HTHM Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 http://www.duluthnewstribune.com/event/article/id/292558/group/homepage/ Possible record catch could land angler in troubleA potential ice fishing world-record lake trout caught by a Crane Lake man earlier this month has been confiscated from a Duluth taxidermist by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.By: Sam Cook, Duluth News Tribune Scott of Crane Lake holds a lake trout he caught Feb. 8 on Lac La Croix, a Minnesota-Ontario border lake northeast of Crane Lake. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources enforcement officers, working in cooperation with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources have confiscated the fish. The Ontario MNR is investigating to determine whether the fish was caught legally. Rob Scott photo Submitted Trout A potential ice fishing world-record lake trout caught by a Crane Lake man earlier this month has been confiscated from a Duluth taxidermist by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. The catch is under investigation by enforcement officials with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, officials with the agency said. The fish, which unofficially weighed more than 52 pounds, was confiscated Monday night from Bowe Taxidermy in Duluth, owner Randy Bowe said. It was confiscated by Scott Staples, a Minnesota Department of Natural Resources conservation officer, Bowe said. The Minnesota DNR is cooperating with Ministry of Natural Resources enforcement officials in the investigation. The fish was caught in Ontario waters of Lac La Croix, a border lake northeast of Crane Lake. MNR conservation officer Joe Burroughs, based in Atikokan, Ontario, confirmed that the MNR is investigating the catch but offered no other details. The angler, Robb Scott, 65, of Crane Lake, caught the large lake trout while fishing on Lac La Croix on Feb. 8. It was weighed at 52 pounds, 3 ounces, on a handheld scale later that day. The fish was 45 inches long with a 32-inch girth, Scott said. It was caught on a tip-up line, Scott said. In a telephone interview Wednesday, Scott said he caught two lake trout that day but gave the first one away after catching the larger lake trout. His limit was one lake trout. The big lake trout hadn’t been weighed on a certified, official scale before it was confiscated, Bowe said. Scott had hoped to have the fish weighed officially and was considering having it submitted for record status. According to the National Fresh Water Fishing Hall of Fame in Hayward, the current ice fishing world record for a tip-up-caught lake trout is 29 pounds, 6 ounces. It was caught in 1996 in Willoughby Lake in Vermont. MNR officials would not say whether their investigation focuses on an over-limit issue or more specifically on the large lake trout. Scott said he has a nonresident Ontario conservation fishing license. According to Ontario fishing regulations, that allows him to catch and possess one lake trout. He had caught a roughly 4-pound lake trout early in the morning on Feb. 8, he said. That fish was on the ice when two Ministry of Natural Resources conservation officers came by to check him, Scott said. After he caught the big lake trout early in the afternoon, he kept it and gave the smaller lake trout to his nephew, who was fishing not far away on the lake, Scott said. Ontario fishing regulations define a catch limit this way: “The catch limit is the number of fish you are allowed to catch and keep in one day and includes fish that are not immediately released and any fish eaten or given away.” “I mean, it was the heat of the moment,” Scott said in Wednesday’s telephone interview. “I’m not trying to hide anything.” “What I know to date is that on Monday the DNR came by to investigate my fishing on LLC (Lac La Croix) on Feb 8th and the possibility of an over-limit catch,” Scott wrote in an e-mail to the News Tribune on Wednesday. MNR conservation officers apparently learned about Scott’s second lake trout after it was reported in the media. Scott, who owns Scott’s Peaceful Valley Resort on Crane Lake, said two Minnesota DNR conservation officers came to his home Monday evening and interviewed him about the lake trout he caught on Feb. 8. The officers were Darrin Kittelson of International Falls and Mark Fredin of Aurora, Kittelson said. They were acting in cooperation with MNR enforcement officials. “It’s under investigation,” Kittelson said. “Part of the investigation was to interview Mr. Scott in regard to the large trout that was caught.” “I am not denying that it was a violation of the ‘party fishing’ rules, and I got caught,” Scott said in a statement by e-mail to the News Tribune on Wednesday. Kittelson said the fish is in the possession of the Minnesota DNR and that the agency is making arrangements to transport the fish to MNR officials in Ontario. “Knowing the importance of this fish being a world-record fish, we’re taking the utmost care to keep it in the same shape it was in when Mr. Scott brought it to the taxidermist,” Kittelson said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosebunk Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 So the guy actually has a resort on the lake and can't spring the $$$ for a sportfishing license. Consider this line-class record served... not conserved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Ironmaker Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 His admitted " mistake " will cost him world record status if it was a record catch, no question. One reason many don't post large catches or apply for record status. Passing the litmus tests are arduous. HTHM, did you sell the boat? From what I've read may have traded it for a car? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Ironmaker Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 So the guy actually has a resort on the lake and can't spring the $$$ for a sportfishing license. Consider this line-class record served... not conserved. So the guy actually has a resort on the lake and can't spring the $$$ for a sportfishing license. Consider this line-class record served... not conserved. Scott said he has a nonresident Ontario conservation fishing license. According to Ontario fishing regulations, that allows him to catch and possess one lake trout. He had caught a roughly 4-pound lake trout early in the morning on Feb. 8, he said. That fish was on the ice when two Ministry of Natural Resources conservation officers came by to check him, Scott said. He said he has the license. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillM Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 (edited) His mistake was not to send that 4lbr back down to the bottom of the lake, lol. Edited February 27, 2014 by BillM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishindevil Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 It's getting to the point that I guess a mandatory written test is in order to get your fishing licence as this crap happens all the time and this is only the potential record fish we hear about ??? Why can't people understand the rules & regs ??? what the hell Is it really that difficult to do ?? Unreal.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Caster Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 This will seem like a very trivial mistake to some. I guess he should have sent that big girl back to her home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solopaddler Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 I'd cut the old guy some slack. I would hope our MNR would have better things to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosebunk Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 He said he has the license. Ohhh I understood that perfectly. Just saying, he has a business on the lake, (probably fishes it often) but chooses a conservation license over sport, then chooses not to conserve. Had he a sport license this second BIG trout would be a non-issue... no? I'd cut the old guy some slack. I would hope our MNR would have better things to do. I sorta hope so too in this case... but would still agree with rules being enforced as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigdritchie Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 When the guy basically admitted in a radio interview that he broke the law by killing two fish when the limit is only one, he painted MNR into a corner and they now have no choice - they have to respond to it, whether they have better things to do or not. I have mixed feelings about it. If his second fish was just another four pounder, and he still whacked it, then would I still be willing to cut him some slack? Probably not so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosebunk Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 If his second fish was just another four pounder, and he still whacked it, then would I still be willing to cut him some slack? Probably not so much. X 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solopaddler Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 When the guy basically admitted in a radio interview that he broke the law by killing two fish when the limit is only one, he painted MNR into a corner and they now have no choice - they have to respond to it, whether they have better things to do or not. Not sure I agree, but it is what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akaShag Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 That is a heck of a fish and would be the dream of many anglers. I am guessing it will up the traffic to Lac La Croix and will be very good for the fellow's resort business. Customers will be lining up with money in hand to stay at his place, and pick his brain about "hot spots." I am guessing that many of them would not care a whole lot about the legal status of his trophy. The guy (and I am an old fart too) is foolish on many counts, starting with the basic one that he should have been buying a full sports fishing licence, not the Conservation licence. AFTER he was checked by game wardens that day, who KNEW he had caught his limit of lake trout, he should have ceased fishing for lake trout. Maybe there are other species present, for example whitefish, that would allow him to continue fishing, but we don't know that from what has been reported. Then when he caught the Brobdignagian Behemoth (see note) he KNEW he was breaking the law by keeping it and decided to do so anyways. But of course the fish is not useful as a business generator unless it gets publicized...............so I reckon he decided to go public and maybe thought he would get away with it. Which is also foolish............ I don't think I would cut the guy any slack if it were my call. Law Enforcement officials do have discretion in laying charges but as somebody posted, the MNR have been painted into a corner by the guy admitting he broke the law. JMOYMV Doug (note: I used to enjoy the writing of the late John Powers, former Outdoors Editor for the Toronto Star and contributing writer to Ontario Out of Doors Magazine. He was a crusty old fart when I met him, and his "purple prose" set him apart from most outdoors writers. The term Brobdignagian Behemoth was one he used several times to describe truly large fish.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmer Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 I will never understand keeping a lake trout that size anymore. They are terrible for a skin mount, probably horrible to eat and would be much better let go to fight another day. Yes, it is in most people right to keep it, but just saying there are other much better options if you want the fish on the wall. I wouldn't think twice about letting that fish go back down the hole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillM Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 I will never understand keeping a lake trout that size anymore. They are terrible for a skin mount, probably horrible to eat and would be much better let go to fight another day. Yes, it is in most people right to keep it, but just saying there are other much better options if you want the fish on the wall. I wouldn't think twice about letting that fish go back down the hole. You wouldn't keep that fish knowing it shattered a world record? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmer Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 What would I get out of it? My name in the records doesn't really mean much to me. Do they give you millions for a record????? I might if that's case though. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bare foot wader Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 his biggest mistake was taking credit for the catch, if he already knew the CO's had checked his possession limit, that was just foolish on his part, a resort owner/operator should know the regs a little better but why not let his nephew fight the fish from the tip up, with a little assistance maybe if his nephew took credit for the big fish, there'd be no issue here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grimsbylander Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 Maybe someone can clarify for me... If the MNR came by and he had a 4 lbr on ice, and there is a one fish limit, and you can't give it away....Why was he still fishing and why didn't that come up in their conversation? If he kept fishing to catch another species, then he knew he was done with lake trout for the day. I must be missing something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillM Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 Maybe someone can clarify for me... If the MNR came by and he had a 4 lbr on ice, and there is a one fish limit, and you can't give it away....Why was he still fishing and why didn't that come up in their conversation? If he kept fishing to catch another species, then he knew he was done with lake trout for the day. I must be missing something. He can still fish with his limit on the ice, he just can't keep anymore... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigdritchie Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 Loophole in the law that lets you fish C&R even after you've bonked your limit. No different than guys on GB streams who continue to fish for steelhead after bonking their daily limit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillM Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 Loophole in the law that lets you fish C&R even after you've bonked your limit. No different than guys on GB streams who continue to fish for steelhead after bonking their daily limit. Is this before or after they make the 'pitstop' to the car to unload? lol! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dara Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 The way its written its pretty simple. he broke the law by keeping a second fish. "Well, its was a good one, maybe a record" doesn't wash. He was one fish over the limit and thats it. Non-resident poaching is what I read in this. Throw the book at him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bare foot wader Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 he won't get the book thrown at him, nor does he deserve it....I think it's $300 per offence, 1 fish = 1 offence but it will set an example for others because it's probably going to get some publicity...and he'll lose eligibility for the record that pro musky guide who was fishing with extra rods and encouraging non residents to blast wolves without proper tags and illegally exporting...that's a lot more severe and he deserves whatever comes his way and the record is silly anyways, an ice fishing record for tip ups, and lake trout is only 29 lbs??? pretty sure that's been crushed many times and is a record nobody cares about Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Ironmaker Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 Moosebunk, yes I see your point. I hope you don't think I was correcting you, I thought you missed it. As far as interpretation of the regs. Loopholes has already been mentioned here. That's why I always point out in our sparsely inhabited county there are no less than an entire page of available Lawyers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dara Posted February 27, 2014 Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 Missing a worlds record and a $300 fine is about as much book as you can throw for one fish over the limit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts