Would you Kill a cat for your name in the books?

I’ve heard two points of veiw to this.

I thought I would use the poll and if you care to comment as to why, that would be good too.

My problem with most people that kill fish for “trophy status” don’t have an accurate scale and end up with smaller fish than they were in the net. This shrinkage then causes the fisherman to say, it’s too small too mount, so I’ll just eat it. I think this happens all the time with all species. Unfortunately I’ve seen this happen first hand to a 10lb walleye a few years back. The fish ended up being and 8lb fish on an accurate scale.

As for a state record cat, I wouldn’t know if I had the record or not. Besides, I don’t think my walleye gear would allow me to land her anyway.

Great question Brian!

I didn’t vote because I didn’t see the option that said “Keep it alive and get someone down to the landing to officially weigh it, then release it” which I think would be my preferred option – you don’t have to kill the cat to get in the record books.

Quote:

---

“Keep it alive and get someone down to the landing to officially weigh it, then release it” which I think would be my preferred option – you don’t have to kill the cat to get in the record books.

---

DITO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ummmm….you do in MN!!

Of course!

I would not do it. Who would you find to do a skin mount on a flathead that size? I’d release it, and then sit back and enjoy all the controversy that would follow on whether it truely was a “record” fish . Don’t forget your camera!!

Just to clairfy, to become a MN State record (any) fish, the fish must be turned over to the DNR among the other requirments.

So again, in MN you couldn’t mount it or have it weighted then release.

I know Dirk, we’ve talked about this before.

I would use my scale to weigh it, snap a couple hundred pictures (until the memory was gone or the batteries were dead) . Then let them test my scale as much as they want. It wouldn’t get me into the books…but I would have a hard time sleeping at night knowing a “bigun” had to be pulled from the gene pool and no one else would ever have a chance at a lifetime memory…just because I wanted my name on paper.

I don’t believe anyway that you answered the poll is wrong. But the trend is that if you don’t fish cat’s frequently, you would have a tendency to take one out of the river.

It would be interesting to find out what the general population would say. Remeber, there are people that don’t log onto IDA…believe it or not

I wouldn’t just kill it I would also ask if I could have the meat and i would eat it as well. A fish that big has many spiritual qualities and I would what to injest those qualities to make me a gooder fisherman. Where I live they call Flatheads candy bars because they they taste so good. Can’t get enough of them to eat.

Not only does it have spiritual qualities, it has chemical “qualities” like concentrated PCBs and methyl mercury. Not so bad for you, but don’t feed it to your wife and kids – there’s a lot of good research linking mercury to neural damage, birth defects, etc… It’s not in the fat, either, it’s right in the lean meat and it bioaccumulates, so the biggest predators have the highest concentrations. A fish that has been in most any river in the US for upwards of 35 years has qualities you may not want to ingest.

If you can not keep the fish what does the DNR do with it?

Quote:

---

Just to clairfy, to become a MN State record (any) fish, the fish must be turned over to the DNR among the other requirments.

So again, in MN you couldn’t mount it or have it weighted then release.

---

I believe they do DNA testing to verify the species.

Lenny Jamison

I checked on this last year. DNA testing not only tells them the species, but if the fish came from the waters the angler claims…I guess.

Quote:

---

I checked on this last year. DNA testing not only tells them the species, but if the fish came from the waters the angler claims…I guess.

---

Pretty advanced for mere record-keeping, it’s not like the state is paying the guy or anything – even without it, most fraudulent records get debunked eventually. Anyway, they could clip a fin and get that – still no need to kill the fish.

I think the saying goes….”DNR works in mysterious ways”…or was that God?

Keep it alive, call the DNR, and when they show up and see just how big it is and that they will need to take it, tell them to urine off and release it right in front of them. Of course you and your buds will have plenty of measurements, weights, and pictures before hand.

If you register the fish with the IGFA as either a line class or an all tackle record the fish can still be released. I do not believe they have state records though.

Lenny Jamison

Having fished for about 50 years and never catching a record fish of any type I would probably keep it, albeit, I would probably spend the rest of my life feeling guilty about keeping the fish.

2fishy?

“guilty”…ain’t that the truth! ‘specially since you had to have a replica made…

‘Fishing for Fifty years without a record being caught”….

Your still fishing aren’t cha?

Dare to Dream!

Amen Brother ‘Duck!