floatingjointed Posted July 28, 2011 Report Posted July 28, 2011 Hello Everyone I was fishing in Scugog today, and luckily i got 4 bass, 3 of them about 1-2 lb, and 1 is about 3 lbs, I only keep the 3 lbs one, when i get back to the dock, a guy see me holding the fish, and he told me that I should release the bigger one and not the smallers the reason he said is the 3lb or above is female, should be release and let them lay eggs, so the lake will have more fish... But my theory is if I release the small one(1-2lb), they still have a chance to grow and mate, and the bigger one will just eat more fish for growing bigger. what do u think? or what should i do , cos i also want to keep the lake healthy (more fish and more balance of the lake) and what will you keep or release thanks
Whitespinnerbait Posted July 28, 2011 Report Posted July 28, 2011 , a guy see me holding the fish, and he told me that I should release the bigger one ............what do u think? thanks Tell the guy to mind his own buisiness
ChrisK Posted July 28, 2011 Report Posted July 28, 2011 Welcome to our site.... Everyone is entitled to there opinion when it comes to ethics. Keep what you want as long as its in your possession limit.
Terry Posted July 28, 2011 Report Posted July 28, 2011 well the guy is right.. very few smaller fish live to become a 3lber and smaller ones have far less toxins in them if the guy was casually chatting with you..great info but if he came up to you and told you...it's no of his business ..you are 100% within your rights to keep the big ones
bowshep Posted July 28, 2011 Report Posted July 28, 2011 l don't no much about Bass do they really change sex when they get bigger
asdve23rveavwa Posted July 28, 2011 Report Posted July 28, 2011 Tell the guy to mind his own buisiness Probably the best answer right there
lew Posted July 28, 2011 Report Posted July 28, 2011 l don't no much about Bass do they really change sex when they get bigger Not sure about bass either, but I know my cousin Leonard sure did
asdve23rveavwa Posted July 28, 2011 Report Posted July 28, 2011 Not sure about bass either, but I know my cousin Leonard sure did Almost spewed a bit of coffee on that one
grimsbylander Posted July 28, 2011 Report Posted July 28, 2011 Not sure about bass either, but I know my cousin Leonard sure did Hahahaha THAT was funny! Poor Leona!
lew Posted July 28, 2011 Report Posted July 28, 2011 Hahahaha THAT was funny! Poor Leona! Actually, it's now Leonora
Gregoire Posted July 28, 2011 Report Posted July 28, 2011 I know a Leonora. Is he/she a bit heavy set?
lew Posted July 28, 2011 Report Posted July 28, 2011 I know a Leonora. Is he/she a bit heavy set? Dunno, haven't seen him/her in years but if their heavy set it could be either muscles or pregnant
Dave Bailey Posted July 28, 2011 Report Posted July 28, 2011 Some species of fish can change sex in response to various types of environmental pressures, but I don't think it happens in largemouth or smallmouth. And like has already been said, tell him to mind his own business.
timmeh Posted July 28, 2011 Report Posted July 28, 2011 If you're really interested in helping keep the fishery healthy you should let the big ones go. Your theory is not correct as most small fish will not grow to be that size. It's just like people, not everyone can grow to be 6 foot 4. Genetics play a key role in determining how large a fish can grow. And it's in the best interest of the fishery to keep those big fish and their genetics in the lake. Think of it this way; next time you spend your time and money to go fishing do you want to catch 3 lb bass or 1 lb bass. Also as Terry mentioned larger fish have more toxins built up in their meat, so it's better for your health the eat a smaller fish as well.
Live2fish85 Posted July 28, 2011 Report Posted July 28, 2011 As said before the bigger the bass the more likely that there offspring will be of a bigger size, also the 1 to 2 pounders are better to eat for taste and health reason. But all in all the guy should really mind his own business, you didn't do anything wrong so don't worry. And welcome to the board.
DanD Posted July 28, 2011 Report Posted July 28, 2011 If you're really interested in helping keep the fishery healthy you should let the big ones go. Your theory is not correct as most small fish will not grow to be that size. It's just like people, not everyone can grow to be 6 foot 4. Genetics play a key role in determining how large a fish can grow. And it's in the best interest of the fishery to keep those big fish and their genetics in the lake. Think of it this way; next time you spend your time and money to go fishing do you want to catch 3 lb bass or 1 lb bass. Also as Terry mentioned larger fish have more toxins built up in their meat, so it's better for your health the eat a smaller fish as well. If genetics play the roll as you state (which I do believe); then a fish that is genetically small, does not necessarily mean that it is a young fish or have any less toxins then a larger fish of the same age and species. The percentage of toxins, calculating in their different weights, would likely be the same. Yes if you consume larger fish, you will be eating more toxins; but that’s because there’s more fish to eat. Dan.
canadadude Posted July 28, 2011 Report Posted July 28, 2011 I look at it this way the 1-2 lbers taste great, the 3+lbers not so much, so for me the 1-2 are my eaters if I want a meal.In most populations there are alot of 1-2 lb fish but as you get to the 3+ and into the trophy sizes the numbers reduce drasticly.To each his own , but next time out keep a few 1 lbers for the dinner table and you will soon be letting the bigger ones go.
craigdritchie Posted July 28, 2011 Report Posted July 28, 2011 Not sure about bass either, but I know my cousin Leonard sure did That's the best comment I've ever read on this website!
GBW Posted July 28, 2011 Report Posted July 28, 2011 Not sure about bass either, but I know my cousin Leonard sure did I LOL so hard on that Lew I think I may have pee'ed a little...
jedimaster Posted July 28, 2011 Report Posted July 28, 2011 If you want to keep it and its within your limit then keep it. As long as your putting some thought into it and your within your limit go ahead. What is better? keeping 4 small fish or 1 large fish? The genetic makeup of the larger fish has allowed it to reach its size. however at 3 pounds your not exactly taking the cream of the crop. For me personally, I don't keep any bass, musky or pike as they are considered to be catch an release fish by many as they are prized by sport anglers. Walleye, pan fish, white fish and smaller trout are keepers within the various slot sizes imo.
fishing Posted July 28, 2011 Report Posted July 28, 2011 (edited) Small fish taste better. And big one normally has more toxins in it. Genetics make sense to me also. Edited July 29, 2011 by fishing
mercman Posted July 28, 2011 Report Posted July 28, 2011 Not sure about bass either, but I know my cousin Leonard sure did My auntie Norman did too Lew. It was very confusing as i grew up. Never knew whether to get Chanel no5 or Old spice.
floatingjointed Posted July 29, 2011 Author Report Posted July 29, 2011 Thanks everyone for the friendly reply. so I think its better to keep the 1-2 lbers for eating or the lake and maybe this is the last 3 lber that I will take, here is the fish... one more thing is the guy just casually talking to me, nothing rude. and he is right, she is a female Thank you
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now