View Full Version : I think most of us enjoy eating walleye but agree that putting back the big ones to grow, spawn and pass on their genes makes sense and we eat the smaller fish. After losing a BIG fish the other day,
Steve CO
06-05-2003, 02:02 PM
EricCO
06-05-2003, 02:16 PM
No message
Olyolson
06-05-2003, 03:07 PM
I don't know about that. The 19.36 lber. DFW netted in Moses Lake earlier this year looked healthy and as full of eggs as any fish I've ever seen. If I caught what I thought was a record fish it definetly would go in the livewell and take a trip 50 mph across the lake or river to a certified scale.
T-Mac
06-05-2003, 08:38 PM
Depends on where I was when I caught this thing and how many people were around to watch. :)
mossboss
06-06-2003, 05:17 AM
I would not feel bad. I have released thousands of fish over the years, so I feel I have done my part. I'll take one for the wall.
bob oh
06-06-2003, 05:34 AM
Doesn't matter how good she looked, she isn't as fertile as a 3 -5 #er. She's an "old lady" not a breeder.
a potential record fish? i keep a listing on the boat. one that would be close would be weighed and keeped if it was close. beyond that anything over 5 lbs gets released. there are plenty of good eaters well under 5 lbs.
Trapper
06-06-2003, 08:59 AM
I don't usually respond to these polls, but if a fish were a potential record(state or world) one would be foolish to put it back in the water. Of course, you would have to be certain that it was close to being a record if keeping a huge fish is completely against your judgement. I had a guy ask me about the state record crappie because he caught one around 13". He obviously wasn't close.
Turning back a world record walleye would be like throwing a winning lottery ticket in the fire. It's not all about fame and fortune, but a world record fish is probably not going to go back in the water and create other world record fish. A fish like that is one in a zillion.
eyedoktr
06-06-2003, 09:18 AM
I didn't vote because I'm really not sure what I'd do. If I was fishing on a small lake that couldn't stand the pressure it would receive after a world record was caught there,I would not report it, much less keep it. I would though document everything necessary to have a replica made. If I was fishing a large body of water like Lake Erie, I still am not sure I'd keep it. What's it good for?? There is no monetary value for a record fish and who needs the publicity it would create? If even 1% of her eggs matured, that would keep the gene pool going for a few more years.
Koldfront Kraig
06-06-2003, 12:30 PM
Other than the recognition, what would you gain by having a world or state record?
Big Walters
06-06-2003, 02:07 PM
The world record whitetail sure has brought Milo Hanson some cash in his back pocket. As walleye fishing becomes more popular, a world record fish could put you in retirement forever! You may have to do some interviews and speak at fishing shows, but is that really work?
A world record big girl goes straight to the wall....the only treasure you'll find in any US waters!
Trapper
06-06-2003, 02:43 PM
How about this Skindog. "You want to take my world record walleye to a sportshow and tell people about the fact that I caught it on your.....(you name it as long as it's legit)? Pay me". Or how about this? "If you want to catch a world record walleye, you have to run a....(you name the boat)".
In a way, you are correct. As long as the person that caught it is reasonably marketable, the fish is worth money. Maybe the woman that caught the SD record could chime in and let us know if her life changed at all.
Steve CO
06-06-2003, 03:42 PM
Well, I guess I won't stew about that one anymore. 76 to 4 that most of you would keep that record fish. Nice to know that we won't feel guilty when we tell our buddies on Walleye Central!
We might just have more fish if y'all would start harvesting the bigger fish and let the little ones grow and reach their prime. Some of them little "eaters" are the big girls offspring with all those "desirable" genes. By harvesting smaller fish, you need more to make a mess. Harvesting more little fish results in less big ones.
Ask any stock farmer. Do ya harvest the babies and keep the old ones or cull the old ones and let the babies grow up to reproduce?
I asked a farmer friend of mine. His answer? "It's called Veal".
Tight Lines All,
Shep
Jason_B
06-15-2003, 04:44 PM
I surely hope that people don't follow the old lady that caught the South Dakota state record. If they do Zebco is going to be in business.