I am surprised at the low participation with regards to the reporting of the tourney results. To get the next tourney permit a club should be required to demonstrate that they fully comply with our DEEP requests such as tourney reporting, AIS Stamps on non-resident boats, etc. If they don't comply with all requests then no new permits for their club tourneys on any lake in Ct.

I got into this issue of too many bass tournaments on Candlewood and the totally open season which made for extensive bed fishing with the DEP's Inland Fisheries division a few years back and did some research on what other big lakes in other states were doing with the bass tournament issues.
This issue has been discussed with the Fisheries Division and the bottom line was that there was no evidence that juvenile recruitment was affected by fishing pressure. This was in regards to bed fishing and its impacts but the issue of the large number of tournaments was a factor that was also considered.
I have a small pond, about 3 acres, that is on average about 15' deep. I find that by the end of the summer I have the same amount of bass fry and fingerlings whether I had only a couple of successful bass nests or more than a dozen successful nests. Fishing is all C&R in my pond. So tournaments and bed fishing may not affect in any appreciable way the year class populations in a lake. Candlewood is a very productive lake in general with a robust forage base and all of the glacial rock on the shorelines and bottoms which favors smallies.
But Candlewood Lake has by far, on a surface acre basis, more bass tournaments than any other lake in the Northeast or New England of a similar size. It used to have 175 per year so the DEEP has dialed it back some in recent years. Also there are only two reliable state launches on the lake so access is competitive.
Lake Wallenpaupak in the Poconos has about 50 tournaments a year and it is basically the same size as Candlewood, is a hydro facility water source, has the same forage base, a rocky bottom mostly of shale outcroppings, has a strong smallie population and decent largemouths, and is nearly the same depth and contour. They have a group of stakeholders including the Pa. Fish Commission, a local mayor, some sportsmen and business owners on the committee that decides how many bass tournaments and when they can be held. Pa. also has more stringent Fisheries laws regarding bass fishing as does NY and NJ versus Ct. with its open seasons. If Candlewood was in NJ, NY or Pa. it would have about 50 tournaments a year.
Other examples are Lake Hopatcong in NJ which is that state's largest lake but smaller than Candlewood has about 50 bass tournaments a year. In Pa. Raystown Lake (the Juniata River with a dam on it) is over 8,000 acres, far larger than the 5,300 acres that Candlewood has, and has many more boat launches, yet has a cap on bass tournaments at 100 per year. That said, I doubt that the top three bags from bass tournaments at any of the above waters I mentioned exceed at all the top three bags from Candlewood in a similar sized tournament.
Looking at the tournaments that actually followed the rules of submitting a report to the DEEP after concluding their bass tournament Candlewood does stick out as the place to get a largie over 6lbs but keep in mind it is the state's largest lake and has twice as many fishermen each year out fishing it so you should expect more of everything each year including trophy largies. The average bass fisherman fishing a tournament on Candlewood seems to be getting the same sized average number of bass per outing with about the same bag weight as are fishermen in other ponds so it may no longer be the premium bass lake in Ct. for the average bass fisherman though due to its size it would probably be every bass fisherman's first choice destination.
And one reason it is the number one destination, though the average bag is now more in line with other lakes, is the top finishers are still hanging bags in excess of 20 pounds per tournament and compare favorably with the trophy bags of many years ago. Some of those guys are right here on this site. So maybe the real answer for all of us average bass fisherman like me is just learn the lakes better and be a better fisherman.

Since N.Y. and N.J. have "catch and release" regulations that last until June 15, those guys ALL use Candlewood in their Spring tournys.
And Candy being a great fishery is much closer to a lot of N.Y. and N.J. clubs for a decent size Lake so you I think you would be right.

I will say this, most of the tournys during the Summer have only have a dozen or so boats so the number is deceiving, unlike the big Spring tournys that can bring in 50 or more boats are only a few.

With the weeds now gone and electronics (forward facing sonar) being so good no doubt the Bass fishing success will go way down to many good fishermen, I know my son and I are now having a tougher time breaking a 20 Lb. bag.

I wish Ct. would join N.Y. and N.J. and enforce catch and release until June 15 also.

Pat Callahan would love to halt ALL tournaments on Candlewood.
Having had a personal dealing with him I know he hates tournament fishermen.

Heres the deal from where I sit. The state requires us to hand over our tournament results. The state then determines if anything needs to be done to improve or offset the overall impact we have on the lakes bass populations. After 34 years fishing club level tournaments (at a total approaching 600 events participated in) to the best of my knowledge the state has determined that we have little impact on the fisheries. They have placed minor restrictions on 2 bodies of water that we frequently fish tournaments on. They restrict scheduling in the month of August on those lakes. Our tournament directors are on first name basis with the state biologist and tournament permitting officer. We adhere strictly to the biologists recommendations in order to be in good standing to receive further permits. If that were not so we would be disqualified from permits. Its a fact we place high consideration to.

Remember this point the state offers no warm water species restocking. We have essentially fished from the same stock of bass for 34 years. The results have improved on some waters , remained similar on others and seldom we have noticed a strong decline over time. Its natural for all lakes to have ebbs and flows which are dependent on weather, ecological and predation factors not related to fisherman. The alternate factors we cannot provide data for is why we govern our activty level according to state biologist recommendations based on the sciences of their studies.

The level of skin in the game begins with each boater is already required to purchase up to 7 yearly licences, insurances and registration permits to partake in legal first ammendment right to assemble events. We contribute at the point of registration payment to having open and free access to state parks for all residents. At the same time on occasion our ability to use those state parks as tournament sites is denied even after our permit was previously obtained at an earlier date. We should not be hindered by self imposition added unbearable restrictions on our events any more then we already freely and willfully subject to in the name of compliance. We are severely restricted on a majority of lakes by a lack of available parking which has left us unable to have tournaments at will on those lakes. Thats a recent restriction that was not present when I started in the clubs and thus has added pressure to the lakes with available parking. We did not create any impact. It was imposed on us by restrictions we had no say in.

I have strong opinions from having skin in the game and eyes on the water. IMO there is an example of a real negative impact which results in unhealthier habitat changes to the lakes in the state. The fishery is only as viable as the habitat present for all age classes to foster sustainable levels. The resulting negative effects are potentially much greater long term to the fishery quality than any damage caused by our tournaments. Under mamaged weed retardant and its over usage is the devil to habitat sustainability. The retardant is present in the lakes from runoff leeching of lawn chemicals and the acts of outright chemical application weed eradication without bias to species of weeds in the lakes. One needed change IMO is to require anyone with waterfront land to need permits for lawn spray chemicals subjected to fines for misconduct. Also needed is to use stronger restrictive targetted monitoring of weed eradication in the lakes by permits and compliances also subjected to fines. Its time to put the blame where it belongs. Its not the sportsman who need more restrictions. We are easy targets but who in the hell gave any citizen or citizen group the permission to reek potential long term harm to our public waters with retardants. Where is it written that our permission to partake in water recreation does not come with an equal voice in how the powers that be are allowed/required to manage for all citizens equal to thier desired participation. We need to prevent wasteful over destruction of the nursery system that sustains our warm water species at levels that afford recreation and table fare. Whats so hard about that? If we are not given a voice of equal participation then rescind our fees which we were unaware were used for lesser than what is the potential of properly mangaged waters. Managed for the entire chain that participates. Our fees pay for our voices. The land owners fees pay to the waterline. Public water rights began there and we deserve the best quality of fisheries we were lead to believe were determined by our fees.

The collective effects from over use of weed retardants by private citizens is visible in every lake I fished in the last 10 years and dating longer before I started to fully recognize the widening habit unfolding to make the lakes pristine of weeds. It would most certainly result in criminal charges for pollution/damage/possible health hazrds to public water systems if it was done with neglect by any corporate entity. The use of the Clean Water act would have the power to bring any corporate entity to bear the repair of any damages to habitat and water qualities. The outrage would be sufficient and seem justified but somehow the same result over time by unabated usage one lawn at a time remains common place??? Maybe what is needed is for anyone to be given a permit to spray the lawn they must have a sysytem to catch the leech before it enters the water. Why not? Our boating insurance requires high environmental damage coverga in to the hundreds of thouands. We spill a drop of gas and we are subject to violations and fines. Why are homeowners free from being responsible for what they add to the water ways either purposeful or by leech effects.

IMO the general consensus of the public involved at the point of contact is to not give 2 shits about the water quality short of threat from litigation. Laws with teeth are needed to recover healthy long term fisheries. Point and shoot the chemicals and move on is not the answer. The facts of studies that find measurable amounts of weed killer in chidren under the age of 10 isnt enough proof. My bitch is that I spent 35 years of my life with a high level of participation in a small state and have watched the speed up of the decimation of habitat enough to make me forego my participation and have weened my interest at the time being to making stump level declarations/observations. Thanks to Mitch for tolerating my bitch session.


I would love for someone to make my bitch into a petition and publish it for gaining signatures for these isssues which the state had been made aware of but fails to deal with. Or at least forwrad it to the state officials who frequent on this site.