State Record Trout!

[Jim W]

Okay,

I want some feed back on this people!

I have always thought there should be a separate or new category in the State Record list. This would include Trout outside of those who spend part of their life in Lake Superior.

More of an In-land stream Trout category.

One response I got from the State was it would take too much time to separate lake run trout from stream trout? Whuh?

Hmmmmm, how many streams in SE MN are connected to Lake Superior? What about the Straight River near Park Rapids??

Highly doubt you'll ever catch a steel head out of those waters?lol Or a 16 pound brown? Love to see a 6 pound brookie come out of SE MN streams...ya right!

Anyone see where I am going with this?

I think it is now time to get these fish included. Heck we pay for their management and half the trout fisherman in MN fish SE MN waters.

Let me know what your take is and if we get enough interest, maybe we can take it a few step further!

Jim

[Dave B]

Nice idea, but I guess I am against it. I should say that I am also against 2 hockey state tourneys, 3 wrestling, 4-5 football, etc.

Some water you just need to fish for the pleasure of it. If we open this box, what is next? River eyes vs lake eyes? Big water records vs under 1000 acres waters?

I completely understand your point, but I think a record is a record. Unless it is a different species, we should only have one.

[Jim W]

Dave,

I see and understand your points. However, I don't personally see it as "A matter of fact" as you.

I won't argue the fact they are same specie, but they are different fish.

What a better way to parallel the current new regulations in place for the 2005 SE MN trout streams, that are, if I may for Large Trout Management(LTM).

What would it hurt?

DO I care if there is a small head buffalo?? Let alone fish for it and do our dollars pay for the management of said fish???

Is it much to ask?

Jim

[WxGuy]

I dunno Jim...I think you're on to something.

A brown trout is a brown trout in the eyes of the record, but they are two very different fish...and if I'm not mistaken there are some genetic differences between a lake-run brown and a brown that you'd find in SE MN or any other MN inland stream.

Same deal with a coaster brook trout vs. the brook trout you find here. They're genetically different.

Regardless of new regulations, or whether they'll work out...I think it's a good idea and would be a fun gauge of our local waters. SE MN is a far better trout fishery than many give it credit.

[GullGuide]

James,

I do agree with most of your points, however, announcing a record brown was caught out of stream "X" for example would cause added and un-needed presure to said stream.

Don't you think if it was published that a stream just put out a state record that it wouldnt get pounded pretty hard?

I guess I'm going on what has happened to lakes where other records were recently caught as examples. Who knows, in some ways it may take pressure of other streams.

But you do have a valid argument.

[Renneberg]

Gull guide brings up a good point. If someone catches a record brook trout from a small stream in s.e. minnesota(or anywhere in the state for that matter) where do you think people are going to head if they want to catch a big brookie?? Good Brook trout stream are few and far between in this state minnesota and got little to no help in s.e. minnesota from the new regs.

If I remember right a few years before the current Brown trout record was set the state record Brown trout did come from a small stream in s.e. minnesota. I think it was just over 14 lbs.

All in all I would like to see that change too. Many of the states that border the great lakes have a great lakes record and a inland record.

[Surface Tension]

Jim, Your opening up a can of worms here. and you know how worm guys aren't "real trout fishermen" . I see your point and agree there is a difference between a lake run trout and one from rivers. Lets not forget how the trout streams in Northern Mn will never be able to grow trout like SE MN can. Should there be a separate record classification there as well? Fare is Fare. Secondly how would it be possible to verify that said stream trout didn't come from an inland lake? Where a record fish is taken isn't of interest to me, I put everything into perspective as to what size fish I catch to that particular lake or stream.

Whats a nice fish in my creek is a runt in yours.

[WxGuy]

I would guess there might be some people who try to claim they caught a lake run trout in their backyard stream...that would stink.

Could the record state what watershed the fish came from and not the specific stream? If that were possible, it might ease the pressure on some waters.

I think you're right Renneberg about the previous record coming from SE MN...

[Renneberg]

If I am right, then that's going to be a tough record to break!..even with the new trout regs!!!

[Jim W]

All very good responses and bring up some very good points to ponder. I guess why I posted.

Maybe just SE MN streams then? I don't know??

As far as announcing the stream it came from, not sure how to handle that one.

Kind of brings up the question then, if there was a separate category and someone caught a new record out of a 100% Catch and Release stream, is it a , sorry you lose scenario?

To me it isn't about, "Jim wants his name in the record book", cause it probably won't happen, but when it comes to recognition and awareness of a fishery I think it holds some merit.

I guess to respond to Gullguides statement, oh someone caught a huge brown out of Mill Creek, new IN LAND record.

Good for them, laws are still in place that will hold the "masses" in place. As most trout fisherman know, those big old fish got big for a reason.

Heck more money spent in SE MN, trout stamps etc. In turn getting more attention from the DNR Fisheries, local interest groups could provide an increase in over all management, funding and awareness for Streams in SE MN.

Back to one of my earilier questions:

What could it really hurt ?

Jim

[WxGuy]

The current Tiger Trout record comes from Mill Creek...

although that's not the fish many of us are thinking of as we head out the door....and it's pretty well known those are a rarity... 'twould be fun to catch though!

and to answer the last question...I think the only thing it could hurt is someone's feelings if they broke off a record trout.

[ikeslayer]

There is something out there that we stream fisherman could make our own records and that is in the master angler program. not sure completely what it is about except you get your name in the minnesota hall of fishing fame and you name on a wall somewhere. www.minnesotafishinghalloffame.com/Master_Angler_Program/master_angler_program.html

check it out each fish has a length or weight it has to be to make your name in the books. Kind of a good thing i think. What do you fellas think?

[Jim W]

I corresponded with another DNR staff member and was given some what of the impression that this might be a possibility given a little pressure. I'll keep everyone up to speed.

If it is doable, anyone out there interested in helping apply the needed "pressure"?

Jim

[tie flyer]

I agree that we should monitor the new regulations' effectiveness. But I'm not sure whether an inland record is right for our fisheries.

Jim raised a good point about the catch and release streams. I have heard stories of guys releasing monsters without even so much as a picture, just happy for having tangled with one of nature’s wonders. There are people who release record fish so they don’t have to kill them.

I don’t know if I could do it myself (hopefully we’ll find out some day). If the interest were to preserve the record for posterity I would argue that we should instead preserve the resource. It takes a lot of time and money to administer a record book. Let’s spend those resources on improving the quality of the natural resources.

[DARK30]

Lake Superior and its tribs up to the first barrier should definitely be apart from the inland streams as far as recording large trout in the record books. The fish taken while standing in a stream is a whole different ball game than downrigging on the great lakes...whole different fish too. I agree though that it might easier to catch the big one, take a pic or 10, and not mess around with trying to be "official" anyway....whats wrong a photo in the local newspaper?

Jim, Don't sell yourself short man! You could catch the new "stream" record just as well as the next guy...then I'd know exactly where you fish! But seriously, how would it work to catch and record a big fish in a C&R stretch? ....The fish must be immediately released right?

Ikeslayer, The master angler program would provide a good place to record a "record" size stream trout but I don't think its an "official" record.....Would be nice to be in there none the less. (nice signature by the way)