Address ___________________________________
City- State- zip______________________________
Phone # _______________________Email______________________________
Extra donation for LSMRP___$_____________
Thank you for your support,
Jerry Newman
Membership Director WRMA
| |
| | |
| Trying to convince the NFFHF of something that any reasonable-thinking muskie angler already knows only gives them credibility, which in my opinion, they simply do not deserve. Pass the WRMA report to IGFA, get Spray's fish stricken, and continue on with the other records. Who cares what the NFFHF thinks.....they're a joke.
To all those people who still believe in Spray's records.....knock yourselves out chasing your 70lb. dream fish. | |
| | |
Location: The Yahara Chain | The IGFA does not recognize Spray's fish...because it was shot to land it...a legal practice in Wisconsin at the time. They recognize Cal Johnson's fish as the record.
Didn't Larry Ramsell resign from the WRMA, also? | |
| | |
Posts: 619
Location: Verona, WI | Yes, Larry Ramsell did indicate on another web site that he is leaving his association with WRMA. I am in no way speaking for him as I do not know him be he did make some comment on the behavior of both the WRMA and FWFHOF supporters on the message board.
Shane | |
| |
|
WRMA Update