we were heard

[A- bomb]

thanks to all ...
i just wanted to let you know there was a follow up
this is a copy of the same colum last wk....IS rocks!!!!
http://Musings on ‘morality’


BY CINDY BEVINGTON
[email protected] (Created: Friday, March 21, 2008 8:35 AM EDT)  | Text Size |  print | e-mail

 
Whether you’re talking about a group of curious kids circled around a fish one of them caught in a youth fishing tournament, or a lazy day of catch-and-release fly fishing, every angler has his or her right to an opinion about how many fish is too many, according to Outdoor Life editor Cindy Bevington. (File photo)
 
 
 
Last week as I was editing and preparing the Outdoor Life stories for the paginator who makes them all fit on these pages, I had a strong suspicion that we’d be getting some reaction from readers.

    But the story and accompanying photo I thought would win all the attention — Jayne Olsen’s shot of a clothesline full of dead fox — didn’t earn a peep of protest, while James Phillips’ opinion column on fishing brought down the barn.

    I think I can say without hesitation that Phillips’ “tale of two anglers” left some folks seething. And, judging from the comments left on this newspaper’s blogs and sent to several editors including me, they are still reeling in the anger.

    In fact, as I write these words, I am studying a note sent to me through inter-office mail, a note that says some outdoor folks (who didn’t give their names) are so mad at what Jim Phillips had to say that they are thinking of canceling their subscriptions if he is allowed to continue with this paper as a columnist.

    Well, now. That’s a pretty strong threat. And certainly deserving of an answer even though I don’t plan to boot him, and even though I usually don’t respond to anonymous comments.

    First, let me say that I, too, disagreed with some of the content of Jim’s column. For one thing, my husband and his friends regularly bring home nice loads of fish in legal quantities — all of which are cleaned and eaten and none of which are ever wasted.

    Although I don’t remember for sure, it’s even possible that I may have printed a couple photos of an impressive mess of bluegills they brought home a summer or two ago, all lined up in rows on the garage floor — photos that without a doubt could earn my husband and his buddies a fish-hog label, hands down.

    But just because I don’t agree with Jim’s opinion doesn’t mean I want to lynch him. Rather, all I feel is a twinge of sympathy for someone who evidently never had the thrill of, first, having that much success in one afternoon and, two, of adding the current catch to all the other successes of the year, freezing them and then bringing them out on Memorial Day weekend for a giant fish fry with a few dozen friends.

    But then maybe I’m wrong here: Maybe Jim has had that kind of success, only of the catch-and-release type; and, maybe he does have stupendous fish fries with his friends, even if he doesn’t stop to think where all the fish they’re eating came from, and whether they were bagged in small batches or in fish-hog frenzies.

    But you know what? It doesn’t matter because, after all, what Jim said in his column is simply his opinion. Nothing else and nothing more.

    Beyond that, I’m satisfied to say that it is an opinion to which he is entitled as much so as those who disagree with him are entitled to their opinions. They are incendiary opinions — maybe. They are biting opinions, definitely. But either way they are his opinions, and they are something  to which he is entitled.

    That’s why I don’t understand the reaction that some people have had to what Jim said. In some instances that reaction has been so vilifying, so personal — as opposed to honest, constructive expressions of opinion and criticism — and so maligning that our Internet editor has reluctantly had to refuse to publish at least two of them.

     And that’s sad because we do encourage an open discourse in this newspaper, especially on the outdoor pages. That’s why you’ll see regular reminders here that we are open to reader contributions of stories and photos.

    And, that’s why you’ll see photos you’ll love and photos you’ll hate on these pages. It’s also why we don’t have cookie-cutter layouts and canned columns from wire writers.

    In Jim’s defense, devout catch-and-release anglers are some of the most fastidious of the water world. They usually are conservators of the environment and pristine in their methods.

    On the flip side, the same can be said of fish-hoggers; the only difference is that they don’t throw their fish back.

    So what to do about Jim? The answer is, pitching him and depriving readers of a writer who spins his craft with passion and eloquence is not a good thing: If we did that, we’d be setting dangerous and new precedents.

     If you dump a writer for having a strong opinion then, surely, the next thing you’ll have to do is censor the publishing of photos showing rows of fox on a clothesline. And from there, where do you go?

    Refuse to print taxidermists’ photos of bunnies and squirrels and coyotes? Send back reader contributions of a kid’s first deer and Daddy’s or Mommy’s big buck? Throw out the shots of kids gathered around a fish on the ground?

    Or simply stop printing the only outdoor section left in the whole of northeast Indiana, not to mention one of the few in the country?

    I think we all know the answer to that one. And that’s why I’m taking this opportunity to invite readers to send me their outdoor stories and photos — and yes, opinions and commentary. Just remember: Only signed submissions with names and daytime contact numbers will be considered.



THANKS .......!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[MnSportsman]

I am really happy that the IceShanty members took the time to respond to this "opinionated" article by Mr. Phillips...

I can only ask one thing that comes to mind....

What does Mr. Phillips think about the responses to his article?

For me, that is what I'd like to know the most...

I almost wrote a response to Mrs. Bevington, complimenting her on "her" article. I withheld my response, thinking that there are plenty of folks from that(your) area, that will compliment her for her contribution on the subject.

    I still hold my view that , if someone is going to put their opinion "out there" for people to read in a "news" type venue; No matter whether it's a report, or a "column", they should at least get all the facts & talk to the people that they are "reporting" about. To just set an opinion "out there", and not take the time to get all the facts & all the input from those that you are writing about , is irresponsible & unethical.

  I can only think of those who don't go online & read this "rubbish" (those who only get the column thru a newspaper delivered to their door), & actually think that this fella(Mr. Phillips) is the "real-deal"  when it comes to giving them the "truth" about what is going on. It actually "scares" me. I know that there are some folks who would read his column & actually think that, because he has the column in a E-zine/newspaper, that he is correct in what he says in his column.

    I hope that someone actually takes the time to talk to Mrs. Bevington , & submits a real column about the outdoors for their E-zine/newspaper & really does the right thing in telling people the "real-deal" about what being an "sportsman" is all about & not just put an opinion "out there" that only reflects a "one-sided view".

'E'nuff said by me...

Have a Great day!

[lindenborn]

Glad to see that response, still wish Mr Phillips had said a few words in response.  Everyone is entitled to their opinion-just wish he had stuck to facts more.

[MrMarty51]

I also feel that an apology is in order to go to PoleCat and also to RiverScum for having their names bashed and also to Iceshanty.com for them having their name even mentioned and to the management of this wonderful site.
If an apology cannot be obtained from this newspaper then maby a collection should be gathered so a crew from this site could buy out the newspaper and then Mr Phillips could get the firing of a lifetime.

[gruntngrin]

I also feel that an apology is in order to go to PoleCat and also to RiverScum for having their names bashed and also to Iceshanty.com for them having their name even mentioned and to the management of this wonderful site.
If an apology cannot be obtained from this newspaper then maby a collection should be gathered so a crew from this site could buy out the newspaper and then Mr Phillips could get the firing of a lifetime.

If they cant get a apology, then we should start to organize a rally to picket there business every weekend till we get one 

[Lobes]

I think that in validating the salvation of this writers employment they should first consider his general attitude. If it is such that he firmly believes he can never do no wrong and it's only just a little bit too bad that people don't like his contempt he holds for people he doesn't even know, then it's time for him top get bounced. If his attitued is at the other extreme and this turns out to be a huge published mistake then I think some milder form of discipline needs to be issued. Regardless this one needs to be addressed properly.
In these times of huge unemployment I somehow feel that if he was removed from his post, that the world would continue to rotate and that they would find someone else at least as well qualified to backfill his position.

                                                 
NBG

[mud_n_fun]

I also worry that the people that have read the article now hold an oppinion against sportsman who keep their catch. As most people aren't sportsman and really don't understand the outdoors, they believe what they read.  And anyone who is in that group now has no respect for those of us who love our outdoors and utilize it. We live in a world now where the general public are like sheep. And if they were to miss an apology for a poor article they will carry the wrong impression untill they are educated. It's the old becareful what you say. I have never heard of shoot and release hunting. Just erks me that now there may be a populous with the wrong impression.

[Oldbear]

IS and everyone shouldn't of ever been put in this situation but in all reality it doesn't surprise me for the media in this day and age.  The closest we could expect for an apology is the coments Ms. Bevington put in this last article which was a CYA attempt.

[pooley]

cindy bevington has no clue if she thinks she has someone who is a true sportsman on her staff. she should reread her response, so she can see how stupid it sounds. she just wants to make money.

[bridgedoctor]

Ms. Bevington is missing a few reasons why we, "brought down the barn."  Yes, it was Mr. Phillips' opinion, but where were his facts?  Or, because it was, "simply his opinion. Nothing else and nothing more.," he didn't need facts just inflammatory rhetoric.  How can readers make informed decisions without facts presented to them? In my "opinion" Ms. Bevington's treatment of this very small article was unethical; she didn't have someone check his facts before publication!   If this is the paper's SOP, then its credibility is questionable.

Another reason why our responses brought down the barn was that the newspaper is a one way street.  Once published and distributed the damage is done.  It's like throwing a rock.  Once it leaves your hand it ain't commin back!  Print a retraction?  Where do we see retractions; buried somewhere deep inside the paper.  The paper is not publishing an article that rebuffs his opinion or one that delves into the facts so readers can make an informed decision.  It is hiding behind, Well, it's merely his "opinion."  We need the same space, the same  article location, and the same readership as Mr. Phillips to express our opinion.  Letters to the Editor section doesn't suffice.

And the third reason is that this small article contributes to the "anti" people, i.e. PETA.  We sportsmen/women don't need misinformation distributed to the public no matter if the writer, "spins his craft with passion and eloquence".  Remember that rock, well PETA will catch it, reshape it, and place it into the wall they're building to separate us from the outdoors.  One could say to me that I'm exaggerating Mr. Phillips' article.  How could his trite, small paper article be so dangerous?  I would ask that person, how may drops of water are in the ocean?  Each drop is such an article.  And if we want to continue to enjoy fishing, hunting, motor boating, etc. then it is our duty to respond to all such articles as best we can.  Are we going to enjoy water recreation or will we be caught in a tsunami?  The answer is up to we all.

[Pajns]

Very well put Doc.
  The sad part is that the newspapers are only worried about the all mighty dollar. They seem to be able to say what they want in order to sell papers. Doesn't matter who or what they hurt they have freedom of speech. When I read that article the thing that came to my mind was slander. To write about people and this website without facts is crazy. To admit ones wrongs takes a big man and by no response from Phillips shows me He could careless what damage was done. I'm not saying for him to get on his knees and ask forgiveness but write a story with all the facts. Admit you crossed a line. A line that He had no right in labeling those guys he wrote about. One thing I am proud of is the responses to that article from members of IS. Very well thought out responses that made alot of sense. I do not live in the State that the newspaper was printed but if I did I would never buy that paper even if it was the only paper in town. If one reporter writes something like that and another defends him I have no desire to read a bias paper like that. Either tell the whole story or don't tell the story.

[MrMarty51]

If they cant get a apology, then we should start to organize a rally to picket there business every weekend till we get one 

How do I get there and when do we start.

[Tomhusker]

 I'm not sure that facts are needed when stating an opinion. Opinions are how you feel about something based on what you know about it. OBVIOUSLY the fella knows nothing about fishing regulations or the life cycle of perch and thier rediculous reproduction successes. If he did, his opinion might be different. He could get this info with a little journalstic research, but then that would be detrimental to his minimal harvest mentality.

[billditrite]

for an editor she sure use the word "but" a lot    kudos for all who left messages on the papers website...apology or not there is no bad publicity so she is liking all the attention!

[InSearchOfPerch]

I have a reply for Cindy, but instead of sending it to her office or editor screened inter office memo system, I will post it here...it's obvious she reads the site. 

Dear Cindy,
 
Thank you for responding to the obvious flood of comments from both sides of the issue.  And I too agree that you dont lynch someone for an opinion.  Everyone has one, although most of us dont have the venue of a newspaper to sling shot ours at everyone else.  I'm sure given the opportunity, none of us would pass on the chance. 

What I find interesting is that even you took the chance to question Jim's reasons for writing the article.  Condemning Jims opinion and questioning Jims reasoning for writing the article are two entirely different things.  You wondered whether he had ever experienced a day of success or partaken in a fish fry with others where the fish may of been caught in one day.  So obviously you do see the direction alot of the strong feelings came from after reading Jim's article.  The part I dont understand is why both Jim AND you only see fit to represent the views of two extreme sides of the angling world.  After years of fishing since I was a small kid, I have developed the belief that a true sportsman understands that neither 100% catch and release NOR 100% Catch and kill, or as Jim and yourself term it "fish Hogging" is the correct answer to responsible conservation.  A true sportsman recognizes the opportunities and the situations that call for one or the other.  Responsible selective harvest is exactly that...Selective AND Responsible.  The angler selects the appropriate decision to harvest a fish, or release it, after carefully considering the lake they are fishing, the size of the fish, the number of fish they have already caught, whether they will be able to use the fish for consumption or give it to someone that would appreciate it for the same reason, etc.  Sometimes these decisions lead us to keep a number of fish, for a fish fry, or to help thin out an overpopulated lake and give the fillets to friends or family.  A picture of these fish should be able to tell a tale...one that isnt automatically categorized by your and Jim's standards as being a fish hog.  You preach two brands of angling in your article, catch and release...or FISH HOG. 

Here is a quote from the article...
  In Jim’s defense, devout catch-and-release anglers are some of the most fastidious of the water world. They usually are conservators of the environment and pristine in their methods.

    On the flip side, the same can be said of fish-hoggers; the only difference is that they don’t throw their fish back.

Instead of promoting these two extreme methods of total release or kill everything....why not take the respectable route...one that shows anglers as most of them are...responsible people who care enough about the fisheries they fish and recognize when one method or the other should be applied.  To take an angler who falls into this category and label them as either a "release everything" kind of angler, or kill everything kind of angler, is a waste of newspaper space.  Articles spent condemning one side or the other are not beneficial to the sport. Because neither side of the arguement practiced alone is the responsible choice.   An article describing the delicate balance that should be practiced and recognizing those situations and things that should influence an anglers decision to keep a fish or not would be a better use of your news papers outdoor section. 

And one last thing, another good measure of a true sportsman is their ability to accept that not everyone will choose to be a responsible outdoorsperson.  Its unfortunate, but it is what it is.  The state will sell any fool a license to fish, its up to us to educate ourselves through information we read on forums, magazines and news papers to prepare ourselves to make responsible decisions.  Jims article did not help that process at all.  And I think you know that.

Jeff Harding
Sioux Falls, SD

[MnSportsman]

Very well said, InSearchofPerch/Jim!

I hope that Mrs. Bevington does read it.

[InSearchOfPerch]

ty

[pooley]

insearchofperch, that was perfect! selective harvest is where it's at.