PlanetCatfish.com

brilliant... the guy catches a state record fish, and the first thing he does is kill it.... Americans!

Carp37 wrote:brilliant... the guy catches a state record fish, and the first thing he does is kill it.... Americans!

So no other nationalities kill things? I think you'd better have a little more thought before you post, no? I'm not very keen on posts getting weighed down with that kind of opinion.

Jools

It can't be registered as a record without killing it. They have to examine it and ID it to species (there is sometimes genetic testing), weigh it, and check the body cavity for added weights (lead sinkers, rocks, etc).

Silly Euros.

Jools wrote:So no other nationalities kill things? I think you'd better have a little more thought before you post, no? I'm not very keen on posts getting weighed down with that kind of opinion.

Jools

I sincerely had/have no intention of angering or upsetting anyone of any nationality on the forum, Jools- I wouldn't have used a smiley were that my intention- the fact that I did use one shows that it was just a flippant remark. However, I do believe I have a right to be depressed by the act of killing fish for no reason- it's taken decades for some British anglers to stop treating pike as vermin, and some anglers still kill eels (even more worrying in view of their recent decline in numbers), but the days when freshwater anglers routinely kill non-food fish have thankfully pretty much gone in the UK- my grandfather used to tell of days when he caught the train dwon to Lincolnshire to fish the River Witham, to find piles of bream left on the bank by anglers who had caught the fish and then had no further use for them.

Jimoo wrote:It can't be registered as a record without killing it. They have to examine it and ID it to species (there is sometimes genetic testing), weigh it, and check the body cavity for added weights (lead sinkers, rocks, etc).

Silly Euros.

Admittedly our system is far from perfect, but we do have a record fish system, as I believe do virtually all other european countries- in the UK the catch has to be witnessed (as does the weighing), and the scales then have to be checked; photographic evidence is also required in some cases. We've had a few records thrown out or claims rejected as a result of suspected hybridisation (roach/rudd and crucian carp/goldfish being particularly problematic even from photographic evidence, lateral line scale-counts and fin ray counts), plus the European catfish record being scrapped due to illegal imports of record-sized fish, so as I say it's not perfect, but it's not necessary to kill a fish over here to claim a record.

jimoo wrote:Silly Euros.

?????? Quite unnecessary imo.

Channel Catfish have been introduced well beyond their natural range into all the major river systems in the Western United States and I can assure to those it may concern, this species is regulated as a game fish in this country and the populations are prodigious. Harvesting them is not enough to make the slightest dent in their numbers and once you get past their ugly heads, they are a very delicious food fish.
They were introduced to the Columbia River and its tributaries in the 188o's and made themselves at home, frequently reaching weights over 10 lbs but they average 4-5 lbs. The policies of the day spread many popular game fish of the Mississippi basin out West and now provide a great deal of recreational opportunities but it came at the expense of fine native wild cutthroat trout populations. Even Rainbow Trout introductions harmed the native cutthroat trout nearly everywhere it occurred. There were a few places where both species evolved together but each exploited a specific niche and remained genetically distinct. The introduced Rainbows often hybridized with the native cutthroats and the latter species was lost or remains threatened for that reason in many river systems. Introduced European Brown Trout also nearly wiped out native Eastern Brook Trout and Western Cutthroats although few anglers today would want to loose their opportunities to fish for this perhaps, most wily of the trout to catch on artificial flies or lures.

The Pacific Northwest States pay a healthy bounty of $4 up for every native Pike Minnow because they eat so many of the Steelhead and Salmon smolts as they make their way out to sea from their hatching beds and despite some people making a living from just catching the Columbia Pike Minnows, they persist in enormous numbers. (This "Minnow" can grow to over 3 feet long)
Sport fishing is legal, regulated and managed heavily by many State and Federal agencies and they all regret the actions of an earlier age that introduced the non-native species but have to make the best of it since they are here to stay.

The United States has highly managed fisheries these days and no species threatened by extinction, however small and rare is protected by a network of Federal and State laws. The harvesting of some Channel Catfish has no impact on the wild populations and it is also a popular aquacultured species in the SE USA. It's the little Daces, Darters and native Killiefish that are on the forefront of conservation efforts. The big fish are doing quite fine, thank you very much.

Carp37 wrote:I sincerely had/have no intention of angering or upsetting anyone of any nationality on the forum, Jools- I wouldn't have used a smiley were that my intention- the fact that I did use one shows that it was just a flippant remark. However, I do believe I have a right to be depressed by the act of killing fish for no reason- it's taken decades for some British anglers to stop treating pike as vermin, and some anglers still kill eels (even more worrying in view of their recent decline in numbers), but the days when freshwater anglers routinely kill non-food fish have thankfully pretty much gone in the UK- my grandfather used to tell of days when he caught the train dwon to Lincolnshire to fish the River Witham, to find piles of bream left on the bank by anglers who had caught the fish and then had no further use for them.

Err, actually it was the smiley that made me take more attention. Bear in mind smileys are used to convey emotion, positive or negative, and in this case I had interpreted your use of "evil" as adding emphasis to the preceding word, "Americans".

Anyway, I am just being even handed and trying to keep our forum free from mudslinging by nipping anything dubious in the bud. Thanks however for writing a full explanation. I too have been disgusted by the waste of others when dealing with nature - I won't go into the details but it certainly bothers me too.

Jools

jimoo wrote:Silly Euros.

Great, I make a point of asking you guys not to post generalist mudslinging comments and you add to your informative post with that.

As Marc, says, pretty unnecessary.

Jools

jimoo wrote:It can't be registered as a record without killing it. They have to examine it and ID it to species (there is sometimes genetic testing), weigh it, and check the body cavity for added weights (lead sinkers, rocks, etc).

Silly Euros.

Sorry, that is not 100% true. There maybe a couple USA states that may want it dead, that I may not be aware of, but. . . .I can say that most states do not need it dead. The local DNR comes out to verify the species (which you can tell by looking at it) fills out some paper work and that's it. I've talked to a few guys that have caught a state record and they all have released the fish back into the water after the DNR finished their thing.

I agree, this guy should have CPRed (Catch Photo Release) it.