IceShanty.com's Ice Fishing Community
Montana => Ice Fishing Montana => Topic started by: ice coach on Feb 22, 2018, 07:44 AM
-
The reason im posting this is because lately ive been seeing people post pictures of their nice walleye they catch and getting shunned to no belief. Other people will post pictures of giant pike, lake trout, crappie, and so on with people saying nothing. Me personally only get to fish for walleye once or twice a year so I keep every one I catch within the laws because the wife and I love to eat them. Just curious what you guys think. ;D ;D
-
Depends on the the lake/area, if the walleye are plentiful, no harm in keeping a few to eat. If the lake is not producing many, may want to put them back. I do like to see people practicing catch and release.
-
I think they set the limits based on the population of the fish. So I wouldn't feel bad to keep em all if it's within the laws. Just my opinion.
-
I keep anything I can inside the law. most fisheries are put and take anyway. I have no problem seeing people keep 10 pound walleye. they paid the money to get there that is there choice
-
I've wondered about this myself and have read quite a bit of literature on the topic to help me form my own opinion. I tend to only keep perch, pike and salmon and have been putting the big breeders back. Eater-sized perch are abundant in my local lakes, but fish pushing 1.5 pounds are harder to come by. For the sake of the future population, I prefer to throw the latter back down the hole, but I don't presume to judge those that keep them, as they're well within their right to do so (so long as it's within the regulations). Same goes for pike...I get some dirty looks for releasing them, but big fish got that way for a reason (intelligence, good genes, and a bit of luck) and I believe it's good for the population to keep those genetics in the system. Judge me all you like, but I find pike in excess of 30" to be a blast on a fly rod and want to catch them in perpetuity. As far as salmon and trout go...they tend to run small in my neck of the woods, at least in the streams and creeks I fish. I keep my fair share without much concern for size, as size rarely varies.
-
As a primary walleye fisherman that's fished in different states, I can tell you first hand that not only in Montana, but other states as well, it's kind of taboo amongst walleye fisherman to keep the bigger fish, unless you're planning a mount. There's different statistics available on walleye breeding, but what it breaks down to approximately is fish in the 20" range have the most fertile eggs, while fish 24"+ produce less fertile, but drastically more eggs. Here in Montana, there aren't very many bodies of water that are managed as walleye fisheries, with the only notable lakes being stocked being Frances and Fort Peck, I believe (there are some smaller little reservoirs that get stocked to, but lakes like Tiber, Fresno, Nelson, ?Canyon Ferry?, Holter, and Hauser are all left to natural reproduction. It boils down to clear favoritism for trout by FWP, which I suppose is understandable due to their range and the amount of money they bring in. Thus, pulling the big mamas out of the lakes is frowned upon. Taking smaller fish is much more encouraged, as it will increase the chances of a healthy population of smaller fish that can grow into medium and large fish, as there theoretically should be more food available to them, especially since walleye grow fairly slowly.
That being said, it is perfectly in your rights within the law to keep the big fish that apply to your limit. Just don't be surprised if some folks are cranky when the fish is dead in your picture, as opposed to a picture where it is going to be released shortly thereafter. I for one put all the big mamas back and only keep the smaller fish (13"-17") usually, as there are plenty of those available in the lakes across the state.
Hope I was able to help you understand a little better!
-
Here is a size age chart for Walleye and Northern
www.wildernessnorth.co m/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/FishGrowthChart.pdf
-
Mtnfisher, thanks for the chart. That sums up my "research" quite nicely. I had no idea that there are pike swimming around that are potentially older than I am (29). Any idea if similar information exists for perch?
-
I don't mind someone keeping a trophy to mount, I have one. For walleye anymore i'll throw anything over 20" back, we have plenty of small walleye in all these lakes to take some home for a fish fry. If you enjoy fishing for walleye, but take ten pounders home to eat, you're a moron, not only did you kill that one, but also about 300000 potential new walleyes. Montana is so hostile to walleyes it's up to us to regulate ourselves if we want these fisheries to thrive.
-
As a primary walleye fisherman that's fished in different states, I can tell you first hand that not only in Montana, but other states as well, it's kind of taboo amongst walleye fisherman to keep the bigger fish, unless you're planning a mount. There's different statistics available on walleye breeding, but what it breaks down to approximately is fish in the 20" range have the most fertile eggs, while fish 24"+ produce less fertile, but drastically more eggs. Here in Montana, there aren't very many bodies of water that are managed as walleye fisheries, with the only notable lakes being stocked being Frances and Fort Peck, I believe (there are some smaller little reservoirs that get stocked to, but lakes like Tiber, Fresno, Nelson, ?Canyon Ferry?, Holter, and Hauser are all left to natural reproduction. It boils down to clear favoritism for trout by FWP, which I suppose is understandable due to their range and the amount of money they bring in. Thus, pulling the big mamas out of the lakes is frowned upon. Taking smaller fish is much more encouraged, as it will increase the chances of a healthy population of smaller fish that can grow into medium and large fish, as there theoretically should be more food available to them, especially since walleye grow fairly slowly.
That being said, it is perfectly in your rights within the law to keep the big fish that apply to your limit. Just don't be surprised if some folks are cranky when the fish is dead in your picture, as opposed to a picture where it is going to be released shortly thereafter. I for one put all the big mamas back and only keep the smaller fish (13"-17") usually, as there are plenty of those available in the lakes across the state.
Hope I was able to help you understand a little better!
Solid reply, I thought about typing up a response, but you summed up my feelings to a "T".
One thing I will add, I want my children to be able to someday catch the 34 inchers that grow from the 20 inch plus fish I release every year.
-
we all need to regulate ourselves. if you only go out once or twice a year and love to eat it than keep it. some of us have more time than others and spend considerable time out there. you don't have to turn your freezer into a fish morgue.
-
catch them ,kill them and eat them. i do draw the line on keeping over sized fish.
-
As a primary walleye fisherman that's fished in different states, I can tell you first hand that not only in Montana, but other states as well, it's kind of taboo amongst walleye fisherman to keep the bigger fish, unless you're planning a mount. There's different statistics available on walleye breeding, but what it breaks down to approximately is fish in the 20" range have the most fertile eggs, while fish 24"+ produce less fertile, but drastically more eggs. Here in Montana, there aren't very many bodies of water that are managed as walleye fisheries, with the only notable lakes being stocked being Frances and Fort Peck, I believe (there are some smaller little reservoirs that get stocked to, but lakes like Tiber, Fresno, Nelson, ?Canyon Ferry?, Holter, and Hauser are all left to natural reproduction. It boils down to clear favoritism for trout by FWP, which I suppose is understandable due to their range and the amount of money they bring in. Thus, pulling the big mamas out of the lakes is frowned upon. Taking smaller fish is much more encouraged, as it will increase the chances of a healthy population of smaller fish that can grow into medium and large fish, as there theoretically should be more food available to them, especially since walleye grow fairly slowly.
That being said, it is perfectly in your rights within the law to keep the big fish that apply to your limit. Just don't be surprised if some folks are cranky when the fish is dead in your picture, as opposed to a picture where it is going to be released shortly thereafter. I for one put all the big mamas back and only keep the smaller fish (13"-17") usually, as there are plenty of those available in the lakes across the state.
Hope I was able to help you understand a little better!
As others have said this is a great summary and echos similar to my beliefs. The other thing I will add to this is just overall quality of the meat. I know for sure that a big walleye (over 20") tend to have softer, less firm meat. The eater size, 13-18 inchers meat is way more firm and is a better texture for eating anyway. Beyond the mushy meat, bigger fish who have lived longer have more time to absorb mercury and other crap that is in all of our waters and therefore may not taste as good.
Again, as Montana is mostly a trout fishery and very few lakes are managed for a walleye population it is up to the people the love to catch, eat, and just enjoy walleye to keep the population going to generations to come. Release it over 20"
-
If it's with in the rules and you enjoy eating them keep them then who cares what the trolls say they are not putting food on your table or paying any of your bills
-
I see it from both sides and support both options when one catches a large fish (keep it or release it).
The catch and release philosophies of large fish should apply to all species, if that's your standards. Large panfish reproduce and provide food for predators so they in turn can achieve larger sizes. 16"-20" bass , 20"+ walleye and 30"+ pike take a long time to achieve that size, etc., it all comes full circle. What can become irritating is the angler who criticizes keeping a big fish of one species but will post a picture of themselves with a bucketful of 12"+ perch or other large species they plan to keep. But it's ok because it's not their preferred target species.
-
I see it from both sides and support both options when one catches a large fish (keep it or release it).
The catch and release philosophies of large fish should apply to all species, if that's your standards. Large panfish reproduce and provide food for predators so they in turn can achieve larger sizes. 16"-20" bass , 20"+ walleye and 30"+ pike take a long time to achieve that size, etc., it all comes full circle. What can become irritating is the angler who criticizes keeping a big fish of one species but will post a picture of themselves with a bucketful of 12"+ perch or other large species they plan to keep. But it's ok because it's not their preferred target species.
Agreed GB, it's the anglers responsibility to know what size the cut themselves off at. It just depends on the fisherman, I suppose. Some folks like you and I and I'd guess a lot of the folks here on IceShanty do the type research necessary to know the information about ideal spawn size, egg counts, etc. Other folks don't take fishing as seriously and don't do the research, thus don't understand the way things work. Then there's also the wrinkle on whether the fisherman cares or not, how they handle the fish...so many different things that can effect the actual catch-and-release or keep.
-
Some folks like you and I and I'd guess a lot of the folks here on IceShanty do the type research necessary to know the information about ideal spawn size, egg counts, etc.
Its seems the guys that are killing big fish always want to justify it with the old wives tail that big fish are past their prime...thats 100% false but it still fits their needs apparently.
-
I don't mind someone keeping a trophy to mount, I have one. For walleye anymore i'll throw anything over 20" back, we have plenty of small walleye in all these lakes to take some home for a fish fry. If you enjoy fishing for walleye, but take ten pounders home to eat, you're a moron, not only did you kill that one, but also about 300000 potential new walleyes. Montana is so hostile to walleyes it's up to us to regulate ourselves if we want these fisheries to thrive.
Really? did not need to go to name calling to give your opinion. Could of left that out and still stated your opinion. If within the law it is their right to do as they see fit without being called names.
-
Walleye are non native in Montana. In my opinion, keep a limit regardless of size, so long as it is legal.
-
Do a google search on Fish Lewis and Clark caught on their travels west up the missouri. I know it says sauger. Think if the sauger were here the walleye were to? Just do a quick google search of a walleyes range and where they originated. It will surprise you. Your right they are not native to Montana but they are to Canada and sh$$ does flow down hill and there’s no way they can make it all the way to North Dakota and for some reason there’s an imaginary line that walleye just don’t pass. The paddleFish some how make it all the way up but the walleye just turn around? Im over the non native Fish debate. Do some research before dams Fish traveled many miles and states up and down the Missouri. Pheasants aren’t native either lets get ride of those too. “HuntMT4Life” Keep what you want release what you want but don’t cry when it’s gone. Tight lines.
(https://s18.postimg.cc/8dxsuhz7p/95004047-_D78_C-465_D-9469-2_DB92_C3_DCC9_D.png) (https://postimg.cc/image/8dxsuhz7p/)
-
How can you debate “keep every fish within your legal limit no matter what” without attempting to gain a little knowledge and awareness of the animal being harvested. Come on. Mtcomnonwalleye spelled it out perfectly.
-
Biggest question I have always had is who dictates native? Native to me doesn't me what was there when we initially had records of what was there. Nature is always evolving and changing to balance itself. As we all know rainbow trout are "nonnative". Only cut throats and bull trout are "native". We as humans can't dictate what should be in a reservoir or lake. We put many many obstacles in the way of the movements and migrations of every fish in every drainage or river system, the largest being dams. Dams are extremely "nonnative"....shouldn't we remove those and let nature take its course?
As Strippin said is there some imaginary line that they just don't cross? What if mother nature intended toothy critters to mostly take over at some point, who are we to know and dictate that? Maybe mother nature intends for some species to become extinct, but we as humans couldn't allow that to happen. Just because they were there to start doesn't mean something can't come in and take them out, just as mother nature intended. Bucket biology can change any waterway, but didn't dams, irrigation ditches, and any other man made feature in a water system?
This is a giant can of worm that started with a simple question of to release or not to release? I guess we have all established that it is not that simple.
-
If your staying within the regs set by the MT F&G then its really nobody's business but your own.If you are taking them home to eat them good for you.Its not like any of our waters are struggling to produce more walleyes. :tipup:There is no conceivable scenario that is going to convince me they didnt travel up the Missouri at least as far as the Falls,why wouldnt they?
-
So you have the guy that catches 1 big eye a year,keeps it,gets ribbed by every expert on the net.Then you have the guy that catches 20+ a year and releases them all with a 10% fatality rate (at best)and gets praised for his skills....makes perfect sense.
-
So you have the guy that catches 1 big eye a year,keeps it,gets ribbed by every expert on the net.Then you have the guy that catches 20+ a year and releases them all with a 10% fatality rate (at best)and gets praised for his skills....makes perfect sense.
Any data to support this claim or are you just tailoring numbers to support your opinion?
-
Some of the C & R guys can sound a bit self-righteous. My wife would object to me going out if I never brought any home. She says I shouldn't be hurting the fish just for my own pleasure---hard to argue with that.
-
Any data to support this claim or are you just tailoring numbers to support your opinion?
Theres plenty of info available on the studys done,as high as 20% in some cases.
-
The reason im posting this is because lately ive been seeing people post pictures of their nice walleye they catch and getting shunned to no belief. Other people will post pictures of giant pike, lake trout, crappie, and so on with people saying nothing. Me personally only get to fish for walleye once or twice a year so I keep every one I catch within the laws because the wife and I love to eat them. Just curious what you guys think. ;D ;D
I feel your pain. I once fished a small pond where I go crappie fishing. C&R bass and pickerel. I once caught a large bass and sent it to the taxidermist. I posted a pic on a fishing website and I got blasted for taking the fish. I no longer post pics of my bass.
-
Theres plenty of info available on the studys done,as high as 20% in some cases.
all studies have their limitations....from what I've witnessed from release mortality comes from bait and dead stick fishing....a person with a release mentality who is actively fishing has a survival rate of near 100% in most waters..and if they think they have a situation that could kill the fish...they morally take it home and eat it...
-
My personal rule is any walleye over 22” goes back. It’s taste for me that affects the decision and then I consider breeding. I personally like to see big girls go back in the water for the most part. That’s my opinion. I do cringe a bit when I see a hog being held up that’s frozen stiff. However, Mille Lacs Lake in Minnesota is potentially evidence of a slot limit conundrum. The lake has a dominant year class of Large walleyes. It has been argued by several anglers and some DNR officers, albeit quietly, that these walleyes are literally stripping the lake of its baitfish and young walleye fry. The big fish are protected by law and it has been argued that they need to be thinned to promote younger fish survival rates. Mille lacs is considered one of the natural fisheries that has a high survival rate of spawn like Red, Vermillion, Leech, and a couple other lakes. Just google Mille lacs and you can read article after article about 1 fish limits, no walleye fishing allowed, and how anglers can’t keep 24”+ walleyes off their lines. No walleyes in the lake except for big ones. Tricky problem to have isn’t it?
Take what you will eat and eat what you take.
-
There have been study's that show when an eye gets to an age that it produces less fry than it consumes,but what do they know. ;D
-
Uh huh....
-
There have been study's that show when an eye gets to an age that it produces less fry than it consumes,but what do they know. ;D
Do you have links to back that up?
I can find ones which indicate a 24” fish will lay 130k eggs. http://www.perraultfallsarea.ca/did-you-know.html
And roughly 1300 fry. So a 24” walleye is eating ~4 walleye fry each and every day?
-
Theres plenty of info available on the studys done,as high as 20% in some cases.
In other words you made the figure up on the fly to suit your argument.
-
In other words you made the figure up on the fly to suit your argument.
A quick google search will give you plenty of studies and articles to sift through on the topic. I mostly catch and release (unless they're perch they taste too good haha) but I think a lot of anglers are blissfully ignorant of the fact that some fish you release will die. Mortality rates can be largely affected numerous conditions, such as handling techniques, tackle, whether you "played the fish out" bringing him in...etc. Properly handled fish have very high survival rates. I think if people who complain about someone keeping a big fish truly cared about releasing big fish and it having the best possible odds at survival they wouldn't be pulling them out of the water for their photo prior to releasing. Enough of my soap box I'm ready to get back to fishing!
-
There are lots of strong feelings on this topic for both sides. I never claimed to be a catch and release fisherman, I am however a proponent of selective harvest. I'll never begrudge someone who catches a trophy and wants to mount it, but I see these pictures or even when I'm out fishing piles of frozen fish laying on the ice, not just one or two, but thirty or forty, and they have several 8,9,10 pounders in there. I fish around here and some days catch few, other days pound the fish, but the average is like 14", then I go not 100 miles north to Canada, and not just one particular lake, but 7-8 different lakes and catch 60-100 and my average size is 22". These are not catch an release lakes either, just reasonable management. Any of our lakes could be like that, but it's a management thing. Our regulations are set up with a generous possession limit and no size limit, it's not a coincidence that our fishing is poorer. I know a lot of people see a limit as a daily goal and we never stop to think about whether we "can" keep that many, but "should" we keep that many. It starts with the angler, us, if we are satisfied with how the fishing is, then no problem, but I know what it could be and therefore am not. On another note, there is tons of studies and information out there on c&r mortality and egg viability in older bigger fish, to summarize everything I've read on the subject:
10% mortality for catch and release of trout is about standard, as far as warm water fish are concerned there is less than 2% when caught and released in general, which includes cutting line on deep embedded hooks, and up to 10% mortality when water is over 70 degrees, or if you dig the hook out of a gut hooked fish. They are just hardier species.
Older fish will produce more viable eggs than a younger fish, just due to sheer number of eggs, yes, the percentage is lower, but a 30" fish will have twice the eggs as a 20" fish, and even 10-12 pound walleyes will hatch over 80% of there eggs in good conditions. Not making any numbers up here. I love fishing, love eating fish, love everything about fish, just wish there was a little more common sense out there, our fisheries could be amazing instead of just mediocre.
-
Figure 8,learn how to use google or stop trolling for an argument,your choice. ::)
Mat
"Our regulations are set up with a generous possession limit and no size limit"
There are size limits on the waters I fish and there are plenty of published studys that show much higher mortality rates.
-
Figure 8,learn how to use google or stop trolling for an argument,your choice. ::)
Mat
"Our regulations are set up with a generous possession limit and no size limit"
There are size limits on the waters I fish and there are plenty of published studys that show much higher mortality rates.
Only four waters in the state have a size limit, Canyon ferry, hauser, holter, and lake Helena, which are all a moot point because you can keep even more fish out of each one of those. I am well aware of our regulations, I was just stating that there is sufficient evidence that we could have better, more productive fisheries if we took a cue from our friends just across the border. Not trying to troll or start a fight, just looking for better fishing for everyone now and in the future.
-
if your going to mount the large fish you catch go for it! they do not come around that that much.as for eating i rather keep smaller fish.the real big fish (walleyes , northern pike etc) get those little black veins in the meat that just do not look good. i have let some big walleye and northern go in hopes another fisher person has the same joy in catching them as i did. the mortality rate of released fish depends on what you are using ,bait higher lures lower.nothing to back up the last statement but common sense.bait swallow,lures lip.
-
haaa haaaaa haa. this is unbelievable. the origin of fishing is to eat fish. end of story. people that have turned it into a sport of catch and release are the worst criminals to the planet earth in my opinion. If you catch a monster, so be it. on a side note... I have to laugh when people are talking about mechanisms that drop fish back down to the bottom of the lake before there bladder burst. haa haaa haaaaa. you guys are rediculous and don't understand what it is to clean a fish no matter how small it is. DEAL WITH IT. if you catch a small fish than you spend more time cleaning and enjoying the fresh flesh. if by chance you land the big one...clean it, eat it and you don't have to fish for a few more months. common guys. get with it.
-
Speaking of trolls I think we have a winner here in chartreuse....move along Cheif.
-
Speaking of trolls I think we have a winner here in chartreuse....move along Cheif.
+1
-
I like to eat fish. we only get ice for x amounts of months in the state . I’ve dropped the bomb on back to back 20# pike spearing if anyone says they wouldn’t reality check u would
-
I don't believe I'm glutenous, if going fishing a couple times a year and catching only 3 or 4 for a meal or two is then I'm no longer fishing along side people that take pride in there catch. releasing a fish at the expense that it may die is ridiculous when it could feed you and sustain you till you go out next time, its better then a store bought fish which gill nets kill more than I care to know. I value the life of the fish that feeds my family and the skin and bones that go into my garden to bring up fresh produce. living off the land is incredible to me. that being said, if the law says release a fish, then I do, and if the law says you can catch 50 i don't, I only catch what I can handle and store and eat . I'm astonished that my views aren't shared more, as these where the ways not to long ago. confession though. I've released a 15lb 34.5 inch walleye back into canyon ferry. only fought for 5 seconds, caught in 4 ft of water below the boat and netted instantly. neither of us could physically fish anymore after seeing such a monster so we laughed and went home. Its hard not knowing what happened to that fish, I hope it paid off though.
-
its not trolling to share your opinion on a controversial topic. posting one in the first place is more of an act of trolling. chartreuse makes some good points.
-
I think maybe he just got back from his overseas diplomatic posting! ;D
-
chartreuse , not to long ago we had more and bigger fish and less fisher persons.
-
people that have turned it into a sport of catch and release are the worst criminals to the planet earth in my opinion.
Wow.....Inane comment of the season right there.....I don't eat fish, family doesn't eat fish & friends don't eat fish.....Sooooo.....I guess I'll cease my catch n' release "criminal to planet earth" ways & refrain from fishing altogether.....NOT !!
-
And then he praised him self for what he was criticizing everyone for.... :cookoo: :cookoo:
-
Wow.....Inane comment of the season right there.....I don't eat fish, family doesn't eat fish & friends don't eat fish.....Sooooo.....I guess I'll cease my catch n' release "criminal to planet earth" ways & refrain from fishing altogether.....NOT !!
+1.
What's wrong with catch and release exactly?
Because that's what they do on tv? Or because the fish may die?
I caught a tagged fish once that had been caught 8 times in a 6 year span. Mortality after release definitely depends on several factors. Use best judgment. Keep what you want to eat and don't waste. Nothing wrong with that and there's certainly nothing wrong with catch and release fishing. Not a criminal act anyway...
-
I must admit I was a little dramatic there, but catch and keepers get hammered all the time so I thought I'd punch back. I used to catch and release quite often, especially the summer fly season. But I've read allot of articles and have changed my mind. The number of catch and releasers is on the rise and catch and keepers are fighting for the right to keep fish. If I catch and keep 1 trout it's better than catch and releasing 30, from the trouts perspective of course and mortality data on summer fishing rivers. This in my mind must be similar when releasing iced fish, frozen gills, holes in the lip, busted bladders, etc.
-
Walleye grant me the serenity to accept the things I can not change
The courage to change the things I can
And wisdom to know the difference ;D
-
Take only what you need....I fish more for substenance..than sport...but am selective and keep a fraction what I catch.....when I see....one guy posing with 20 lbs of filets...I wonder a bit...hopefully all is shared and consumed....we can all have our opinions on catch and release....but the real issue is whether their is respect and gratitude for the creature taken...some are conscious others blind....and that is up to one's perception..and that's another story...the sin...is when fish/meat is wasted...and if you are releasing..and u are doing it in a conscious matter...it's one thing..and if you are eating and being selective...and consciously releasing...it's one thing...never understood trophy...why have a mount of the biggest thing killed?..a lion..giraffe...elepha nt...Kodiak or 25 lb pike or 6 lb smallie...I get that many on this site desire to have these trophies on their walls..or in their photos...but others are not that way...I personally would rather have those monster bulls in the woods..and those huge old fish in the waters....many of us here are expert hunters..we can take at will... But we choose to be selective...or not at all....to take just cause you can....?..sigh...
-
One of the interesting and recurring thoughts in this thread is the apparent belief by some that if something is legal, it’s therefore ethical. There are plenty of examples in (or missing from) MT regs that allow for legal practices I (and maybe you) don’t consider ethical.
-
Agree 100% Dave.
“Ethical behavior is doing the right thing when no one else is watching- even when doing the wrong thing is legal.”
― Aldo Leopold
-
IMO, this has been one of the more, if not THE most interesting topics I have read on this forum. I have a great amount of respect for all fisherman, and their reasons for keeping and/or releasing (this, of course does not include those who cross the line of the law). Years ago, I had an experience with a walleye fishermen getting angry about keeping walleye that they felt they should be released, and to be quite honest, their argument, at the time, was something that had never crossed my mind, and also made a lot of sense. I have enjoyed reading everyone's opinion on this topic, however, over the years I have developed a mindset that hasn't been expressed here yet. I DO considered myself a trophy fisherman/hunter. I have had a lot of success with big bulls/bucks/fish throughout the years. Where I have become different with fishing though, is that I do not have to keep a fish to enjoy it. I have literally fished multiple days on multiple trips, and only kept the fish that I felt would not survive, and have never let a piece of meat go to waste. If by chance I caught a trophy, pictures are taken and the fish is back in the water as soon as possible. While hunting, I have set standards of the quality of animal that I would like to harvest, and if three or four years pass without seeing that type of animal, I am very content to go without. I simply enjoy being in the mountains, on the ice, or on the lake in the summer. I enjoy watching others succeed, fill the freezer if needed/wanted, or take pride in a big fish that they wish to keep. I enjoy the thrill of not knowing what is one the other end of the line, or what is over the next ridge. In other words, I enjoys hunting WAY more that killing, and I enjoy fishing WAY more than catching. To judge someone that has different motivations is ignorant. I am fortunate enough to have a freezer full of beef every year, but also thoroughly enjoy eating fish/elk. Who am I to place judgment on the guy that needs to kill two cow elk a year and keep every fish he can legally keep to feed his family?? Who am I to judge the guy that loves putting mounts on the wall?? In my opinion, there is an off setting group of people that have differing methods/ways that make fishing fun. Until the FWP places lower limits or places a slot on a fishery, we should simply respect the people that are playing by the rules/laws, and criticize only those who are not.
-
well said snitch#8 we here are not judges. you do what you do i do what i do (within the law of course) i do not pass judgement on anyone lest i be judged.
-
Ditto. One thing that I do know is that we are never going to be able to come to a consensus to this topic. One thing to keep in mind is the varying ages of those on this site. I for one came from a depression era family where nothing went to waste and nothing went back into the water. Doesn't mean that is the way I am, but I can tell you that if my father, who would have been 88 today if he was still with us, was involved with the hunting or fishing trip, nothing would be let go to grow up. I think as a general rule the younger generations are much more tolerant of catch and release or letting the animal go to grow up another year or two. Doesn't mean its a good thing or a bad thing as long as a person is functioning within the limits of the laws that are established for us to follow. If you wish to change the laws/Rules, then run for political office and be part of the solution.
-
gf hard water guy you really dont want to run for office do you? just think of all the names and such you will be called.
-
Not on either of our lives hoofer. Not enough money in the world for that kind of headache. Probably more than a few people out there that would come out of the woodwork if my true identity was revealed in a campaign of this nature as well. :)
-
I think to say the younger generation is more aware of the benefits of c+r is a bit short sighted. I don't see the older generation as a bunch of hard headed bumpkins that would rape that land for all it's worth without care for the future generations. I think it had more to do with a trust that God was faithful and put those fish in the water to feed us. I hear the argument that it is more expensive to go fishing for fish than it is to buy them in the supermarket. And that big fish and bucks bring so much out of town money around we should adopt antler restrictions and slot and small bag limits on our fish. I'm here to say that I don't believe our fish and game should be sported out to trophy anglers while the natural way is pushed further and further into taboo. People that have no idea where there food comes from, sealed in cellophane with no face or idea where it lived it's life or what the conditions were like. That say I would rather grab a burger on the way home, or think cleaning fish after a day of grinding on the ice an impossible task. If I must expect flak or a hard time from someone like that for keeping a 21" walleye, you better think it and not say it.
-
Agree 100% Dave.
“Ethical behavior is doing the right thing when no one else is watching- even when doing the wrong thing is legal.”
― Aldo Leopold
That is a great quote from one of our best stewards of natural resources. I think a lot of people would benefit from becoming more knwolegable of his work.
-
Another way to show more respect for the resource is to kick the fillet habit. Bones are not scattered randomly thru a fish's body---they are quite easy to find, actually. Slow down, savor the flavor as you eat and pick out the bones as you eat. Much less waste. as for pike, the are shaped like logs anyway. What do you do with logs---you saw them up. So cut the pike into steaks rather than fillets.
-
My point was that the majority of the depression era babies where I grew up and have had the pleasure to know over the years, have the take the limit mentality and don't stop until you do. More than anything else it was a matter of having food to eat or being hungry. That mentality in a lot of cases was passed down to the offspring of the depression era babies as a learned behavior. We are creatures of our environment unless we make a conscious effort to change that. I might cause a fire storm by saying that, but its my opinion and I am entitled to state such. Not saying that those offspring can't grow out of the habit as I am testament to it, but there is a lot to what I say. Take what you or others can eat and eat what you take. Trophies, dinks, pigs, etc.
-
we fish for fun now. it would be a lot cheaper to go to the store for your fish.same for hunting although i love deer and elk steaks @25-30 dollars a pound.but wheres the fun in that.i keep enough fish for a few meals (to lazy to fillet a 50 fish limit because i will be going again) yes i fillet my fish hate bones they get stuck in my dentures.
-
Hoofer.
Sssssssh, don't tell our wives. I have been out to Holter the holy grail of perch fishing in this area and the back topic of this extended thread and have brought home the total of 6 perch. Do the price per pound on that one driving round trip in a full sized half ton 4x4 pickup along with the bait, beer, tackle, etc. You are 100% correct. I too am too lazy or maybe my adhd doesn't allow me to focus enough to do 50 fish, but I would have to catch that many to have to worry about it. Doesn't appear that is going to happen this year anyhow so that I guess is a good thing.
Tight lines all. I just broke a shoe lace in my work shoe so I need to get that replaced before I go home this evening. AHHH, the important things in life.
-
Ha. that reminds me of this fall when I went salmon fishing at fort peck. I only managed to catch two. My wife couldn't refrain from telling me those fish were $500 apiece. I told her "aren't you glad I didn't catch more?"
-
And yes, I kept them both.
-
And yes, I kept them both.
How do those kings taste out of Peck? Curious how they compare to a salt fish.
-
Can I ask what some of those things are?
Here’s one straight from the MT regs.
“All Paddlefish caught during the catch-and-release season must be released immediately and may not be gaffed or lifted out of the water. Captured fish must remain at least partially submerged in water at all times (to avoid injury to the fish).”
Keep in mind, these protections are regarding paddlefish legally snagged and landed using up to size 8/0 hooks.
-
How do those kings taste out of Peck? Curious how they compare to a salt fish.
This was snagging season so they are coming in to "spawn" and die. I hit it early and one was fantastic. I am typically a white fish guy but it was as good as any salmon I have had. I spent 8 years on the Puget Sound so I have had a few. Unfortunately the other one was starting to turn and get soft. I thought I could salvage it on the smoker but it was too far gone. I guess that makes one $1000 fish. Really glad I didn't catch more now.
-
Let em come. I had a buddy that used to say "In order for life to sustain, something has to die." I may not have eaten both those fish but they did get to go full circle in the cycle of life as opposed to being thrown in the trash. Come to think of it that same buddy used to also say "There's no point in arguing with stupid."
-
Right on. I lived in Kent for a couple years when Century Link Stadium was being built, my dad and I spent a lot of time fishing the Sound and coastal rivers. Talk about a fishery that has zero catch and release except for wild fish. And correct me if I am wrong, but the salmon in Fort Peck are obviously stocked, so are they used to restock the lake once they spawn? I wouldn't think it would be a viable source of reproduction, meaning that it would have to be helped out through stocking processes, so it shouldn't matter if you kept whatever you caught because that individual fish wouldn't make a contribution to the population anyways.
-
That is correct. FWP collect these fish in the fall and harvest their eggs to take back to the hatchery. The surviving fry get stocked into the lake in the spring. They live out a three or four year cycle and head back in to "spawn". They open up to snagging in the fall when they come in because these fish are just going to die anyway. It's actually a bigger waste of resources to not take them home. Although I think pretty much all people doing the snagging game realize it's not a catch and release sport. That being said I would like anyone who feels like attacking to know that in other scenarios I keep a few and I release a few as well. I like to eat fish and even more so I want my kids to be able to go fishing.
-
Just goes to show that the catch and release conundrum is not so easily answered. There are so many variables on each given fish, body of water, season, etc... I think the most important question would be to ask if fish that are caught, regardless of size or trophy 'status' are going to waste. I don't think I could condemn anyone for keeping any fish legally caught, so long as it is being consumed and not left to rot in the freezer unti an angler deems it inedible and throws it away.
-
I would agree with that. I think most people still know the difference between right and wrong and I usually find that the most defensive people have the guiltiest consciences.
-
Pretty open ?
-
Just goes to show that the catch and release conundrum is not so easily answered. There are so many variables on each given fish, body of water, season, etc... I think the most important question would be to ask if fish that are caught, regardless of size or trophy 'status' are going to waste. I don't think I could condemn anyone for keeping any fish legally caught, so long as it is being consumed and not left to rot in the freezer unti an angler deems it inedible and throws it away.
makes perfect sense...still won't keep trophy fish...aint judging no one...but like ive said...feel good about those big boys in the water...
-
there are so many ways to catch....and catch n release in a way where you increase the release survival ratio..sky high....water temps..playing out..depths..bait vs active fishing.. if you are dead sticking and you gut shot a rainbow on a worm? keep it..no matter if it counts against your limit..and if you are going fly fishing in summer where water temps high and stream flows are low...don't hook some fish for your personal enjoyment.go hiking instead..be aware...and think of the fish first....
-
If you are truly that concerned about the fish you would never wet a line. ::) how can you sleep at night knowing one of the those non native speckled carp might not have survived the unnecessary torment you put it through for your own enjoyment.And if it does imagine the years of PTSD it will endure with no other shoulder to lean on other than a lonely crawdad or muskrat.
-
Now that you put it that way, maybe I'll give it up altogether!.
.
.
..
.
.
.
Naaah, not happening!!
-
We could start a support group for Caught and Released fish,a safe place where they can share their stories and receive the support they need to return to society. :'(CARA :'(
-
so you are saying if you wet a line you don't care about fish....so...the rancher doesn't care about the cow if he eats beef....and so on down the line...all I was saying just be aware of the situation..if the fish is going die..eat it..and if you are catching and releasing..be educated and aware as much as possible to lower mortality percentages...everythi ng in between is personal ethics...and those obviously are diferrent from person to person....
-
CCC
its hard to argue with your logic. nobody should try. respect is a good quality.