# cca polygraph test



## ztmleafar (Aug 6, 2006)

As some of you may know, Steve Chavez of Harlingen, recently caught a tagged redfish while night fishing near Green Island. It was the first one caught from this area and he was, as you might guess, quite excited.

 After contacting Jim's Pier and registering his catch, he proceeded to the next step of contacting CCA. They advised he should come to Houston on Monday, June 9 for a polygraph test. He paid his own transportation to Houston for the polygraph test, which is customary. However, on arrival at the office, things went very bad for him. 
 It appears the company used by CCA for the polygraph testing, Boyd and Company, utilize all means to discredit the potential winner. Boyd and Company specialize in polygraphing child sexual predators and include those tactics in trying to intimidate potential winners.
 From the onset, Steve was pummeled with questions regarding drugs, his sexual habits, his alcoholic consumption rate, etc. And he was asked all questions a second time in an effort to disprove his first answer. 
 The guy who administered the test was described as having an attitude...sort of like he had a fight with his wife before coming to the poly session and wanted to take it out on someone. 
 As an example, he advised Steve that no body movement could be tolerated during the session. And when he did move once, was told by the Boyd employee, 'which part of the question did you not understand'? Steve felt he was trying to be provoked. 
 Another example questioned who netted the fish, he or his fishing partner. CCA officials admitted their rules are sort of unclear on this, but the manner in which the question was asked will make you sound guilty of lying, no matter how you answer it.
 Well, long story short, the Boyd employee left him in an interrogation room while the results were interpreted and returned to say, 'I flunked you.' That is all..good bye. 
 The CCA's position on this was that they have had complaints on Boyd and Company, but have used them exclusively for a number of years. However, the lady in charge of CCA did advise of complaints against one individual who has administered the tests !!
 They advised he could take the test again, but at his cost for transportation and the cost of the polygraph. That seemed a little strange that they would acknowledge a problem with the testing company, then allow him to re-take the test. One catch is, CCA can only name the polygraph company. It would seem to be in their interest to be above-board and let an impartial polygraph company be involved, similar to what is done in the legal field with arbitration.
 Steve intends to follow through with taking the test again. But as you might imagine, is quite sour toward CCA. Come to think of it, I would be intimidated by such an array of questions designed to prove you lied. It does not bode well for CCA to ask for public donations to their cause, then enter their contest in which the first assumption they make is, you are a liar...now prove to us that you are not a liar.
 Those of you that know Steve know he is a 'stand up' guy. He and his family have owned and operated their family business, JC Mini Mart, for many years and did not credit it's success to cheating folks. Steve lives by the same rules. 
 Until CCA clears up this mess, they can forget about my support


----------



## Bukmstr (Nov 12, 2004)

*Wow!*

What a crock of poop.......I wish him the best. Please keep us posted on the outcome!


----------



## raz1056 (Jun 16, 2006)

I'm with you! The CCA is suppose to help encourage sportmanship and they have a company that the donors pay for to make you feel like a criminal-they don't have to wait for my dues.


----------



## D.L. (Sep 13, 2007)

Another strike!


----------



## BOBBYG (Nov 17, 2006)

I think everyone should boycott all C.C.A. stuff until this is cleared up and the man is awarded his prize!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Just my .02!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1


----------



## jeeper2 (Mar 24, 2008)

Ditto here. Unbelievable. I was going to go for it, I will use my cash instead to buy gas for another fishing trip. Until I hear this has been resolved with apologies AND the prize, CCA can forget it.


----------



## Sweet Action (Mar 27, 2008)

Dude I'm sorry but thats ****ed up!!! That makes me angry towards cca, I can't believe they would be like that.


----------



## chickenboy (May 5, 2008)

was steve registered at the time he caught the red?


----------



## Javadrinker (Feb 13, 2008)

sits and listens


----------



## POCO LOCO (Mar 7, 2005)

I would like to set in on the interview and the graph. This would make for a very good story for one of the Mag.'s. I had been involved in ploygraph / interview and interigation for years. I have found the ploygraph is an only as good as the ploygraph operator's opinion? Keep us informed, Regards Donk


----------



## Javadrinker (Feb 13, 2008)

ztmleafar, thanks for reporting this. I'm sorry to hear taht Mr. Chavez was treated this way. I hope that he gets this resolved in his favor, and if it is that he is reimbursed by CCA.


----------



## Silverspoon (Jun 1, 2005)

Perhaps one of the moderators here can make this a sticky so we can all follow this event more closely. 

I for one am somewhat shocked and those questions seem way out line. They should be able to establish a baseline with much less intrusive questions.


----------



## Troutter1 (Jul 5, 2007)

ztmleafar said:


> As some of you may know, Steve Chavez of Harlingen, recently caught a tagged redfish while night fishing near Green Island. It was the first one caught from this area and he was, as you might guess, quite excited.
> 
> After contacting Jim's Pier and registering his catch, he proceeded to the next step of contacting CCA. They advised he should come to Houston on Monday, June 9 for a polygraph test. He paid his own transportation to Houston for the polygraph test, which is customary. However, on arrival at the office, things went very bad for him.
> It appears the company used by CCA for the polygraph testing, Boyd and Company, utilize all means to discredit the potential winner. Boyd and Company specialize in polygraphing child sexual predators and include those tactics in trying to intimidate potential winners.
> ...


I can not believe what i just read!! What is CCA thinking ? And what does his sexual habits, Alcolic consumption rate or anything of the kind have to do with catching a fish????


----------



## kraymond (Aug 12, 2005)

I think this should be made more public than just this forum. Maybe someone with connections to the media could make some noise. What about our local news reporters like the defenders, Akins army or someone similar? In my profession reputation is everything and anything that were to jeopardize it from someone else's action I would consider slanderous and consider legal action. Maybe he should talk to a lawyer, I would.

I wish him luck, Ken


----------



## famousunknown (Aug 13, 2005)

Two questions among many that come to mind are 1) did a CCA rep witness the test and 2) was the test videotaped.

Assuming that all facts were as posted, if a CCA rep was present one would think he would have realized it had progressed to the point of being out of hand and would have stopped it. 

If the test was videotaped it should clear up any doubt as to what happened during the test.

Surely there will be a response to this by CCA.


----------



## reelthreat (Jul 11, 2006)

I do not condone the actions of this employee... but there are many people each year who try to cheat the CCA and WE THE MEMBERS AND CONTESTANTS of cca out of prizes. I am not saying the guy cheated, what I am saying is CCA has to cover all bases to avoid this.

If he has nothing to hide and gets a fair test he should pass with flying colors.


----------



## FISHNNUTT (Oct 27, 2007)

Well cca just lost 4 new members was going to sign up myself
and the kids today!! Glad I read this first, this is stupid using
a polygraph co geared to question scumbags. Did I read right
that he will have to pay for the second test himself ? If so I know
several independent polygraph operators that might help out if the
cca would approve of them.Other wise I would be willing to donate my
former cca money to help cover his cost !!! I've taken several polygraphs
for bass tournaments but none of the operators were a**holes like this 
one sounds like!! In case you haven't noticed this really **ss's me off!!
( sorry for the rant)
Everybody else have a nice day


----------



## topwater kid (Dec 14, 2006)

what does his sexual habits and alcohol consumption matter about fishing a tournament. I was fixing to enter the star tourney but not now. CCA you just lost my money and support for you.


----------



## SHOALWATER TV (Apr 8, 2008)

reelthreat said:


> I do not condone the actions of this employee... but there are many people each year who try to cheat the CCA and WE THE MEMBERS AND CONTESTANTS of cca out of prizes. I am not saying the guy cheated, what I am saying is CCA has to cover all bases to avoid this.
> 
> If he has nothing to hide and gets a fair test he should pass with flying colors.


I agree,but the idea that CCA knew there was a problem with this guy already is whats bugging me, why would they let him conduct the poly? i mean it's a huge prize wouldn't you want the best person possible? sounds cheezy to me.


----------



## Eric H (May 16, 2007)

GOOD LUCK STEVE, YOU HANG IN THERE WE GOT YOUR BACK, FISHERMAN STICK TOGETHER !!!!!!! KEEP US POSTED.


----------



## Snap Draggin (Nov 11, 2007)

All I can say is WOW!! Let's see the cheerleaders come out in their defense now!

Sorry to know of your friend's misfortune and best of luck. Thank you for the information.


----------



## deerspotter (Apr 8, 2008)

CCA has used these tactics and has taken stances during the years that should prove to them why their enrollment is down. If just more people would throw their stories out there less would throw their money down the drain. Everybody thinks CCA has done SO MUCH GOOD(they have done some) but believe you me they are out to take the money and run. I have had issues in the past that needed some resolve and no one has returned calls or e-mails. We as a company used to pay for our fishing employees entry. Not in the last 5 years. We have stopped spending money for 3 tables and buying 2-5K worth of auction items. My boss still goes but spends his own money. They will NEVER get a company check or credit card again,EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Stuart (May 21, 2004)

topwater kid said:


> what does his sexual habits and alcohol consumption matter about fishing a tournament. I was fixing to enter the star tourney but not now. CCA you just lost my money and support for you.


Not defending what happened, but they can't just ask any old question. I mean they can't ask you if you like mexican food or not, or whether you floss your teeth at night. They have to ask you questions to which you would have a reason to want to lie about. Now maybe they could have asked some different ones, but ................................


----------



## mdmerlin (Oct 10, 2006)

reelthreat said:


> I do not condone the actions of this employee... but there are many people each year who try to cheat the CCA and WE THE MEMBERS AND CONTESTANTS of cca out of prizes. I am not saying the guy cheated, what I am saying is CCA has to cover all bases to avoid this.
> 
> If he has nothing to hide and gets a fair test he should pass with flying colors.


Reelthreat, I agree with you on the unfortunate number of cheaters there are out there. Howerever, there are better, more consistent and professional ways to cover that ground, some of it has already been mentioned....multiple blind draw for which company performs a poly, elimination of any poly interpretors the client (CCA) chooses to omit (due to complaints, for example).

Good suggestion about getting some media coverage on this. Got get 'em Dolchi baby!

Maybe we should start waterboarding the suckers?

Just my 2 cents. Re-thinking about joining CCA next year.


----------



## Electric Mullet (Mar 18, 2008)

Yep, I don't think I'll be joining any time soon....I wonder if those fourteen Texas Recreational Anglers that started CCA to fight commercial fishing back in the late 70's know what their organization has become?


----------



## chickenboy (May 5, 2008)

Troutter1 said:


> I can not believe what i just read!! What is CCA thinking ? And what does his sexual habits, Alcolic consumption rate or anything of the kind have to do with catching a fish????


I can't believe you asked that question. If you don't know by now.......


----------



## Electric Mullet (Mar 18, 2008)

Stuart said:


> Not defending what happened, but they can't just ask any old question. I mean they can't ask you if you like mexican food or not, or whether you floss your teeth at night. They have to ask you questions to which you would have a reason to want to lie about. Now maybe they could have asked some different ones, but ................................


Stuart,

I've taken polygraphs for centain things I've worked on....There is no to ask such questions to establish if you are a liar.


----------



## SHOALWATER TV (Apr 8, 2008)

Electric Mullet said:


> Yep, I don't think I'll be joining any time soon....I wonder if those fourteen Texas Recreational Anglers that started CCA to fight commercial fishing back in the late 70's know what their organization has become?


Maybe? but all they can do is listen.The new CCA guys are all about the $$$$$.


----------



## jhbarc (Aug 28, 2006)

No more money from me. What does CCA gain from asking a persons sexual preferance or drinking habbits or WHO NETTED THE FISH . I am all for preventing cheating but this is outrageous. If they stoop to level of trying to disqualify any one for having there partner net the fish or somebodies drinking habbits it's over.


----------



## BATWING (May 9, 2008)

I was going to join today after seeing the pics of the other guy that caught the tagged red the other day. I think i will just keep my $40 and replenish my tackle box.


----------



## jhbarc (Aug 28, 2006)

The bottom line is the CCA is responsible for who they contract with to perform the polygraph. Going by the response given by th CCA rep referanced in the original post it seems obvious that the polygrapher got the desired result.


----------



## mud duck (Apr 24, 2007)

*cca*

This same thing happened to a man in *Bridge City Tex. He ended up having to hire an lawyer but he did get his boat. He owns the Bridge City bait shop on cow bayou.*


----------



## redfish bayrat (Feb 17, 2006)

Haven't been a member since it was GCCA. Don't think I am going to join now. Was planning on joining and entering the STAR because I hoped to have more fishing time this summer. Now I'll just save some money for a 1/2 tank of gas.


----------



## SHOALWATER TV (Apr 8, 2008)

Hey who is Max?.......


----------



## ccrocker1313 (Oct 23, 2005)

I'm asked to support CCA each year this I have taken my time to send money . I think it was a good move not to..They didn't get my 2 cents this year..that's my 2 cents... *What are they thinkin ?????? CCA Needs help.....*


----------



## Brine Jake (Aug 12, 2005)

So far, all we have is a third party report of what another guy said someone did to him, along with a character reference. Assuming there is at least some truth in it, I'll play:

This particular quote from the examiner, if it happened, troubles me the most:
* "I flunked you."*
Normally, "You passed" or "You failed" the test is the result.
This quote, if true, implies or at least suggests that the examiner 
admitted tacitly that he made a judgment call based on inconclusive test results.

On a different note, Does anyone know an information source for an objective opinion of the *impact* (not the list of projects and acitvities) of CCA on Texas coastal fishing for the past decade?
My neutral impression is that it has increased both the numbers of fish and the amount of fishing pressure.



ztmleafar said:


> As some of you may know, Steve Chavez of Harlingen, recently caught a tagged redfish while night fishing near Green Island. It was the first one caught from this area and he was, as you might guess, quite excited.
> 
> After contacting Jim's Pier and registering his catch, he proceeded to the next step of contacting CCA. They advised he should come to Houston on Monday, June 9 for a polygraph test. He paid his own transportation to Houston for the polygraph test, which is customary. However, on arrival at the office, things went very bad for him.
> It appears the company used by CCA for the polygraph testing, Boyd and Company, utilize all means to discredit the potential winner. Boyd and Company specialize in polygraphing child sexual predators and include those tactics in trying to intimidate potential winners.
> ...


----------



## Third Wave (May 24, 2004)

So what was the answer when they asked about catching the fish?
Did they fail him on that particular question?
That would be important to know.


----------



## Big Willy (Jun 20, 2007)

*Come ON!*

We have registered our entire family every year for the past couple years but certainly won't this year until this is resolved. They will lose 7 individual registrations. Seems ridiculous that they would subject someone to those types of questions! CCA fix your screw up and prove that you can do the right thing!


----------



## Stuart (May 21, 2004)

Electric Mullet said:


> Stuart,
> 
> I've taken polygraphs for centain things I've worked on....There is no to ask such questions to establish if you are a liar.


I've taken them too and they always ask some pretty tuff questions. Maybe they have different levels of certainty they test for. Again, they have to ask you questions that you might want to lie about otherwise what is the use? The easy questions like your name, address etc.. are to form the baseline.


----------



## reelthreat (Jul 11, 2006)

Everyone.... this is all hear say. I am going to wait to see what happens and then pass judgement on CCA (I personnally think they do more good than harm).

But I for sure am going to enter every year because you know what... THEY GIVE OUT A TON OF BOATS AND SCHOLARSHIPS TO HONEST WINNERS EACH YEAR.


As said earlier if he has nothing to hide he will get his truck and boat.


----------



## Brine Jake (Aug 12, 2005)

P.S. Boyd Smith and Associates is not answering its telephone this afternoon.


----------



## The Machine (Jun 4, 2007)

I know there have been threads down on the CCA and I couldn't understand why now there is my answer. I like to compete and always look forward to joining, cause you never know, I have the Summers off, I coach. I thought they would ask you like what bait did you use, was anyone with you stuff like that, Not treat you like criminal. as I read the article, I couldn't believe what I was reading, what hope does one have when they treat you like that. I know there was a poll to an alternate tour. to the cca, if this gentleman does not get his prize now is good than ever. Does prejudice has anything to do with this. I feel foe the winner imagine the roller coaster of emotions. When I catch one I want someone from this site to join me to record the process. I need a witness.


----------



## The Machine (Jun 4, 2007)

I just read reelthreats post and he is right, what quetions do they ask the teens and kids?


----------



## chicapesca (Jun 7, 2004)

I would like to hear from Steve Chavez on this first hand Rafael.


----------



## z-cat (Jul 24, 2007)

First, let me say that I am completely dissapointed with CCA's recent stance on the red snapper fishery. As a blue water fisherman, out of Port Mansfied, I know there is not a problem with the snapper fishery, other than the commercial quotas and the shrimping bycatch. I had already signed up, in advance for this years membership, but will not be renewing next year. 

Second, I too, am from the Valley(if it makes any difference).

In 2006, I won a boat, for the biggest Ling division. I went to Houston, at my own expense, and took a polygraph, at the same office in question. Never, was I asked about drug/alcohol use, or any kind of sexual preference questions. It was a standard test, with questions to establish baseline, and of course, questions about the ling. The people there were extremely friendly, and the man administering the test, was polite, and very professional. Before the test, he explained how it worked, and described the type of questions he'd be asking.

I am in no means trying to defend CCA, in fact I'm quite upset with them right now. What I'm trying to say, is that the polygraph test, and the people giving it, really don't match the story in this thread.

Like I've said all along, if you have nothing to hide, everything will be fine.
There are 2 sides to every story as well.

And one final time, I am VERY upset with CCA's stance on the red snapper fishery.


----------



## Snagged (May 21, 2004)

I guess Russel Nelson had something to do with the sex questions, after all that is what he was fired over.


----------



## The Machine (Jun 4, 2007)

Another wow! Next time let the person that caught the dadgum fish do the dadgum post, Now I'm ****** off! I'm going to eat my ceviche that I prepared last night, a good one I might add.


----------



## Third Wave (May 24, 2004)

I believe everything I read on the internet.

Mostly stuff about global warming.


----------



## CoastalOutfitters (Aug 20, 2004)

* IF,* he did legally/legitimatly catch it , then he can pay to take another polygraph .

Over a truck and boat, I hope he would, it is certanly worth the effort and CCA should pay him back for it if he passes.

*IF, *he refuses to take another and just whines, too bad.............put up or shut up.

anything else is pure speculation and hearsay.


----------



## chicapesca (Jun 7, 2004)

Snagged said:


> I guess Russel Nelson had something to do with the sex questions, after all that is what he was fired over.


You might want to check your facts on that Jerry. His employees had sex on their computers and he resigned. This I found out from doing my homework on the guy.


----------



## phi471 (Feb 14, 2006)

*Question in general with STAR*

If you catch a winning fish but someone else nets or gaffs the fish, will it still count? Or do you have to fight and land the fish all yourself? Sort of a gray area I guess, probably should read the fine print.


----------



## chicapesca (Jun 7, 2004)

You have to set the hook and fight the fish. You can have someone help you by netting or gaffing the fish, but they cannot touch your fishing rod. This is from CCA S.T.A.R.


----------



## luna nueva (Jul 4, 2007)

wow!


----------



## RenFish (Sep 17, 2007)

Some very good points made. Not trying to discredit someone I don't know but, if I failed the test, I would sure as heck try to blame the person or company that adminstered it. As many have said, we only have one side of the story (third hand). I would also like to know if someone from CCA was present or get an unbiased account of the test. 

I do think some tough questions have to be asked to create a baseline but it should be handled professionally. Just ask the questions and determine if they are truthful. Don't assume a liar and make them prove otherwise.

If he did legally catch the fish, he will get his truck/boat. The truth will come out one way or another.


----------



## fishnstringer (Oct 20, 2006)

Ztmleafar, nor any of us were there. I don't enter Star, but if I did I would expect CCA to do every thing in their power to keep some dishonest person from taking a prize they cheated to acquire. Fishermen are generally great people, but I once worked, fished, hunted, and socialized with guy for 8 1/2 years before we put a business together, and until then I had no ideal he lived a complete lie. The experience was very expensive and debilitating.
CCA's rules are probably very well spelled out, and it's like the Marine Corps some of us were in, it's all voluntary. You either play by their rules or don't get in it. If Boyd & Co. let a fraud slip through and take someone else's prize, they are probably going to lose their contract, which they well should. If they have a sorry employee, they need to purge him, but taking a lie detector test with anyone is no picnic. I've only done it once, as a kid when a fellow employee stole a customer's purse, and it was not fun then, as I'm sure it never is. I totally disrespect a third party opinion, and never try to take a position on the information, especially involving something this sensitive and involving someone else's honesty.
CCA, or GCCA to me, is a great organization and has and will continue to improve or protect the resource, regardless of how this matter works out. I once served on the state board for several years, but if I were a current member of the state board, I think I would want to work toward either finding another way to prove a person worthy of the prize at hand or discontinue the Star tournament. The problem for both CCA and the person catching the tagged fish is there is so much money and responsibility at risk. Money being the total funds accumulated from the contest, and the prize money, due any one person, and responsibility being CCA's to all entrants to the tournament and each entrant's responsibility to be honest. Only a few days ago a story was posted here where another party caught a tagged redfish, but had not entered Star. He was honest enough to admit he had made a mistake by not joining Star. Not everyone is that honest, a lot of us would have tried to join after we caught the fish and then registered our fish, or find a buddy who was entered who would say he caught the fish and split the take with him. There's a lot of money at stake, and my experience is few of us have the balls to deal with honestly. Fortunately, I have not been put to that test! I hope I pass if the situation ever arises, and I hope all of you do too, but it's incumbent upon CCA and Boyd and Co. to make sure we do, and that's the problem here. Most of you posting here, are making harsh statements, with very little knowledge or understanding, and don't respect the responsibility CCA and Boyd and Co. have in this matter. Have a great day and support CCA for CCA supports you and our resource! :smile:


----------



## Electric Mullet (Mar 18, 2008)

chicapesca said:


> I would like to hear from Steve Chavez on this first hand Rafael.


I'm with chicapesca on this...Is Steve Chavez a 2cooler and if so can he shed some first hand light on the subject?


----------



## Wading Mark (Apr 21, 2005)

Completely unprofessional. I'll tear up my STAR card if this is true. I don't need the money bad enough to support such conduct.


----------



## Snagged (May 21, 2004)

Official suspended for looking at ****
[SOUTH PINELLAS Edition]

St. Petersburg Times - St. Petersburg, Fla.
Author:JULIE HAUSERMANDate:Aug 31, 2000Start Page:5.BText Word Count:575
*Document Text*
​One of the state's top wildlife enforcers is on 10-day suspension for looking at hard-core pornography on his state computer - including Internet sites that feature child pornography.

The suspension marks the second time a top official has been disciplined in an continuing investigation into pornography surfing at the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission.

The agency's deputy general counsel, Charles Shelfer, who goes by the e-mail name "LawSquid," was suspended Aug. 22 and returns to his $63,864-a-year job Sept. 5.

His suspension notice noted that Shelfer "has admitted his conduct and offered a sincere apology."

The state's top fishing regulator, Marine Fisheries director Russell Nelson, resigned from his $88,988-a-year job July 25 after computer records revealed he visited sites like "Sexhound" and "VirtuaGirl," which advertises "lovely girls living and stripping on your desk top while you work."

In February, hundreds of employees at the wildlife commission and the Department of Environmental Protection got an e-mail that had more than 126 pornographic attachments, including child pornography. The e-mail looked like it had been sent by fisheries director Nelson, a charge he denies.

The wildlife commission called in the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to see if someone was tampering with the agency's computers.

Further investigation revealed that Nelson had been looking at **** sites at work. Officials say he admitted to looking at **** sites, but said he didn't send the e-mail to hundreds of workers.

Two other agency officials - fisheries management analysts Jorge Laguna and William Teehan - also are being investigated for allegedly looking at pornography on state computers.

The FDLE also is investigating whether public records have been destroyed at the wildlife commission, a charge that a commercial fishing group made in a lawsuit it filed against the state.

The scandal went public in July when a computer consultant hired by commercial fishermen found "cookies" - Internet markers that show which sites a computer user has visited - that revealed the on-the- job **** surfing.

The consultant, Anton Hajducek, also found racy e-mails sent office to office, including one that Shelfer sent about the demise of his car, the "Babemobile."

"Several automotive and erotica museums have contacted me about acquiring the backseat," Shelfer wrote.

Shelfer told the wildlife commission's inspector general that he is sorry.

"I know what I did was wrong, and that to the extent this becomes public, it will bring dishonor to myself and my family and to this agency," he is quoted in the investigative report. "I am deeply sorry for that and I wish it hadn't happened and it won't happen in the future."

Shelfer did not return a phone call from the St. Petersburg Times seeking comment.

Last month, the wildlife commission's executive director, Allan Egbert, said the case is part of a "smear campaign" that some commercial fishermen are waging against state regulators.

In an affidavit, the commercial fishermen's computer expert alleges that the agency deliberately and systematically deleted state records, including wiping out the entire hard drive used by commission head Egbert.

"Actually, a couple of the hard drives were wiped by FDLE technicians to remove the pornographic pictures sent on Feb. 22," the wildlife commission said in a July statement. "FDLE believed it would have been illegal to return the hard drives to the (wildlife commission) without removing the offensive pictures. Others were wiped by FWC technicians to prevent re-creation of certain legally deleted files which are exempt from public records requests."

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.

*Abstract* (Document Summary)
​The agency's deputy general counsel, Charles Shelfer, who goes by the e-mail name "LawSquid," was suspended Aug. 22 and returns to his $63,864-a-year job Sept. 5.

The consultant, Anton Hajducek, also found racy e-mails sent office to office, including one that Shelfer sent about the demise of his car, the "Babemobile."

"Actually, a couple of the hard drives were wiped by FDLE technicians to remove the pornographic pictures sent on Feb. 22," the wildlife commission said in a July statement. "FDLE believed it would have been illegal to return the hard drives to the (wildlife commission) without removing the offensive pictures. Others were wiped by FWC technicians to prevent re-creation of certain legally deleted files which are exempt from public records requests."

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.


----------



## Snagged (May 21, 2004)

St. Petersburg Times - St. Petersburg, Fla.

Author:

LUCY MORGAN

Date:

Jul 25, 2000

Start Page:

5.B

Text Word Count:

263









 *Document Text*









_Copyright Times Publishing Co. Jul 25, 2000_

A Division of Marine Fisheries inquiry finds he used his state- owned computer to access pornographic sites.

Russell Nelson, director of the state's Division of Marine Fisheries, resigned Monday after state officials concluded that he had used his state-owned computer to reach pornographic Internet sites.

Jim Knight, inspector general for the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, said Nelson did not violate any law but did violate agency policy.

Allan L. Egbert, director of the state agency, said he accepted Nelson's resignation from his $88,988-a-year job effective Monday.

"This was an extremely difficult decision but one that brings to a close a painful episode in the administration of this very young agency," Egbert said.

Egbert said Nelson's contributions to managing Florida's marine resources were "of the highest caliber" but said his departure is in the "best interest of preserving public confidence in this agency."

Egbert said the agency will reinforce and clarify its policies.

Computer records at the state agency show that Nelson visited such sites as "Sexswap," "PornTrack,""Sexhound" and "VirtuaGirl," which advertises "lovely girls living and stripping on your desktop while you work."

Accusations against Nelson and other state conservation employees surfaced in a lawsuit filed by commercial fishermen against the state agency over a net ban imposed on fishermen.

The fishermen also say various state officials, including Egbert, destroyed files on their computer hard drives after the fishermenrequested them. Egbert denied having anything done to his computer hard drive.

Kenneth Haddad, chief of the Florida Marine Research Institute for the past seven years, will serve as the division's new interim director.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission. 









 *Abstract* (Document Summary)









[Allan L. Egbert] said [Russell Nelson]'s contributions to managing Florida's marine resources were "of the highest caliber" but said his departure is in the "best interest of preserving public confidence in this agency."

The fishermen also say various state officials, including Egbert, destroyed files on their computer hard drives after the fishermenrequested them. Egbert denied having anything done to his computer hard drive.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.


----------



## Snagged (May 21, 2004)

Officials catching Web **** viewers
[SOUTH PINELLAS Edition]

St. Petersburg Times - St. Petersburg, Fla.
Author:SHARON TUBBSDate:Aug 13, 2000Start Page:1.ASection:NATIONALText Word Count:1564
*Document Text*
​Government workers who access illicit Web sites on the job are being punished - some more than others.

Bill Horne's voice is low and uneven. All day long Clearwater's interim city manager has tried to avoid this moment.

Yes, he has the list of names a reporter requested. Most aren't recognizable to the general public: a summer intern, a guy in the finance department and two men who don't even work for the city anymore. The fifth, though, is a heavy hitter in City Hall.

Over the past four years, they were caught looking at adult Web sites on the Internet at work. But they did it just once, Horne said, so he's reluctant to release their identities.

"I do have a lot of sensitivity to how this is portrayed in the media," Horne says. These men, he says, are "good employees."

Horne is one of a number of officials in the Tampa Bay area - and across the nation forced to deal with the same touchy question:

With the Internet's growing prevalence, how should government agencies discipline employees caught using their office computers to eyeball naked and scantly clad women?

Several employees in the White House were reprimanded and one was suspended without pay last year for downloading pornography from the Internet, a White House spokesman confirmed last week.

Closer to home, supervisors in St. Petersburg and Citrus County have reacted swiftly, delivering pink slips or unpaid suspensions, while higher-ups in Clearwater have taken a more genteel approach.

"It's very informal," Horne said of the process in his city. "We have had no basis to be punitive with our people."

At the state and municipal levels, even within the law enforcement community, government employees including department heads have been caught peeking at **** while working at public expense.

"I know we've had some cases," said Hillsborough Deputy County Administrator Pat Bean. She didn't know, however, how many employees had been disciplined. "There could be a whole bunch," she said. "There could be two or three in every department that I don't know about."

Besides Hillsborough, governments in Citrus, Hernando, Pasco and Pinellas forbid workers from using the Internet for anything but business. Some supervisors concede they turn their heads when employees violate the policies by shopping or checking their stocks on line. But they draw the line at adult entertainment.

"Personally, I consider it more serious," said St. Petersburg auditor Steven Smith, whose office periodically reviews employee computer records for pornographic activity.

Most abusers are men. So women could become uncomfortable if they spot risque pictures on a co-worker's computer screen.

"Any company that has a hostile work environment has to be concerned about litigation," Smith said.

Private companies nationwide are grappling with the same problem. For instance, Compaq Computer Corp. fired 20 employees after bosses learned they had accessed sexually explicit Web sites, a March Dallas Morning News article said. And the New York Times Co. fired 23 employees in a central processing center in Norfolk, Va., for distributing pornographic images via e-mail, a December New York Times article said.

But when employees paid by tax dollars start looking at **** in the office, the stakes are higher, government officials say.

"They hold positions of public trust," said Pinellas County Sheriff Everett Rice, who dealt with his first **** viewer this year. "We don't expect them to be misusing public resources."

St. Petersburg Mayor David Fischer felt much the same. "The fact that we are a government, we are in a fishbowl category," Fischer said.

In the past year and a half, at least four St. Petersburg employees were disciplined for using city computers to look at ****. Two of them, security guards, were fired. A security supervisor with an "exemplary" work history was suspended for 30 days without pay, personnel records show.

The fourth was Joseph Arenas, the manager of energy and technology and a city employee for 23 years.

When asked what happened, the 65-year-old expressed remorse. "I had access to the Internet and started to explore it," Arenas said, adding he did it out of curiosity.

"It was a weak moment and I fell into it," he said.

Arenas periodically looked at sites over three months before stopping in December, he said.

"I did it for a while and I realized how sinful it was," he said. "The Lord gave me the grace to stop and I stopped."

Smith's audit department uncovered Arenas' former activity, and days before he was set to retire, city bosses confronted Arenas. A scathing reprimand was placed in his file.

"This violation of the city policy is a serious offense and were it not for your imminent retirement, you would be subject to severe discipline up to and including termination," City Administrator Tish Elston wrote on March 29.

Arenas retired from his $61,000-a-year job two days later, city records show.

He didn't realize the city could track his Internet activities, especially those from months gone by. With all the technology and computer know-how available today, though, it wasn't difficult.

"We actually track everything," said Muslim Gadiwalla, the city's chief information officer. St. Petersburg has a special computer server that logs every Web site accessed by employees. Smith's audit department then reviews reports detailing Internet activity.

Employees also have been caught by co-workers who glimpsed pornographic pic-tures on a computer screen. The co-worker told the boss, who told the computer department, which gathered evidence.

That's what happened in Citrus County, where an 11-year employee had been granted Internet access just a few hours before a co-worker caught him. He was forced to resign in May, said Dwight Small, director of the county's human resources department.

Then there's the case of Pinellas County Sheriff's Sgt. David McKenzie. On several days in May, McKenzie looked at pornographic Web sites on his office computer in Dunedin, records revealed. One day, he inadvertently printed a photo sheet with thumbnail pictures of women engaged in sexual acts. A shocked female co-worker watched as the printout scrolled from the office printer, followed later by the naughty tale "Crystal's Fantasy."

Sheriff's investigators reviewed the matter, interviewing workers with a court reporter on hand to take sworn statements. Women in the office were asked if they were offended by the material, if McKenzie had apologized to them and if they felt sheriff's officials handled the matter properly.

When interviewing McKenzie, an investigator pulled out the thumbnails. Presenting it to McKenzie like a lawyer setting up the accused at trial, the investigator said, "Let me show this to you and see if you're familiar with this."

McKenzie answered, "Yes."

He was suspended for two days without pay.

In Tallahassee, an intense investigation began when someone sent out a pornographic e-mail to state employees under Russell Nelson's name. Nelson, then director of the Division of Marine Fisheries, hadn't sent the e-mail.

But in the course of the investigation, officials discovered he had visited **** sites while at work. Nelson admitted this when questioned, said James T. Knight III, inspector general for the Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission.

"If he was bored or under stress, he would surf for a couple hours," Knight said.

Nelson resigned last month under duress.

"The fact that Dr. Nelson was the head of the division, that was certainly a first," said Henry Cabbage, public information director for the commission.

In Clearwater, special computer software flags an array of inappropriate sites, even venues such as CNN, and computer network specialists alert supervisors when a site containing adult content is accessed.

In June 1999, a computer specialist noticed that a computer in City Hall had been used to peruse adult Web sites.

Word got to Horne, now the interim city manager, and he approached the guilty party. It was Bob Keller, Clearwater's assistant city manager of economic development.

Keller said he was embarrassed throughout the five-minute conversation as Horne told him the sites were against policy. "Yeah, I felt awkward," Keller said.

But there was nothing lewd about what he did, Keller said. The sites may have contained adult content, but were not pornographic, he explained.

"What I logged onto was a commercial site where you could buy sexy lingerie and clothing," Keller told the Times. "So it was not pornography, but it comes up as (an inappropriate) site."

Keller said he was buying the lingerie for his wife and shopped a few different sites. He knew of Clearwater's Internet policy, but, at the time, did not think he was doing anything wrong.

"Where I made a mistake was not associating what I was doing with something that was objectionable," Keller said. "Frankly, it just didn't occur to me."

Keller, like others approached about accessing inappropriate sites, was warned not to do it again, Horne said. In most cases, supervisors made no written record of the verbal reprimands, and nothing was put in the employees' personnel files.

"In our case, the individuals heeded the warning and that was the end of it," Horne said.

Clearwater treats Internet **** violations the same as many other violations, he said. Officials have no rigid plan of discipline; instead employees are punished based on the manager's discretion, which takes into account a number of factors. One is whether it's a first-time offense.

Employees make mistakes, Horne said. "They may not remember what the policies are or whatever."

- Times researcher Caryn Baird contributed to this report.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.

*Abstract* (Document Summary)
​Then there's the case of Pinellas County Sheriff's Sgt. David McKenzie. On several days in May, McKenzie looked at pornographic Web sites on his office computer in Dunedin, records revealed. One day, he inadvertently printed a photo sheet with thumbnail pictures of women engaged in sexual acts. A shocked female co-worker watched as the printout scrolled from the office printer, followed later by the naughty tale "Crystal's Fantasy."

[Bob Keller] said he was embarrassed throughout the five-minute conversation as [Bill Horne] told him the sites were against policy. "Yeah, I felt awkward," Keller said.

Keller, like others approached about accessing inappropriate sites, was warned not to do it again, Horne said. In most cases, supervisors made no written record of the verbal reprimands, and nothing was put in the employees' personnel files.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.


----------



## iridered2003 (Dec 12, 2005)

*same old story different year*



ztmleafar said:


> As some of you may know, Steve Chavez of Harlingen, recently caught a tagged redfish while night fishing near Green Island. It was the first one caught from this area and he was, as you might guess, quite excited.
> 
> After contacting Jim's Pier and registering his catch, he proceeded to the next step of contacting CCA. They advised he should come to Houston on Monday, June 9 for a polygraph test. He paid his own transportation to Houston for the polygraph test, which is customary. However, on arrival at the office, things went very bad for him.
> It appears the company used by CCA for the polygraph testing, Boyd and Company, utilize all means to discredit the potential winner. Boyd and Company specialize in polygraphing child sexual predators and include those tactics in trying to intimidate potential winners.
> ...


cca/star did the same thing to me in the 2005 star. i caught,faught and boated the biggest ling and held the star board for 87 days and was shot down by their buddys at BODY,SMITH and assc. search this forum and i'm sure it will come up.i did not or had no reason to lie. we asked to have everyone on the boat the day i caught the ling polygraphed at our expense and bill kenney said he couldn't do NOTHING for us even if he was standing there on the boat when i caught the ling. i hate the cca for what they do to the people the support and line their pockets! i fish with one of the best and most honest people i have ever met as far as i'm concerned and just because they and the cca had some beef before,BILL KENNEY of the CCA/STAR bent me over like a bowed over fishing rod and put it to me just like they did this guy. all you guys and ladys that feel so strong about the cca/star, wait till you are put through the samething,then i bet your feelings will change real fast!i ask anyone that knows this person to have him shot me a pm because i would like to talk to him and compare notes. i have alot a rage that needs to be let out of the bag and i can't thing of a better way then to stirup the cca/star! until then, sorry to hear this. i KNOW the feeling very well. it still huants me till this day.

ps. the day the cca screwed me, they lost alot of money. most if not all of my friends and family will not enter the cca/star because of what they did to me and all the others they have SCREWED!


----------



## Snagged (May 21, 2004)

chicapesca said:


> You might want to check your facts on that Jerry. His employees had sex on their computers and he resigned. This I found out from doing my homework on the guy.


 He admitted that he used state computers for ****.


----------



## Snagged (May 21, 2004)

*I'd better post this also.*

Report: Wildlife official did not view child ****
[SOUTH PINELLAS Edition]

St. Petersburg Times - St. Petersburg, Fla.
Author:JULIE HAUSERMANDate:Sep 9, 2000Start Page:1.BText Word Count:491
*Document Text*
​The Inspector General, in an addendum, says no images were viewed while the official surfed.

The pornographic Internet sites that a state official visited, costing him a 10-day suspension, did not include child pornography, the agency's Inspector General says.

The official, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission deputy general counsel Charles Shelfer, was suspended for 10 days late last month after Inspector General James T. Knight concluded that Shelfer used his office computer to visit pornographic Web sites at work.

But in an addendum released early this month, after the initial report was issued, the inspector general says he "takes strong exception" to a Aug. 31 St. Petersburg Times story that said Shelfer's Web surfing included sites "that feature child pornography."

Printouts of Shelfer's Web surfing ventures include sites that feature pornographic "thumbnail" images. Web sites listed in the inspector general's report included titles such as "Click here for Preteen XXX," "No Daddy!," "Hidden Camera Pix of Tiny Teens," "Japanese schoolgirls," and "Six

Teen

Little Girls Gallery."

But those were "captions," the inspector general said in its addendum. "There were no actual images contained in the report that the investigation considered to be child pornography," it said.

"First of all, there is no evidence that Shelfer ever 'clicked' on any of those links," the addendum says. "Secondly, there is no evidence that any of the links actually contained child pornography. Even if there had been an image of a young person when the link was 'clicked,' to label that image as child pornography is impossible without meeting the legal test for child pornography."

"To successfully prosecute someone in Florida for possession of child pornography, typically a medical expert must testify that in his or her medical opinion, the person in the image is less than 18 years of age. This opinion is based upon criteria far more medically precise than the mere appearance of the person."

Shelfer, who is back at work at his $63,864-a-year job, did not return a phone call seeking comment. In a Sept. 2 letter to the Times' attorney, Shelfer said, "I have not visited any of the sites to which you refer."

The inspector general's report includes items not usually found in government documents: a warning label and a series of pornographic images that are printouts of the sites that the report says Shelfer visited at work. The inspector general's new addendum is one more development in a scandal at the state's wildlife agency.

On July 25, the state's top fishing regulator, Marine Fisheries director Russell Nelson, resigned after computer records revealed he visited **** sites at work. Inspector General Knight said he also is investigating other state officials.

The wildlife commission called in the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to see whether someone was tampering with the agency's computers. That investigation is ongoing. Law enforcement officials also are investigating whether the agency destroyed public records, a charge made in a lawsuit filed by commercial fishermen.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.

*Abstract* (Document Summary)
​The official, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission deputy general counsel Charles Shelfer, was suspended for 10 days late last month after Inspector General James T. Knight concluded that Shelfer used his office computer to visit pornographic Web sites at work.

"First of all, there is no evidence that Shelfer ever 'clicked' on any of those links," the addendum says. "Secondly, there is no evidence that any of the links actually contained child pornography. Even if there had been an image of a young person when the link was 'clicked,' to label that image as child pornography is impossible without meeting the legal test for child pornography."

The inspector general's report includes items not usually found in government documents: a warning label and a series of pornographic images that are printouts of the sites that the report says Shelfer visited at work. The inspector general's new addendum is one more development in a scandal at the state's wildlife agency.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.


----------



## Haute Pursuit (Jun 26, 2006)

He didn't inhale...LOL


----------



## Professor Jones (Nov 17, 2005)

Same thing happened to a friend of mine. He caught a tagged redfish and flunked the polygraph exam. He did not complain about the questions that were asked, but he did complain about the way he was intimidated during the exam. He compared it to a Gestapo interrogation. He never went back to take part in another exam, he was under the impression it would be done by the same company. I have not been a part of the CCA or the STAR Tournament for several years because of this.

Professor Jones


----------



## Fishdaze (Nov 16, 2004)

Unbelievable!!!!!!!! I'm kind of speechless after reading that story...... I hope this works itself out and the guy is treated fairly and gets his prize.......


----------



## chicapesca (Jun 7, 2004)

You know Jerry, this isn't the time or the place for this, but thank you for hijacking the thread.


----------



## Crispito (Aug 30, 2005)

I see a dark dark path ahead. Sorry for the bum luck to all that had winning fish. 

Tight lines and Screamin' Drags!

Cm3


----------



## Snagged (May 21, 2004)

chicapesca said:


> You know Jerry, this isn't the time or the place for this, but thank you for hijacking the thread.


 Liz,
Perhaps if you had just allowed the truth to run there would be no hijack.
Jerry


----------



## specktackler77 (Jun 11, 2008)

I caught a tagged redfish last weekend and was not registered in STAR. I released the fish, However, I would be a liar if I said I didn't have brief thoughts of trying to fool the polygraph. I did the right thing and cut my losses. You also did the right thing and you were penalized and provoked. CCA must not want any new members or any participation in there so called cause. This word needs to get out and CCA needs to make a change. There is no reason for them to ask you about anything other the Tournament rules and if they were violated. What is the rule about landing the fish must you net the fish yourself or can your fishing partner? Sorry for the way you were treated. Hang in there and the truth will prevail.


----------



## gater (May 25, 2004)

*CCA*

Snagged.....I thought this was pretty clear!

#*1*   







06-09-2008, 09:57 AM 
http://www.2coolfishing.net/ttmbforum/member.php?u=1Mont







vbmenu_register("postmenu_1603246", true); 
webmaster









*notice on CCA threads* 
Folks, I am sick of all the pro/con CCA threads on the boards. If you want to support them, fine. If you don't, that's fine too. This isn't the place to bash CCA nor is it the place to air our every indifference you may or may not have with them. You want to start a new tourney, fine. Just don't call it an alternative to STAR. Good, bad, indifferent, CCA threads are going to be locked and or deleted until this dies back down. This isn't CCA's site, or forum and they don't sponsor here. Get over it. I am.


----------



## TexasDux (May 21, 2004)

Where's that Jr. Moderator Badge? I'm sure after 70 replies and 3,500 views it would have been deleted or closed it they took issue with it. The truth is out there.


----------



## iridered2003 (Dec 12, 2005)

*step out of it*



gater said:


> Snagged.....I thought this was pretty clear!
> 
> #*1*
> 
> ...


them step out of the tread.read no more! i think it needs to be put on the table once and for all. after all, this is a fishing website,ain't it? what better place to do it them a fishing website on the internet. not sure if its happen to you or not, but it hurts! i still have bad feelings about it! after 3 years. when someone dips into your pockets $50,000 deep, i bet you would post it up just like he did and want all the replys to it to get it out there.think about it. its not fair. i had nothing to lie about and did not lie, so i know whats going on in the cca/star,first hand.
by the way, this topic was emailed to me today and brought back some bad feelings, but its all good. they ain't getting my money no more


----------



## iridered2003 (Dec 12, 2005)

question asked at my poly

#1=do you live in the state of tx?
answer=yes
#2=is today tuesday?
answer=yes
#3=did you lie to me today when you said you,yourself,caught this ling,that we have discussed today
answer=no
#4=are you now 42 years of age?
answer=yes
#5=did you intentionally break any of this touraments rules?
answer=no
#6=in your thirties,did you lie to someone to get out of a major problem?
answer=no
#7=have you told me your correct last name?
answer=yes= they put it on paper as no. they had my drivers lic???
#8=did anyone else on the'boats name'actually catch this ling that you have entered in this tourament?
answer=no
#9=have you,yourself,received any money in violation of this touraments rule#3?
answer=no
#10=before 2000,did you ever lie to the police about a serious issue?
answer=no

#3,5,8 and 9 are the ones i failed so they say. me and the people on the boat the day i caught my ling know who caught the fish! thats all i need! this will get out and someone is going to make a big deal of it sooner or later. you just have to have deep pockets. enjoy your tagged redfish and i hope all the people who disagree with me catch a tagged redfish and go throught the same thing. have a good day, i'm going to the peig for a couple of redfish right now,LATER!


----------



## Hughoo222 (Aug 24, 2005)

The thing I find not only appaling but also ironic is that CCA would have the nerve to ask about his "private" habits after they knowingly hired a guy who had been fired by the state of Florida for viewing internet **** on his work computer. Could it be that support and funding are down and those prizes aint as "free" as they used to be.

Several years back I actually turned in someone who I knew for a fact was ineligible, I saw him working as a deckhand more than once...he won a division and I and several others called and voiced our concern, in fact I offered to give a full deposition to an attorney, long and short is he kept the boat despite the evidence. 

And before anyone decides to rail me for posting this I would ask what is wrong with telling the truth... especially about the people who are covertly ruining something I happen to care about. Fact..not my opinion or gossip...it is a fact.


----------



## SpeckReds (Sep 10, 2005)

I took a polygraph test from these people 2 years ago when my son won the kids sheepshead division. NO SUCH QUESTIONS WERE ASKED OF ME> I HAD NO PROBLEMS WITH ANY OF IT. PASSED WITH FLYING COLORS. and my son got his $50K. Not saying that it did not happen like he said, But something doesn't smell right.


----------



## Freshwaterman (May 21, 2004)

*Fed up*

I have never been involved with CCA and was really thinking of joining this year even after their stand on the red snapper limit but this makes up my mind. It is time that all of us tell them to take a hike.They are just like all of the goverment offices and just want our money. Even though they offer good prizes and scholarships, they need to get back in touch with us common people. CCA has in the past done some good for the fishery but they seem to be going in the wrong direction. Until they live up to thier name I will not be supporting them and will encourage everyone to boycot them also.


----------



## CHARLIE (Jun 2, 2004)

I have taken 2 STAR polygraphs and although they did ask some questions that did not pertain whatsoever to the tourney my thought was they had to establish true or false. 
Like have you ever violated any game and fish laws? Answer absolutely yes, would you cheat if you knew no one would find out ? no. No problems. Nothing about drinking, sex, or anything else. If it did happen the guy needs to go. 

Charlie


----------



## Freshwaterman (May 21, 2004)

*CCA* 
Snagged.....I thought this was pretty clear!

#*1*   







06-09-2008, 09:57 AM 
Mont







vbmenu_register("postmenu_1603246", true); 
webmaster









*notice on CCA threads* 
Folks, I am sick of all the pro/con CCA threads on the boards. If you want to support them, fine. If you don't, that's fine too. This isn't the place to bash CCA nor is it the place to air our every indifference you may or may not have with them. You want to start a new tourney, fine. Just don't call it an alternative to STAR. Good, bad, indifferent, CCA threads are going to be locked and or deleted until this dies back down. This isn't CCA's site, or forum and they don't sponsor here. Get over it. I am.
__________________

Gator I don't know who you are or who you think you are, but this is the fishing forum and I think we should be able to post how we feel. Just as you have posted how you feel. We can take that you are a supporter of CCA. GOOD FOR YOU. Some of us are not!!!!!!! So if you don't like us bashing CCA why don't you just go fishing and settle down. This is AMERICA the last time I looked at a map and it is still a free country at this time. So just get over it.


----------



## ztmleafar (Aug 6, 2006)

*wow*

what a response steve has been contacted by fellow 2 coolers and thanks for your support and is going all the way and will pay his own way to take another test.


----------



## CptJosh (May 16, 2008)

Put one of those CCA executives on the polygraph test and ask them where all the money is going!!!!


----------



## Javadrinker (Feb 13, 2008)

CptJosh said:


> Put one of those CCA executives on the polygraph test and ask them where all the money is going!!!!


that really made me laugh


----------



## guiness (May 9, 2005)

*CCA Polygraph Test*

Only food for thought. I'm not a polygraph guy but have used these tests as an investigative tool for 25 plus years. They are just that a tool. That's why they are not acceptable as evidence in a court of law. I'm not an attorney and this is not to be construed as legal advice. This is just from experience with these tests. The results are such that interpretation shouldn't, but often does play into the results and if the polygrapher had the attitude described in this forum, CCA needs to move on and at a run. One thing that can be reviewed. A test is a recorded document. It can be reviewed by other polygraphers as a means of qualifying a result. It may be of interest to CCA to have that done. It does not mean that a new test needs to be given but the results reviewed. I know that at least one governent agency retains all of their results and they are available for review by other polygrahers. The tests usually have no more than 10 questions. Five are control questions for truthfulness and the other five are for the topic to be discussed and to detect deception. The control questions are such as your real name, your date of birth, the color of the shirt your presently wearing. Veery specific, very direct and very short for a short answer. The five for accuracy of the event in question would be about one topic only. In this case fishing. Even in my younger and single days sexual behavior did not play in to my fishing results......except for what time I got up to go fish or what time I came home.....Something smells here and its not the fishing...again only food for thought.


----------



## Capt Rick Hiott (Dec 14, 2007)

* A "Polygraph test"* is a bunch of **** to start with. I have seen people lie there ***** off and pass


----------



## Snagged (May 21, 2004)

Gater, I'd suggest that you figure out who is slamming what and just who insinuated that I was a liar.


----------



## fightinaggies (Mar 30, 2008)

It seems that this is not the first time that this exact thing has happened to just the people on this board, much less all of the other fisherman that register for the STAR every year that dont frequent this board. It seems to be a problem that CCA needs to address as soon as possible. With that being said, there are also several people on this board that have had no problems with the poly exam and have had a completly different experience with the company giving the poly. I would like to know if the same employee gives ALL of the poly exams for the STAR. There is a good chance that that is where the difference in experiences may have come from IMO. We have all come into contact with the ****head in a position of power that loves to use it to show how big of a man he is. I would like to see the CCA address this issue publicly as it is obviously costing them a lot of money and support for the organazation. We as fisherman all should have the same goal of keeping the fishery in the best condition possible and as long as CCA has that goal in mind I will and do support them but things such as this and their stance on the red snapper limit has me seriously questioning my further support of the organazation.


Barrett


----------



## iridered2003 (Dec 12, 2005)

Javadrinker said:


> that really made me laugh


polygraph Bill Kinney and i will pay for the test! i will also put my last dollar on him failing it!


----------



## 22fish (Dec 12, 2006)

Good luck on the retest Steve...whats up with the CCA


----------



## alwayswrkn (Jun 4, 2008)

I didnt have timebeing at work and all,but can someone tell me what happens to the Trucks,boats and everything that isnt awarded for one reason or another.Just wondering if it is already donated or if they send it when they have a winner.I wouldnt be happy if someones Brother in Law was driving the truck I wasnt given.Just a thought.


----------



## fishin shallow (Jul 31, 2005)

How many people were on the boat at the time and how many of them were registered in the STAR?


----------



## scwine (Sep 7, 2006)

I have read most the replies to this post. One thing no one has mentioned is why not videotape the entire polygraph test? That way it can be scrutinized by a third party. Just a thought.

Good luck.


----------



## Snagged (May 21, 2004)

scwine said:


> I have read most the replies to this post. One thing no one has mentioned is why not videotape the entire polygraph test? That way it can be scrutinized by a third party. Just a thought.
> 
> Good luck.


 Very good idea.


----------



## Fishin Tails (Mar 21, 2007)

I was a supporter of CCA in the past and agreed with their cause. This will make my third year to not be invoved in the Star tournament. It has pretty much become an intimidating thing to go fishing without having your current membership. Fishing should be fun and enjoyable without having to worry about What if I catch the winning fish? We have gone from fishing to the industry of fishing. Everything involved is a money making racquet. On the other hand I guess there is nothing free.


----------



## mastercylinder60 (Dec 18, 2005)

scwine said:


> One thing no one has mentioned is why not videotape the entire polygraph test? That way it can be scrutinized by a third party. Just a thought.


i kinda' doubt they'd go for that.


----------



## biged412 (Mar 8, 2005)

CCA is self interested and I think EVERYONE should spread the word about CCA's conduct. The Snapper issue is a perfect example, and these stories add more evidence. While it's possible some people try to defeat the polgraph, let there be objectivity, bass tourneyments use 'em all the time. Never do we hear stuff like this about them. All signs lead to underhandedness by......CCA


----------



## fatrat82 (Feb 27, 2006)

will CCA allow you to bring a lawyer with you or someone of this statue that would be able to be a witness to the questions asked? It seems like you should be able to do something like this and if they turn you down, there must me some legal action you can take to insure everything is performed professionally.


----------



## wading_fool (May 3, 2005)

Not that it will do much good, but seems to the nature of the internet and boards in general is everyone is quick to jump on the bandwagon. There has been several threads where someone started off saying they were wronged and then the other side of the story breaks and all of a sudden everyone that was denouncing a dealer or whatever it was jumps back to the other side.

Why is it that everyone is so quick to jump on a side before both sides of a story are posted? It is known that I am a proponent of CCA, that doesn't really matter, what I am asking is why on any board, one side of a story is posted, everyone automatically assumes its gospel?

I have fished many of a tournament where you are required to take a polygraph, no you can't bring a lawyer with you, no you can't retake the test if you fail, you sign a little piece of paper that states if you win or catch a qualifying fish, you must pass a polygraph. there is no if's and's or but's, you agree to bide by the rules. How many on here would be gritching about someone at a FLW or Redfish series, if someone failed their test for whatever reason and was allowed to retake a test. Seems situations on this board at times seem to arise if they fit a theory.

I guess its just the nature of the internet, whether I am involved with CCA or not I will reserve judgement until I hear both sides of the story.


----------



## Steve Gardner (Mar 23, 2008)

I'm totally unfamiliar wit ht what is going on But I would suggest that one of you guys send this entire thread to CCA. I might open their eyes the amount of support they are, and will be loosing especially since this is just starting to come out.


----------



## Snagged (May 21, 2004)

Perhaps because many of us have heard of others of know honisty who have failed their test.
Perhaps many no longer trust the CCA.


----------



## iridered2003 (Dec 12, 2005)

number 29 leaves it all wide open on the side of the cca. if they don't like the way you look, rule#29 shall apply, plan and simple

*OTHER RULES:* *26.* If a participant under 18 years of age wins a prize, their legal guardian over 18 years of age will receive the prize in their behalf. *27.* Any person, including minors and their parent/sponsor, entering a prize-winning fish, must agree to the taking of a polygraph test, if required and each person entering the Tournament agrees to submit to a polygraph. Polygraph tests are to be taken at the time requested by the STAR Tournament Committee. Failure to take and/or to pass the polygraph SHALL result in disqualification. All travel expenses are to be paid by entrant. *28.* Any protest must be submitted, in writing, to the CCA TX/STAR Tournament Director at 6919 Portwest Drive, Suite 100, Houston, TX 77024 by 5:00 p.m. on September 8, 2008. *29.* The decision of the CCA TX, the Tournament Director, and the CCA Tournament Rules Committee, in their sole discretion, shall be final on any matter. *30*. Top prize-winners are responsible for payment of any applicable taxes.


----------



## wading_fool (May 3, 2005)

iridered2003 said:


> number 29 leaves it all wide open on the side of the cca. if they don't like the way you look, rule#29 shall apply, plan and simple
> 
> *OTHER RULES:* *26.* If a participant under 18 years of age wins a prize, their legal guardian over 18 years of age will receive the prize in their behalf. *27.* Any person, including minors and their parent/sponsor, entering a prize-winning fish, must agree to the taking of a polygraph test, if required and each person entering the Tournament agrees to submit to a polygraph. Polygraph tests are to be taken at the time requested by the STAR Tournament Committee. Failure to take and/or to pass the polygraph SHALL result in disqualification. All travel expenses are to be paid by entrant. *28.* Any protest must be submitted, in writing, to the CCA TX/STAR Tournament Director at 6919 Portwest Drive, Suite 100, Houston, TX 77024 by 5:00 p.m. on September 8, 2008. *29.* The decision of the CCA TX, the Tournament Director, and the CCA Tournament Rules Committee, in their sole discretion, shall be final on any matter. *30*. Top prize-winners are responsible for payment of any applicable taxes.


I guess we shouldn't fish any other tournaments either then since it seems the rules are on the side of the tournament. here are some rules from several popular Saltwater tournaments

*Redfish series:
8) Polygraphs: By signature on the official tournament entry form, each contestant agrees to submit to a polygraph test and abide by its conclusion. Polygraph tests will be issued at the discretion of the tournament director/committee if any rules or regulations are in question. The results of the polygraph are final and cannot be reviewed by a court of law. 
20) Protest Procedure: All protests must be submitted in writing, along with a $100 cash deposit. Protests must be submitted to the tournament director no later than 15 minutes following the weigh-in of the last fish. All decisions will be made by the tournament director and committee and are final. If the protest is upheld, the cash deposit will be returned to the person submitting the protest. The protester agrees that by filing a protest, the protester may be subject to a polygraph test.

FLW Kingfish Tournament

1. Rules changes

These rules will remain unchanged during the year 2008. Interpretation of these rules will be left exclusively to the tournament director. Decisions of the tournament director are final in all matters and are not subject to appeal. Protests must be made in writing within 30 minutes of the official check-in time of the final flight of each tournament day. Protests must be given to a tournament official. No fees will be required to file a protest.

15. Polygraph

Each team agrees to submit, by signature on the official tournament entry form, to a polygraph examination to be administered at a time/date determined by the tournament director upon the close of competition in each tournament and to abide by its conclusion. Failure to pass the examination will result in disqualification. Determination of the meaning of the results will be made solely by FLW Outdoors.

FLW Redfish

1. Rule changes

These rules will remain unchanged during the year 2008. Interpretation of these rules will be left exclusively to the tournament director. Decisions of the tournament director are final in all matters and are not subject to appeal. Protests must be made in writing within 30 minutes of the official check-in time of the final flight of each tournament day.

18. Polygraph

Each contestant agrees to submit, by signature on the official tournament entry form, to a polygraph examination to be administered at a date/location determined by the tournament director following the close of competition in each tournament and to abide by its conclusion. Failure to pass the examination will result in disqualification. Determination of the meaning of the results will be made solely by FLW Outdoors. In team events, at least one member of the winning team will be given a polygraph examination.

IFA

27. POLYGRAPH: Each contestant who fishes an IFA Redfish Tour event agrees to submit to a polygraph examination at a time and location determined by the Tournament Director following the end of the competition
in each tournament and abide by its conclusion. Failure to pass the polygraph will result in disqualification.
28. PROTEST AND REPORTING PROCEDURE: All protests must be submitted in writing on an IFA protest
form, along with a $200 cash deposit, within fifteen (15) minutes of the last flight check-in to the tournament
director or designated tournament official. The protester also agrees that if there is a question of verifying the charge
of a protest that he or she also may be subject to take a polygraph and agree to testify in a court of law if necessary.
If the Tournament Director, or polygraph, upholds the protest, the cash deposit shall be returned to the contestant
submitting the protest.*

I think you will find all tournaments have pretty much the same rules, submit to the polygraph, fail and you don't win, subject to the tournament director who has final say in all matters. Its a simple deal, sign up to play, you play by the rules of any tournament you enter. FLW is the only one I looked at that didn't require a deposit to file a protest. Wonder why that is, I guess thats so the tournament directors can screw with the little people.


----------



## Snagged (May 21, 2004)

There is no objection to a polygraph test, there are questions as to how it is administered and read.


----------



## wading_fool (May 3, 2005)

Snagged said:


> There is no objection to a polygraph test, there are questions as to how it is administered and read.


Yep I can accept that, but as you see in the other rules I posted from other big time tournaments, ours is not to question how its administered and read. Each tournament director reads it and determines the results and you can't question it. Just food for thought


----------



## Pocboy (Aug 12, 2004)

So one person comes on here with one of those "my brother-in-law said that he knows someone who failed a polygraph" and y'all just take that as verbatim? Oh well, I've had a few good days fishing at POC and look what y'all have gone and done. I noticed some of the bluewater boys have put in their two cents, which is to be expected since they have to get theirs any way they can. Hey, I found this on the internet so it must be true: http://home.inreach.com/kumbach/velcro.html, and here's a story about tree octopusses: http://zapatopi.net/treeoctopus/. Be sure and read them so you can warn your friends about them.


----------



## wading_fool (May 3, 2005)

Pocboy said:


> So one person comes on here with one of those "my brother-in-law said that he knows someone who failed a polygraph" and y'all just take that as verbatim? Oh well, I've had a few good days fishing at POC and look what y'all have gone and done. I noticed some of the bluewater boys have put in their two cents, which is to be expected since they have to get theirs any way they can. Hey, I found this on the internet so it must be true: http://home.inreach.com/kumbach/velcro.html, and here's a story about tree octopusses: http://zapatopi.net/treeoctopus/. Be sure and read them so you can warn your friends about them.


HA....that velcro piece is funny as all get out!!!!


----------



## Stumpgrinder (Feb 18, 2006)

If I were the guy asked all the oddball questions and then summarily failed, and I knew in my heart I was clean.................. well I'd sue until there wasnt any C notes left in the CCA.

Course we could outlaw fishing tournaments , they seem to bring out the contentious nature in folks anyway. LOL


----------



## sbs5950 (Apr 3, 2008)

That's some total BS there... :hairout:


----------



## Snagged (May 21, 2004)

Pocboy said:


> So one person comes on here with one of those "my brother-in-law said that he knows someone who failed a polygraph" and y'all just take that as verbatim? Oh well, I've had a few good days fishing at POC and look what y'all have gone and done. I noticed some of the bluewater boys have put in their two cents, which is to be expected since they have to get theirs any way they can. Hey, I found this on the internet so it must be true: http://home.inreach.com/kumbach/velcro.html, and here's a story about tree octopusses: http://zapatopi.net/treeoctopus/. Be sure and read them so you can warn your friends about them.


 Go back tp POC and leave the adults alone. We get tired of your trolls.


----------



## wading_fool (May 3, 2005)

Snagged....let me ask you one simple question, CCA or not CCA, what tournament do you fish that you can question failing a polygraph? Its a simple rule, CCA is providing him a chance to retake the polygraph, most tournaments don't provide a retest if you fail, you fail your disqualified. If he fails again can we assume he was wrong or shall we assume that CCA is still wrong? Notice that the original poster of this thread has only posted once since he started this, and its second hand information. I will be the first to contact State if he passes the second one and still is not giving his boat and truck, but its automatically assumed he is in the right and CCA is in the wrong with only one side of a story posted.


----------



## ztmleafar (Aug 6, 2006)

what happened here all i did was submit an email for a fellow long time cca member whom paid his dues like you and me im sure if it happened to any of us on this forum who is pumped up every time we went fishing thinking it could be our turn or your turn wed defend each other equally i didnt mean to cause division so forgive me but the whole coast falls apart. the answer is in the problem. its easier said than done and the truth will set us free. lets go fishing this weekend for what realy matters and put this behind us and pray that this will never happen again for the better of our pastime. so this my prayer.

proverbs12:19 truthful lips will be established forever, but a lying tounge is only for a moment


----------



## Snagged (May 21, 2004)

wading_fool said:


> Snagged....let me ask you one simple question, CCA or not CCA, what tournament do you fish that you can question failing a polygraph? Its a simple rule, CCA is providing him a chance to retake the polygraph, most tournaments don't provide a retest if you fail, you fail your disqualified. If he fails again can we assume he was wrong or shall we assume that CCA is still wrong? Notice that the original poster of this thread has only posted once since he started this, and its second hand information. I will be the first to contact State if he passes the second one and still is not giving his boat and truck, but its automatically assumed he is in the right and CCA is in the wrong with only one side of a story posted.


 I no longer fish in tournaments, but have in the past. I don't question the test if done properly,but there has been a question raised as to how the test was administered.
With the current amount of ill feelings toward CCA and their connections with the far left anything they do may be questioned.


----------



## mastercylinder60 (Dec 18, 2005)

who needs tv or the movies when there's entertainment like this available at your fingertips?


----------



## Mad Mike (Dec 28, 2005)

Good stuff!


----------



## BertS (May 21, 2004)

ahhh........internet allusions to grandeur........internet toughness.........and internet threats..........lol.......I don't think either side is making a case for their respective teams......

I agree with mastercyliner, aka the snake hugger........this stuff is almost as good as Springer.......


----------



## iridered2003 (Dec 12, 2005)

Yep I can accept that, but as you see in the other rules I posted from other big time tournaments, ours is not to question how its administered and read. Each tournament director reads it and determines the results and you can't question it. Just food for though



wading fool,you said it not me. the director reads it and determines the results and you can't question it. just what happen to me at the hands of BILL KINNEY! the director of the CCA/STAR. to the guy that started all this mess, i would like to say thank you much! i mean tthat from the bottom of my heart. when wading fool gets burned like me or your friend has been, he will cry just like the rest of us that have already been burned by the cca. anyone that gets burned for over $50,000 is going to make it public. i am willing to bet my last dollar this guy gets his boat,motor,trailer and truck for the tagged redfish he caught as per the rules. fool, when you get burned, do cry,just leave it alone, it won't bother you,NOT! i run around with bad things writing on me stringer cork or on my hat about the cca and people ask me all the time what its about and i am more then happey to tell them. if you see the village idiot running around with the craxy sayings on his hat, stop me and i will and my fishing buddy will explain to you how they burnt me. please keep this post going so everyone see the TRUE COLORS of the CCA/STAR. now,if anyone would like to bash in my head, go ahead because till youv'e been is the same position, now really don't know what your talking about! like i said before, same thing, just a different year, been there done that. have a great day. johnny


----------



## boom! (Jul 10, 2004)

When I fished f/w tournaments, failing a polygraph test disqualified you from all future events. I HAVE witnessed first hand this happening to a team mate that I KNOW did not violate the rules. Perhaps it is time to start taking your own interpretor (sp?) when being given the test. Not to read it, but to make sure that standard proceedures are used.
If star is on the up and up, they only want cheaters to be caught and should have no problem with this.


----------



## iridered2003 (Dec 12, 2005)

*thank you so much*



ztmleafar said:


> what happened here all i did was submit an email for a fellow long time cca member whom paid his dues like you and me im sure if it happened to any of us on this forum who is pumped up every time we went fishing thinking it could be our turn or your turn wed defend each other equally i didnt mean to cause division so forgive me but the whole coast falls apart. the answer is in the problem. its easier said than done and the truth will set us free. lets go fishing this weekend for what realy matters and put this behind us and pray that this will never happen again for the better of our pastime. so this my prayer.
> 
> proverbs12:19 truthful lips will be established forever, but a lying tounge is only for a moment


 bro, this needs to be put out on the table, so THANK YOU! i have sent you my number and i hope to hear from your buddy. maybe we can band together and make sure this does not happen to anyone else. i stand to gain here, but i would like it be knowing that the CCA/STAR is not what its made up to be. have a good day,johnny


----------



## Mrschasintail (Dec 8, 2004)

This thread was a good one, now it has just gone south like so many others.


----------



## spitfire (Jan 2, 2007)

Man that sucks cause AGF and me just registered for the star yesterday. I didn't know they were like that!!!!


----------



## Capt Ryan Rachunek (Feb 16, 2006)

Can't believe this thread is still going.....At least the Post Turtle thread was interesting before it was pulled.....


----------



## raz1056 (Jun 16, 2006)

They have to try to insure that a winner is not cheating, but what would your answer be if you we're asked have you cheated on your wife or girlfriend? I would say YES and I'm sorry to say it was with YOUR WIFE!


----------



## SHOALWATER TV (Apr 8, 2008)

Bill Kenny..LOL!!!!!!!!oh brother......


----------



## manintheboat (Jun 1, 2004)

I am about as anti-CCA as they come, but I really feel that there are 2 sides to this story, or at least there is more to it than we heard from the OP. CCA really needs to get a handle on this. If this company is acting in such an unprofessional manner, it hurts CCA because, like it or not, they represent CCA. 

Man, CCA is really on a roll right now.


----------

