Wow very interesting read. And although I don't agree with the state releasing a state record fish I have to vote for it being recognized as a State record. And Carly says it best
Quote:
Stocked or not it's a record fish.
What if it was stocked 1-oz less than the record at release and was caught later 1-oz heavier than the record? Would it qualify then? What if it was 1-lb less at release and was caught 2 years later and was 1-lb over?
Taken to an extreme should any fish raised in a hatchery qualify?
Where do you think all the Rainbow trout records are from, yes the hatchery. I used to know the state record Rainbow trout holder and he caught it opening day on the salmon river. Only to get beat a few years later after the state released a bigger one.
With that said, don't ask me if i'd rather catch a 5 year holdover trout weighing 8lbs than a 15lb right off the hatchery truck trout. Thats why I love fishing East Twin. If I catch a big trout I know its been living in the wild for a while.
#893815 - 12/08/0710:53 PM
Re: The Stocking of State Record Breaking Fish
[Re: Jayhova]
Jon Pski
Member
Registered: 04/15/02
Posts: 5742
Loc: Winsted, CT
Interesting poll. I think it has to stand as a State record. I don't like the idea of the state releasing ready made record fish BUT..... This fish must still be landed using typical angling methods. In all honesty, how many trout fishermen out there are actually geared up to LAND the next State record? The beast of Kensington is 20+ pounds. I'd bet that 98% of the angling public just do not have the skills and tackle neccasary to land a fish of that size. I primarily bass fish and can tell you first hand that even amongst the bass guys ,who tend to use much heavier gear than trout folk, odds are low they will actually land the next state record bass (which is smaller in weight than the trout). I was showing a trout angler from Japan the picture of the "Beast" and told him, "Many will hook that fish, no one will catch it". It should stand as a Staet record due to the individuals skills, not how the fish was created.
Stock the Beast in either the Farmington or Housatonic TMAs where it can't be kept as a state record but provides angling thrills multiple times. It could also move around more going downstream into larger waters.
#905831 - 01/13/0808:56 PM
Re: The Stocking of State Record Breaking Fish
[Re: Buck]
Don D
Member
Registered: 01/03/02
Posts: 7142
Loc: Bristol, CT
Buck,you have it right. No way the state should release a state record fish that was grown that big at a hatchery any where but a catch and release area. That's just plain stupid. Why not raise the world record bass in an aquarium and release it in a small farm pond so some one could catch it. How do you think that would go over guys?
If there are fish to catch. I'll be there to my end.
Interesting poll. I think it has to stand as a State record. I don't like the idea of the state releasing ready made record fish BUT..... This fish must still be landed using typical angling methods. In all honesty, how many trout fishermen out there are actually geared up to LAND the next State record? The beast of Kensington is 20+ pounds. I'd bet that 98% of the angling public just do not have the skills and tackle neccasary to land a fish of that size. I primarily bass fish and can tell you first hand that even amongst the bass guys ,who tend to use much heavier gear than trout folk, odds are low they will actually land the next state record bass (which is smaller in weight than the trout). I was showing a trout angler from Japan the picture of the "Beast" and told him, "Many will hook that fish, no one will catch it". It should stand as a Staet record due to the individuals skills, not how the fish was created.
Exactly my thinking. Take the record trout they shocked at Twin for example. How many times might he have been hooked and jst overmatched the tackle being used. How many CT are running 4lb test line or leaders on light action or medium action rods? If you hook that thing there is no way you will be able to move it with that gear. You'd need a set up similiar to something used on Ontario. Naturally that would limit the action for the day to only truly large fish so many do not go there as they would rather have action than target a new record specifically with intent to land it.
#924534 - 03/02/0801:23 PM
Re: The Stocking of State Record Breaking Fish
[Re: buckcall]
Brown Bagger
Member
Registered: 11/05/04
Posts: 473
Loc: Black Rock, Bridgeport, CT
Its not a question of stocking its a matter of stocking fish so large. Read through the previous posts, I wasnt suggesting to end stocking. You're right, without stocking there would NO trout left in no time, but stocking state record breaking fish or fish close to that size is the issue I was trying to raise for discussion.
Previous Topic
Index