Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[ynot]

 a 72 lb spring taken at senora lodge ,n.e. of cambell river a new lodge record.good things happening in the ocean.

[Blackrt03]

a 72 lb spring taken at senora lodge ,n.e. of cambell river a new lodge record.good things happening in the ocean.

wow monster..any pictures would love to see the beast

[ynot]

i know the guide ,top notch. here is a picture.
http://twitpic.com/2l8jdx

[Randofish]

That is definitely a pig
Saw it on the local news last night.WOW!!

[Blackrt03]

i know the guide ,top notch. here is a picture.
http://twitpic.com/2l8jdx

holy cow that monster is so thick..huge belly
ynot thanks for the pic

[Tex]

Right on, another hawg killed for bragging rights!  Wicked.   

Disclaimer - I know it's legal, it's also just very disappointing.

[rymack]

We had a 78 pound release this year...it was chrome compared to this thing! I know some of the other lodges around here have had a few other 70 pound releases as well. i have been talking to some people with the Salmon society and they were mentioning that the whole Big fish breed Big fish may not be as absolute as we think.

We don't really know the story ...it may have been a bleeder , unable to revive etc. Also from what I hear Sonora usually has very poor salmon fishing.

[Rodney]

Large fish don't always produce large fish, as genetic makeup in a small fish coming from a large fish may still result in a potentially large offspring. The size of the fish, IMO, is more dependent to the amount of feed available. That being said, large fish has a much higher fecundity (number of offsprings that they can produce) therefore the loss of one large fish may influence the health of the run quantitatively.

[HARLEY]

Right on, another hawg killed for bragging rights!  Wicked.   

Disclaimer - I know it's legal, it's also just very disappointing.

I do not understand your disappointment --BUT-- you are certainly entitled to your sorrow.  I for one would consider the size of that fish to be the highlight of my many years of fishing and would have gladly given it the BONK shall we say. Nothing in this life lives for ever even if you are big and fat. I am sure the angler paid a pretty penny to catch the fish and being totally legal it is his right to make the choice that he made. I for one would have made the same choice. The only scarey point would be the $1000.00 bill to mount the fish or there abouts.

[ynot]

and a nice big tip for tommy.

[Rodney]

What is more satisfying? Spending additional money to mount it and tell the story while visitors wonder why there is a dead fish in your house, or take a photo of it and send it on its way to produce thousands more offsprings and tell the story whenever you show the photograph?

Personally I choose the photograph.

I've never regreted to release a fish, but have regreted to kill a fish. There's nothing wrong with harvesting a fish to eat, but some fish are a bit too special to kill.

At the end of the day, it was a legal kill. Maybe one day we will actually have a maximum size limit implemented.

[BigFisher]

What is more satisfying? Spending additional money to mount it and tell the story while visitors wonder why there is a dead fish in your house, or take a photo of it and send it on its way to produce thousands more offsprings and tell the story whenever you show the photograph?

Personally I choose the photograph.

I've never regreted to release a fish, but have regreted to kill a fish. There's nothing wrong with harvesting a fish to eat, but some fish are a bit too special to kill.

At the end of the day, it was a legal kill. Maybe one day we will actually have a maximum size limit implemented.

Im with Rodney on this one. Just like the guy who pulled out a picture of a 25 pound steelhead with the KWB in the backgorund, I had to hear his storey.

[Robert_G]

No question I would have bonked it. That would be 15 meals for my family....at least.

[bbronswyk2000]

What is more satisfying? Spending additional money to mount it and tell the story while visitors wonder why there is a dead fish in your house, or take a photo of it and send it on its way to produce thousands more offsprings and tell the story whenever you show the photograph?

Personally I choose the photograph.

I've never regreted to release a fish, but have regreted to kill a fish. There's nothing wrong with harvesting a fish to eat, but some fish are a bit too special to kill.

At the end of the day, it was a legal kill. Maybe one day we will actually have a maximum size limit implemented.

I have felt that same way Rod. I dont kill many fish anymore. Other than the few salmon I kill ever year thats about it.

[Tex]

I do not understand your disappointment --BUT-- you are certainly entitled to your sorrow.  I for one would consider the size of that fish to be the highlight of my many years of fishing and would have gladly given it the BONK shall we say. Nothing in this life lives for ever even if you are big and fat. I am sure the angler paid a pretty penny to catch the fish and being totally legal it is his right to make the choice that he made. I for one would have made the same choice. The only scarey point would be the $1000.00 bill to mount the fish or there abouts.

Rodney summed it up really well, I think, Harley.  A photo and the satisfaction of watching such a gorgeous specimen swim away would give me incredible pleasure... bonking it would would've almost certainly led me to regretting it.

As for big fish not making big fish - I am surprised to hear that, and would be interested in doing more reading.  Every animal I can think of passes on certain genetic code that is in part predisposed to be similar to it's parents... I can't imagine why it would be different in salmon?

Tex