|
|
| Obviously this is a catch and release species, but is there ever a time you would keep a muskie? What if you had a record fish? Let's hear your opinion. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 55
| I'd never keep one. |
|
| |
|
Location: Eastern Ontario | A 60 inch St Lawrence fish with a good girth has it's mouth and anus duct taped and is on it's way to a scale. ( If I was convinced it would put the O'Brien issue to rest )
Edited by horsehunter 3/9/2014 7:44 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 140
Location: Northern Illinois | Would probably have to keep a fish if it was state record class. Gotta say though,
after seeing the replica fish at the Milwaukee show, I was really shocked at how
great those look. Get some good pictures & a girth measurement & let em go. I
haven't come close to any records yet.....but there's always a chance. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | they'd all go back in ... |
|
| |
|
| This has been a question a few fishing partners and myself have been tossing around. We have no reason to keep a musky otherwise and respect the catch and release attitude and what it does for the sport.. So far this poll is right on par with our discussions... torn between never keeping a musky(unless cannot revive) and keeping if its a state record. Personally, I like replicas better as I believe they will last longer and look just as good when done by a pro.. but how would they get a blank made for a record class fish? I'd probably work with one of the bigger taxidermists..have a replica made for me and have them let the dnr take whatever samples and measurements from the real one then auction it off with proceeds going to a good cause or something.. On the other hand, I'd probably release regardless.. hard to say. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 310
Location: Lake St.Clair | Keep none!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 541
| haven't kept one yet but often wonder if I caught a real big tiger in a lake where there not stocked and if it is at that age where it isn't gonna live much longer as they only live to be around 12 I think. If its at its max age around there and it obvouisly isn't reproducing and its already in a regular musky lake then I dont see what good its putting back to the fishery then yah I might think about keeping it. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1082
Location: Aurora | FishFinder87 - 3/9/2014 6:55 PM
Obviously this is a catch and release species, but is there ever a time you would keep a muskie? What if you had a record fish? Let's hear your opinion.
You need to add "If you were facing starvation and no other protein was available" |
|
| |
|
Posts: 35
| For those that would never keep a state record, what is your reasoning? Most, if not all, state record caliber fish are so old they probably only have 5 years at best left to live. Maybe another angler will catch it again, maybe not. I guess I just don't get it. They only live 20-25 yrs. It's gonna be dead soon anyway. Why not keep it?
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 54
Location: Minnesota | If it was with out a doubt the record for the state and the fact I would be shaking so bad I wouldn't get good pics nor would be able to get the hooks out in a timely manner. The poor thing would have expired with all the pics, measurements, and the kisses I would have given it!!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 618
Location: Michigan | bcram555 - 3/9/2014 9:34 PM
For those that would never keep a state record, what is your reasoning? Most, if not all, state record caliber fish are so old they probably only have 5 years at best left to live. Maybe another angler will catch it again, maybe not. I guess I just don't get it. They only live 20-25 yrs. It's gonna be dead soon anyway. Why not keep it?
What is your reasoning for keeping it? And just because they are so big doesn't mean they are that old. The past couple Michigan giants haven't been that old at all and still would have been able to spawn for 5-10 years. Wouldn't you want those genes in the spawning pool for as long as you can?? Even if the fish spawn only once more it would be worth it in my opinion to let them go. Also, replicas look better and last longer than an actual mount so no need to kill the fish. There really isn't going to be a huge fame and fortune element into either; there will be some articles and videos about a new state record, but you're not going to be rolling in cash all of a sudden just because you caught a 50-60lb muskie. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 38
| I'm with Frank. The only fish I would consider keeping would be one I was pretty darn sure was THE FISH. A fish that when verified would end any debate about the WR. It would have value as a biological specimen and there is no mold that big.Then again if she got a little squirrely when I was holding her for a pic and made it over the side going away strong I know there would be no regrets. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 35
| The idea that letting it go will allow it to spawn and pass it's genes along for several more years is a good argument. I think it would be cool to be the state record holder, and for me, that would outweigh the idea of letting it go to spread it's genes a few more yrs. The spawning reason is the only logical one I could think of. I suppose another argument is that you want someone else to catch it and have that amazing experience. I'm just asking the question. I really want to know why people would release a 60-70 pounder! Is it out of respect for the fish? Or maybe you don't want to deal with the publicity it would bring? Just asking, no reason to get all bent out of shape. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2686
Location: Hayward, WI | I guess we never really know untill it happens, but I don't think I'd keep one unless I knew it was THE one, a 70 pounder. Maybe if I had one of mount worty size that went belly up I'd bring it home with me and have it mounted. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 618
Location: Michigan | bcram555 - 3/9/2014 10:08 PM
The idea that letting it go will allow it to spawn and pass it's genes along for several more years is a good argument. I think it would be cool to be the state record holder, and for me, that would outweigh the idea of letting it go to spread it's genes a few more yrs. The spawning reason is the only logical one I could think of. I suppose another argument is that you want someone else to catch it and have that amazing experience. I'm just asking the question. I really want to know why people would release a 60-70 pounder! Is it out of respect for the fish? Or maybe you don't want to deal with the publicity it would bring? Just asking, no reason to get all bent out of shape.
I hope my post didn't come off as bashing you as it wasn't meant to be at all. I can definitely see wanting to keep it and having the title of 'state record holder', but I would just rather have the fish live and get a replica. No offense, but I think it's more logical to let the animal go then to kill it for a title. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 216
| Yup out of respect for the fish and maybe my son, a friend or I might be able to catch it again and see this beast when it's even bigger.if it was a 60x32" giant that rolled over on its side upon release because maybe she is just a little too old and maybe a little battle worn from the fight maybe I might think about it. But she'd be in the water while I was thinking, and Probly begging my fishing partner, and if she took right off so be it. I'd Probly feel better if she did.Lax makes some beautiful replicas that look better than skin mounts especially over time. Some ppl just don't care about records or being in the public spotlight.My fishing bud has caught Lazarus sized fish that you'll never see pics of, and he'd Probly make me swim back to the boat launch with the world record if I decided to keep it. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 572
| I only voted once, but I assume anyone voting to keep a state record would also keep a world record.
As for Missouri's state record, it is many years old, caught by a bass fisherman in a lake that isn't stocked with muskies. I'd like to see the record coming from a lake where muskies are stocked.
I guess recent state records in a state where muskies are stocked help say the muskie program is working and improving. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2754
Location: Mauston, Wisconsin | FishFinder87 - 3/9/2014 6:55 PM
Obviously this is a catch and release species, but is there ever a time you would keep a muskie? What if you had a record fish? Let's hear your opinion.
Not to be a naysayer, but you live in a delusional world if you believe this is catch & release only species. Even sasquatch is not a catch & release species to some folks! Its only catch & release on a very select venue! Record fish? Get a life, 30" fish are killed on a regular basis. Some other species fisherman kill every one they catch and put them back into the water as turtle or crawdad food........
What are you saving with a world record class fish? The species? Your ego? Post your world record C&R photo's on the internet & see what happens! I'll be first to say nice big fish, but you better have some irrefutable evidence.............
Bonk!
Al
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1106
Location: Muskegon Michigan | You didnt have my answer listed. One over 70 pounds or it goes back. So Ill never keep one right? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32955
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Actually, it is not obvious Muskies are a catch and release species. That is encouraged, but currently I don't see many regulations requiring only C&R, and there are plenty of Muskies well under any record of any kind at all harvested every year. I like the trend to larger length limits, and hope it continues where appropriate, but NOT where it is not.
And Al's right, if one catches a 'record' and releases it, it's not a 'record', it's just another big fish released.
Now if we're discussing length only, and a C&R record that was bumped and witnessed, that's a different description of 'record'.
As for me, I'd let her go. Not for 'genetics' reasons, those who use that answer about releasing a single large fish need to study genetics more carefully. I'd let her go because of my personal C&R ethic, not reportable or to be explained to anyone else at all.
If someone else chooses to harvest and register a new record, I will celebrate the catch, accomplishment, and new record with ZERO reservations.
It's not my place to make that decision for anyone else, and there are World Records out there for a reason...to be broken.
If it's over 70 pounds, I'd probably drink too much beer that evening in celebration, but as Kingfisher said...
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 162
Location: Metro, MN | 100 inches or 100 pounds...maybe |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8863
| I can think of two instances where I'd keep a legal musky.
1. It died
2. I needed to eat
Personally, I couldn't see killing a fish just because it was state or even a world record. Even with a WR musky under my belt, I'd still just be some guy nobody has ever heard of. I know from experience that killing a fish to hang on the wall as some sort of accomplishment does not diminish the loss of knowing that the big SOB isn't out there anymore, and it would be if you had let it go instead of killing it. I'd get more enjoyment releasing it and knowing that next year it might be bigger, that some day I might see it again, that someone else might encounter it and it may become the stuff of legend.
That all goes out the window if I need to eat. If it's made out of food? It's food. It's the same agreement I have with every other animal on the planet, even the dog. Most of them would eat me if it came right down to it, and turnabout is fair play. Might not be the happiest meal of my life, but if it was musky or nothing, we'd be eating musky sandwich. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 455
| Some states have records that are almost as questionable as the Louis spray record. For that reason I would kill a state record just to give us a fish that's proven legit. We have no reproduction and since I have donated lots of time and money over 20 years improving the fishery I would not feel bad about keeping a record. True or Tiger. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 216
| I don't like this point of "I put some much time and money into this sport so I don't care someone owes me something and I've paid enough to kill my fish already".Whatever get out then sell all your #*#* on the bst forum get your money back and nobody owes you anything especially that fish you killed.just the way I see it. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2389
Location: Chisholm, MN | I'd be scared of being crucified if I kept a state record fish! They all go back  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1425
Location: St. Lawrence River | If I had a nice fish that was flat out dead in the water, tits up, no doubt about it, I would keep it.. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1220
| I have not kept a musky since 1976, but I'd keep a 70 pounder....cept I don't believe they get that big! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 909
Location: South-Central VA | I don't think I'd ever keep one. The only exception would be if it died on me.
jeremy |
|
| |
|
Posts: 304
Location: Lino Lakes, MN | Back in the day a 52" fish was almost at the end of it's life cycle.............
Now a 57" fish is at the end of its life cycle.......
An honest to goodness no doubter for a MN or World Record would put some crap to rest.
However I would probably let her go.
Good topic- its been a long winter here in MN
Steve |
|
| |
|
Location: Eastern Ontario | JakeStCroixSkis - 3/10/2014 8:38 AM
If I had a nice fish that was flat out dead in the water, tits up, no doubt about it, I would keep it..
And if you were on the Larry or lots of other waters it would be ilegal |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1300
Location: Hayward, Wisconsin | BINGO! Junkman...
And Brozz88, don't think that Laz wouldn't keep a 60 pounder! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 228
| Probably only if the fish died! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4342
Location: Smith Creek | I plan on keeping a male or two between 28 and 33 out of one of the lakes I fish regularly. There's a lot that size and they're beating the heck out the forage right now.
Only other fish over 34" I'd keep is one that died on me. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1041
| Given how far graphite reproductions have come, I'd have to say that all get let go.
The toughest thing I've encountered the last few years is when someone gets their first legal fish, and it is 40+. It is tough talking them out of keeping the fish. Two instances in two years, but both fish are swimming. After good measurements and great pictures. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 216
| horsehunter - 3/10/2014 7:59 AM
JakeStCroixSkis - 3/10/2014 8:38 AM
If I had a nice fish that was flat out dead in the water, tits up, no doubt about it, I would keep it..
And if you were on the Larry or lots of other waters it would be ilegal
why? Are fish with tits ileagal to keep on the Larry. If there doubl Ds I'm taking her home! |
|
| |
|
Location: Eastern Ontario | If you were caught with a fish under the legal size limit you would be charged. Otherwise some unscrupulous person could rip the gills of a 50 inch fish and say it died. Unfortunately it must be left for the turtles. The law in Ontario waters states fish under legal limit must be immediately released and where most CO's wouldn't bother you for taking a quick picture I know others that would charge you for multiple pictures or passing the fish around or otherwise taking what they consider an unreasonable length of time.
Edited by horsehunter 3/10/2014 10:14 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 110
Location: Albertville, Minnesota | Never...Fittante does great work. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 697
Location: Minnetonka | I'd keep a state record because I have a huge ego; because I need recognition and validation for all the time I've wasted chasing muskies for the past 10 years. Catching a big muskie is the only reason anyone should fish for them, in my opinion. 
In all seriousness, I'd let the state record go and then instantly regret it. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 89
| IMO a replica looks nicer the the real thing b |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32
Location: Tower, Lake Vermilion | A nice photo is still the best way to save the moment. I don't really have an ego when it comes to catching big fish of any species. I know I caught it and I'm the only person that I need to impress. For you guys that think you'll get fame and fortune from keeping a record fish, well good luck with that. Just remember that "All fame is fleeting" and chicks dig scars.
"Ace" |
|
| |
|
Location: Eastern Ontario | ImpactFishing - 3/10/2014 12:04 PM
IMO a replica looks nicer the the real thing b
Not likely I will ever break a record but I fish where it could happen until then pictures will suffice. A replica is just an expensive plastic fish. You can order any thing you want and if you want it pink and baby blue you can have that too. |
|
| |
|
| Depending on the circumstances I "might" have to bonk my first 50". Although that may never happen on the lakes I fish... Replicas are looking better all the time but most still look fake to me. Another aspect of a skin mount is the cool scars, etc. that an old fish will have that wouldn't necessarily be present on a replica.
I ask you this:
Is it more acceptable to harvest a 50-53" (WI fish) likely near the end of it's life cycle OR keep a 40" (legal) fish to grill up at the party you've planned this summer? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1416
Location: oconomowoc, wi | ^ clear the basement stairs! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 182
| Only if you could topple Louie Sprays record. LOL!!! Sorry. Bad joke. The record of course is the joke. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 357
Location: Duluth, MN | fishhawk50 - 3/10/2014 12:10 PM
^ clear the basement stairs!
LOL! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 455
| Not into the sport Bozz into the fishery. I have done over thirteen Muskie schools over the years, sold countless raffle tickets over the years and when the only fish in N.J. were stocked by MI I was raising money. Now we have plenty of fish and DFGW is not stretched at all. Whats the big deal if I kill a fish there is a slim chance will get any bigger? If you feel I robed some other sportsman good for you. They shoulda caught it before me if they wanted it. Not to mention I have never accidentally killed a fish in over twenty years of catching them. By the way I will be helping stock fish as well as donating another muskie school this year. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1425
Location: St. Lawrence River | horsehunter - 3/10/2014 8:59 AM
JakeStCroixSkis - 3/10/2014 8:38 AM
If I had a nice fish that was flat out dead in the water, tits up, no doubt about it, I would keep it..
And if you were on the Larry or lots of other waters it would be ilegal
I fish 3 other rivers where that's not the case... I only fish the st lawrence about 30% of the time.... The fish in my avatar came from a different river. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 216
| muskyrat - 3/10/2014 6:12 PM
Not into the sport Bozz into the fishery. I have done over thirteen Muskie schools over the years, sold countless raffle tickets over the years and when the only fish in N.J. were stocked by MI I was raising money. Now we have plenty of fish and DFGW is not stretched at all. Whats the big deal if I kill a fish there is a slim chance will get any bigger? If you feel I robed some other sportsman good for you. They shoulda caught it before me if they wanted it. Not to mention I have never accidentally killed a fish in over twenty years of catching them. By the way I will be helping stock fish as well as donating another muskie school this year.
Didn't mean to offend, I appreciate what you do. You came off as one of those guys that think they bought rights to all the game because they bought a liscence and some gear so now there entitled to kill there share. I here ya there's guys that have killed many just by mistreating them. so yes your right,you are entitled to do what you want with a big ski if you wish.... But man I wanna catch her too, so let her go! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 455
| Keep in mind also Brozz the main guy at the Hatchery who we have a great relationship with would want me to keep it or at least hold in in my livewell until he could collect it. A new record shines a bright light on his hard work as state records make news across the country. You may not understand it but the sacrifice of one at the end life fish is worth it for the publicity. (To him) (He will make more) The DFGW is about gaining interest and getting young people involved. Also many people doubt our current record about as much as they doubt Louis spray. It would be nice not just to have the record myself but for chapter 22. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 216
| Wouldn't that be killer, have the world record in your livewell. Call the proper people to have it officialy weighed measured and legitimized by many witnesses and then release it.would this still not be good enough for some ppl to recognize or just another catch and release fish, not the same unless it's dead.is it possible to hold a state or wr and release the fish or do they wanna grope the fish so long that it wouldn't be possible to release it?probly got to bring it to them I imagine right,they just don't come running out to the river to measure every possible record.lol |
|
| |
|
Posts: 455
| Well I would suppose I could do it. I would just put in a call and the state would most likely pick up the fish weight it and keep it in a pond for spawn. I`m not so sure it would be that easy outside of N.J. We have some pretty cool guys at the hatchery and as I said a great relationship with MI. Not sure they would have a truck at the time but if they did I bet they would pick her up. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 216
| To see the living world record swiming in a bass pro like tank would be kick azz! |
|
| |
|
Location: MN | Personally I have only seen a couple replicas that look good to me. That being said, I would never keep one unless it died on me....even if I knew it was a record. I can't imagine keeping a record fish would be any fun in the muskie community and I would have too much respect for the fish to give it the bonk. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 639
Location: Hudson, WI | I'd only keep a surefire state record, just so I could confidently say the record was accurate. That said, last year was such an awful year for me, I seriously considered killing the first musky I caught, cutting it's head off, and sticking it on a pole on shore as a warning to all other musky's not to f with me anymore. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32
Location: Tower, Lake Vermilion | Moltisanti - 3/11/2014 10:14 AM
I'd only keep a surefire state record, just so I could confidently say the record was accurate. That said, last year was such an awful year for me, I seriously considered killing the first musky I caught, cutting it's head off, and sticking it on a pole on shore as a warning to all other musky's not to f with me anymore.
I gotta say that this was the best post of the thread, I think we have all felt like that on occasion. Very Funny...
"Ace" |
|
| |
|
Posts: 165
Location: tHe LaKe Of PrIoR, mN | Moltisanti - 3/11/2014 10:14 AM
I'd only keep a surefire state record, just so I could confidently say the record was accurate. That said, last year was such an awful year for me, I seriously considered killing the first musky I caught, cutting it's head off, and sticking it on a pole on shore as a warning to all other musky's not to f with me anymore.
where's the dang like button on here!!! I have felt that way for 3 years only getting about 10 a year maybe? catching the same stupid 2-3 times one year does that count as 3 or 1 |
|
| |
|
Posts: 20278
Location: oswego, il | I keep them all. What I dont eat goes in the garden for fertilizer. |
|
| |
|
Location: Sawyer County, WI | Hilarious !
Moltisanti - 3/11/2014 10:14 AM
I'd only keep a surefire state record, just so I could confidently say the record was accurate. That said, last year was such an awful year for me, I seriously considered killing the first musky I caught, cutting it's head off, and sticking it on a pole on shore as a warning to all other musky's not to f with me anymore. |
|
| |
|
Location: Eastern Ontario | How many boxes of Fish Crisp would I need for a 54 inch muskie? |
|
| |
|
Location: Sun Prairie, Wisconsin | I return them all…fortunately I haven't lost any. Very proud of that even though I know someday my luck will run out.
|
|
| |
|
| if its a world record it have to be bigger no? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 295
| horsehunter - 3/10/2014 11:12 AM
If you were caught with a fish under the legal size limit you would be charged. Otherwise some unscrupulous person could rip the gills of a 50 inch fish and say it died. Unfortunately it must be left for the turtles. The law in Ontario waters states fish under legal limit must be immediately released and where most CO's wouldn't bother you for taking a quick picture I know others that would charge you for multiple pictures or passing the fish around or otherwise taking what they consider an unreasonable length of time.
Who said anything about keeping a fish under a size limit? He was talking about keeping a fish if it was dead right in front of him, he didn't say anything about its size... I thought it was implied that it would be a decent fish in the first place anyways. And on a side note... I've found it's actually harder to catch fish under the size limit vs over it on that particular river so if one died on him, odds are it would be big enough to keep anyways. |
|
| |
|
| its a non sense there is a lot more guys that would keep a states record over a world record,really weird no? |
|
| |
|
| It says "state record or bigger"- Implying that they would also keep a world record, as it would likely be bigger than a state record. |
|
| |
|
| I just realized there are 200 total votes. So far 58.5% say they would either never keep a musky OR say they would only keep a musky if injured/unable to revive. The other 41.5% would keep a musky at some size point between anything legal to world record- state record being the most popular for those that say they would keep one at some size point. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 95
| For me it depends where I'm fishing.
I fish small streams and creeks here in ky. We have some fish that we catch over an over . We know them to be the same fish because of the location we catch/raise them on a regular basis, visual markings etc. I dont keep creek fish. The creeks get stocked on occasion but idk how many they put in.
I'm 40 minutes from cave run. I only fish it when the creeks are blown out. I'd like to have about a 45-50" fish on the wall. My personal best is a 42". If I catch that size fish out of the cave I'd be more likely to keep it and mount it vs catching a 45-50" out of the creek and removing it. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 65
Location: Garrison, Mn | I'd never keep one unless I couldn't revive it and it was legal. Muskies have all swam away, but once spent 35 mins with a 23 lb northern until he went in the live well.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1202
Location: Money, PA | Is this where muskie fishing is heading? Fanaticism and Extremism?? Release 'em all, make the limit 55", Release ONLY, use a cradle, don't hold 'em that way it hurts them, you're keeping it out of the water too long!....Whats next, muskies become our Gods and we begin to worship them? Geeze!...I am all for the choice of catch and release, but I'm also for "selective harvest"...Either way IMHO, the focus has been shifted too much in favor of the well being of the fish itself rather than educating newcomers/youth AND promoting healthy management systems with healthy fish to be replaced when need be. Educate what constitutes a true trophy and whether or not one decides to keep it....HOWEVER, all in all People should have a choice within a REASONABLE list of laws/rules.
I choose to release all the muskies I catch (Thank God for Walleyes!) But I'm all about letting the next guy have the right to his choice too!
To me, this is all just a result of greed of a select few wanting more, bigger better....what ever happened to the thrill of catching fish period? And enjoying the whole experience?
WOW
Edited by ShutUpNFish 3/21/2014 10:38 AM
|
|
| |
|
Location: MN | ShutUpNFish - 3/21/2014 10:28 AM
HOWEVER, all in all People should have a choice within a REASONABLE list of laws/rules.
I don't see anyone arguing that choice here. All people have the choice and that is what this thread is about. Some people chose different than others and most are okay with that.
Obviously some people believe a REASONABLE law/rule is to increase the size limit which is another discussion all together that you certainly have your opinion to. Contact you legislators if you do not agree with it.
No need to get on your high horse about a simple survey. |
|
| |
|
| ShutUpNFish - 3/21/2014 11:28 AM
Is this where muskie fishing is heading? Fanaticism and Extremism?? Release 'em all, make the limit 55", Release ONLY, use a cradle, don't hold 'em that way it hurts them, you're keeping it out of the water too long!....Whats next, muskies become our Gods and we begin to worship them? Geeze!...I am all for the choice of catch and release, but I'm also for "selective harvest"...Either way IMHO, the focus has been shifted too much in favor of the well being of the fish itself rather than educating newcomers/youth AND promoting healthy management systems with healthy fish to be replaced when need be. Educate what constitutes a true trophy and whether or not one decides to keep it....HOWEVER, all in all People should have a choice within a REASONABLE list of laws/rules.
I choose to release all the muskies I catch (Thank God for Walleyes!) But I'm all about letting the next guy have the right to his choice too!
To me, this is all just a result of greed of a select few wanting more, bigger better....what ever happened to the thrill of catching fish period? And enjoying the whole experience?
WOW
YEAH STFU WHAT A GOOD IDEA |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1202
Location: Money, PA | Nershi - 3/21/2014 11:36 AM
ShutUpNFish - 3/21/2014 10:28 AM
HOWEVER, all in all People should have a choice within a REASONABLE list of laws/rules.
I don't see anyone arguing that choice here. All people have the choice and that is what this thread is about. Some people chose different than others and most are okay with that.
Obviously some people believe a REASONABLE law/rule is to increase the size limit which is another discussion all together that you certainly have your opinion to. Contact you legislators if you do not agree with it.
No need to get on your high horse about a simple survey.
I did say a reasonable/realistic law or rule...55" to me is not realistic thats all.
And I wasn't questioning the survey down whatsoever; just some of the responses is all...Its typical...just sift through some of the other threads...same old extremist story.
High horse?? OK...
Edited by ShutUpNFish 3/21/2014 11:58 AM
|
|
| |
|
| Yeah, I have mixed feelings.. In a way, I like the 55 inch limit.. its nice that the fish will stay there and have the potential to be record class fish.... BUT, who I am to tell someone who catches their 50 inch fish of a lifetime that they can't keep it because we want bigger fish? I don't know the right answer... Maybe do some sort of tag system like they do for deer? You pay 10 bucks for a trophy musky tag, and that allows you to keep one fish over 50 inches? After you've registered one over 50, you can only register another one if its bigger than your last? Idk the right answer. I like the passion and certainly appreciate the effort that so many people put in to making musky fisheries what they are today, but at the same time what right is it for me to tell someone they can't keep their fish of a lifetime? Personally, I will probably never mount a real fish- I like replicas, think they look just as good or better when done by the pros, and believe they last longer... but who am I to tell someone what they can and cant keep? |
|
| |
What size musky would you keep?