AOTY 2017 Rule Change Proposal #1 - Mouth Closed Rule Amendment

Hi All,

The AOTY Committee has been discussing potential rule changes for 2017, and have come up with a few ideas for consideration.  We'd like to get the AOTY competitors to provide us input on these ideas to see whether they would be worth changing.  This is the first in a series of polls about the ideas that have been tossed around.  While the polls are not binding, we will be happy to take the results under advisement when making our decisions for 2017.

The first rule proposal is to modify the mouth closed rule to be less strict than it currently is.  Currently, we reject all fish with mouths open even a little bit, i.e. if you can see the trough at all through the mouth then it is flat rejected. Only one of the AOTY committee members enjoys rejecting fish, the rest dislike it because we know you caught the fish and the intention is not to try to game the system for extra points, but not every fish agrees.

Anyways, the rule proposal is to allow these fish to be approved to an extent for mouth slightly open, with some sort of point deduction.  Obviously fish with mouths that are wide open and trying to gain extra length are still disallowed. Unfortunately, the "mouth slightly open" definition can't be 100% ascertained as our measuring troughs don't have to ability to measure how open a mouth is.  But my idea was that generally mouths should be open less than 1/2", subject to the committee's discretion, no backsies.

Please, only vote if you are an AOTY competitor or honestly plan to be one in the future.

Thus, the genesis of arguments whether the mouth is more or less than 1/2 inch open. 

Thus, the genesis of arguments whether the mouth is more or less than 1/2 inch open. 

That would be up to committee to decide. Generally speaking it shouldn't even be close to 1/2" open.

Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk

How can you measure sturgeon larger than 68 inches which cannot be removed from the water?

How can you measure sturgeon larger than 68 inches which cannot be removed from the water?

Those fish are not legal to be kept so are not allowed in AOTY.

Only Sturgeon from 40"-60" fork length are allowed to be entered.

Yes, approve 1/2 rule. Honor system. I think that will make on the water pics way easier and better for fish caught and quickly photographed and released. Plus it's just fishing right 

I could go for "slightly open" with a half inch points deduction but drop the "up to 1/2" open. 1/2" can vary too much between species. Basically if the best picture possible has mouth slightly open then knock a few points off.

Here are some examples of fish that were rejected this year due to the mouth closed rule.  As you can see, none of these had intentional mouth open to lengthen the fish, and the amount of mouth open was minimal at best.

Under the proposed rules, these fish would all be approved in 2017, with either a pt deduction or not.

I've had 2 fish rejected for open mouths this year. I really thought their mouths were closed, but when zoomed in there was the tiniest bit of air gap. I've also lost a few off the trough while trying to get a picture with the mouth fully closed. Personally I think a 1/2 inch gap is too big. I think that the suggested rule change is too vague and the rule should stand as is.

1/2 does seem a fair bit, 1/4 makes more sense to me. But I like the general idea. Since I am mostly catch and release these days, this would make on the water pictures significantly easier.

I'm ALL for it!  But you already know that, Ben....   

Since I am mostly catch and release these days, this would make on the water pictures significantly easier.

thats the idea, to help catch and release fishermen who have difficulty taking perfect OTW pictures.  We generally frown on dead fish with crappy pictures but there's really no specific way to enforce it on only C&R vs dead fish.

I'd prefer to see it left to the discretion of the committee (reject or deduction, as they see fit). There are too many variables to make any hard and fast rule.

I'd prefer to see it left to the discretion of the committee (reject or deduction, as they see fit). There are too many variables to make any hard and fast rule.

The committee is happy to make those types of decisions, but we prefer rules that at least have some sort of outline to make sure no one can accuse us of favoritism.  The current rule is very strict, which allows us to rely on the rule rather than to potentially play favorites.  But at the same time, there are fish being rejected that honestly no one wants to reject because they were caught honestly and a good faith effort was made to close their mouths.  We do generally vote on anything that is borderline.