Muskie Discussion Forums
| ||
| Moderators: sworrall, Slamr | View previous thread :: View next thread |
| Jump to page : 1 Now viewing page 1 [30 messages per page] More Muskie Fishing -> Muskie Biology -> WRMA Has Announced Findings of World Record Muskie Investigation |
| Message Subject: WRMA Has Announced Findings of World Record Muskie Investigation | |||
sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32886 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | The World Record Muskie Alliance is prepared to release the results of the one and one half year long investigation into the standing World Record Muskie. The peer review and scientific scutiny portion of the investigation is now complete, and the findings will be published today here on MuskieFIRST with additional commentary from the WRMA. | ||
| sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32886 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Here is the link to the Press release and the report documents. We will have a full WRMA interview on MuskieFIRST Radio this week. http://muskie.outdoorsfirst.com/articles/10.20.2005/974/WRMA.Delive... | ||
| sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32886 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Here is the document required by the Hall to protest or question a standing World Record. Procedure For Protesting an Existing World Record 1) Written report (12 copies) must be submitted to the Hall’s Executive Board for review. 2) Notarized signatures are required from the complainant, the primary contact person and all other individuals whose testimony is included in the complainant’s report. 3) The decision to reject or concur with a protest rests solely with the combined vote of the full Executive Board of Directors and the Executive Director. 4) If they deem it necessary, the Executive Board may seek the input of their Advisory Board of Governors, legal council or other expert consultation. 5) At the Executive Board’s discretion, they may choose to invite the complainant to their next board meeting to answer questions or give a summary to their complaint. 6) A 2/3 vote is required to overturn an existing world record. Protests against an existing world record must be sent to the Hall’s Executive Board of Directors for review to: National Fresh Water Fishing Hall of Fame, Attention: Records Committee, P.O. Box 690, Hayward, Wisconsin 54843. Upon a careful evaluation of the protest and, if deemed necessary, after considering the input of others (for example: the Hall’s Advisory Board of Governors, legal council and/or expert consultation), the decision to reject or concur with the protest rests solely with the Hall’s Executive Board of Directors, whose decision will be final. All protests must first be submitted in writing, in a concise report complete with all supportive documentation. Twelve copies of the complainant’s report must be supplied to the Hall for review. Notarized signatures are required from both the complainant and the primary contact person (if different) on the accompanying Formal Protest Form. Additionally, there must be notarized signatures for every individual whose testimony is included with the complainant’s report. Each member of the Executive Board will carefully review the protest and, if they desire additional input, the Board may choose to forward copies of the written protest onto the Hall’s Advisory Board of Governors, legal council and/or other expert consultation for their collective input. However, if the Executive Board considers the protest to be unfounded, they reserve the right to reject the protest and deny the complainant’s request to disallow or disqualify the world record being reviewed. If the Executive Board chooses to seek out the consultation of others (as mentioned above), in order for their input to be fully considered, each person reviewing the written protest who gives a response (either in favor or against the protest) is required to give a detailed explanation of their reasoning as to how they have arrived at their decision. In the interim, if the Board so chooses, they may invite the complainant to the next board meeting to give any closing arguments that support the protest and to ask the complainant questions. Once the report (protest) is fully reviewed and all of the requested input is carefully considered by the entire Executive Board, they (along with the Executive Director) will make the final determination as to whether or not the protest will be rejected or accepted. A 2/3 vote is required to overturn (or veto) an existing world record. Each member of the Executive Board is also required to give a detailed explanation of their reasoning as to how they have arrived at their decision. Once the Executive Board arrives at a final judgment regarding the protest, they will inform the complainant as to their decision. A few thoughts on historical record keeping and investigating disputed catches. For both historical reasons and to acknowledge the many outstanding world record achievements that have been made, we take our responsibilities as an official freshwater record keeping body very seriously. Because time has a way of marching on, “today’s great angling achievements will soon be considered tomorrow’s historical legendary catches.” It is our duty, as a historical record keeping body to not allow time to diminish or cheapen those catches which happen to have been caught many years ago. In fact, it is these older angling records (achievements that ever-increasingly run the risk of being forgotten with time) that we should especially strive to preserve. From time to time, an existing world record fish may prove to have been a falsified claim. In such a case where incontrovertible evidence proves that a world record fish had been falsified, that fish should be disqualified and removed from our record books. However, because the reputations of the anglers (and their families and/or descendants) can be greatly affected by such a decision, it is incumbent on us to make sure that we never wrongfully take away a world record title from any angler because of mere suspicion, unsupported speculation, rumor or innuendo. Because it is part of human nature to be skeptical of any fantastic claim or happening, rumor and “bar talk” tend to follow some of the outstanding angling accomplishments of the past. Such negative comments have had a way of evolving into nothing more than unsupported hearsay, which continues to be passed on in ever-changing versions. Therefore, when checking up on a world record claim, it is important that we only concern ourselves with facts and not allow gossip to influence our inquiries. When it comes to investigating the validity of a world record claim, there are basically two questions that should be asked: 1) was the fish caught by fair and legal means, and 2) was the fish as big as claimed? Although the first question is very difficult to prove or disprove, when it comes to the second question (regarding confirming a fish’s size), unaltered photographic evidence can, at times, either back up or disprove a claim. However, there are limits to photographic analysis. Not every photo can be assessed in a way that will yield a conclusive size range for a fish. For a size assessment calculation to be valid and acceptable, it must be backed up with indisputable data that is made up of enough “knowns” so as to yield a calculated high and low end size range for the fish. Formal Protest Form For an Existing World Record (Name of complainant)__________________________________ (Address)_____________________________________________ (Phone number) ______________________________________ (E-mail address) _______________________________________ (Organization)_________________________________________ (Primary contact person) _______________________________ Signature of complainant_____________________________________ (signature must be notarized on this form) Signature of primary contact person, if different from name of complainant__________________________ (signature must be notarized on this form) | ||
| Jump to page : 1 Now viewing page 1 [30 messages per page] |
| Search this forum Printer friendly version E-mail a link to this thread |
Copyright © 2024 OutdoorsFIRST Media |