ok ... let's discuss this

i do not deny genetics ... it would be stupid to do so ... what is boggus about all this is using genetics to push an agenda ... an agenda that is trumped up & fabricated to suit certain ones & their fishing style or personal preference ... not to mention all the tourney's & guides, this agenda certainly suits their style

first off can any one tell me what the absolute worse case scenario would be as far as the most undesirable genes in a bluecat ... what i mean is what would be the max size a fish would get with the least desirable genes ... probably not

lets just say 40# ... after all a 40# blue (or yella for that matter) is still just a pup, considering how big they can get ... their is no way to tell though if a fish has reached his/her max ... so in theory by releasing all "trophy" fish we may very well be tainting the gene pool with out even knowing it ... nobody that i know of has a portable gene tester ... so at best it's all just guess work cuz just the fact that a fish has reached a certain size does not translate into having the most desirable genes

we really can't throw yellas into the same deal as blues ... simple fact of the matter is they are so much different ... to put a yella under 10 or 15# under the knife is such a waste ... by the time you get all the fat & red meat trimmed off you have so little left ... but because of this agenda some folks proudly display baby yallas that went under the knife while they also proudly proclaim that they released a few bigguns ... they think they are some kinda conservative hero because of all the BS that has been floatin' around for so long

bottom line is ain't anybodies argument or personal preference totally fool proof enuff to demand that others need to "DO LIKE I DO"

seems purty obvious that what is happening right now (on most waters) is working ... read in-fisherman or just observe ... we ain't hurtin' for fish big or small ... now i know there are some cases of waters that are but i'm talkin' the majority ... i watched an old roland martin TV show this morning (prolly 20 years old) ... he was fishing in santee cooper ... he stated that he guided there back in the 60's & there just were no big fish there then, blues or yellas ... the list can go on & on

boils down to a buncha propaganda that has been around for so long that most did not witness it from the start so therefore can't seem to get a grasp on what it really is

catfish guides have played a big roll in this creepin' into catfishin' circles ... these guides take out huge numbers of what have been labeled "EATER FISH" ... what is a eater fish? ... why of course it's a fish under 10# ... these guides insist that their clients release all fish over 10# & make them feel all warm & fuzzy inside cuz they threw back a "BIG OLE BREEDER FISH" so's our kids & grandkids can have a chance to catch a trophy

now the truth ain't hard to figure out why these guides really do it this way ... they figure if they can get the majority of folks to release all fish over 10# & only keep the "EATERS", the ones under 10# that have been so conveniently labeled ... that way they (the catfish guides) can continue to haul out several (OR MORE) 25 fish limits each week cuz all the big ole fish are still there to produce more babies ... IT'S A MONEY THANG!!!!!! ... these guides are taking just as mnany or more fish out of the lakes than the average catter ever thought about doin'

now don't get me wrong here cuz i have nuttin' at all against catfish guides, all i wanna do is establish just a lil' CLARITY here on this subject ... straning at a gnat & swallowing a camel

This a quote (a couple of years ago) from a post, one catfish guide in texas about what he caught or seen caught in one winter … there is no tellin’ how many limits of 25 smaller fish under 10# that was taken ... he is telling what kinda stress his rod & reels have been under

You need to stop crying about CPR people for just a minute and focus on one topic.

It's pointless talking with you when your obviously so pissed at certain CPR people that you can not see straight. Everything and ANything any person says you freak out on and assume they are undercover CPR spies.



Whats wrong with eating "eater" fish? That sure seems to work. Keep the big breeders breeding and then keep on eating all their offspring. Who gives a rats rear if someone makes money on it.

Whats wrong with eating a biggun? . They sure seem to work for me too cause I like to eat them. Keep some bigguns throw some back. I take less eaters and give them a chance to grow so I can eat them later down the road :)(::()::)

Albert man you are 100 per cent right on all points. Just one thing I did not relize I was a liberal if I let a few fish go?????. I have been accused of John Birch of being way too liberal for me. But I am learning.
Johnny

Keep what your not gonna waste & move on <-- I loves the new thingy ma bobber

I know my opinion means nothing but I do "FEEL" I am doing the fishery good when I release the big ones. It's all based on feelings so anyone can dispute if it is the "RIGHT or WRONG" thing to do.

I know CATFISHD & ALBERTKING will crucify me for stating this but if someone would have caught the record Blue Catfish at Texoma (Splash) when she was only 35 pounds and cleaned her, she would have never made it to the 121 pound State record.

I am not out to change anyones beliefs or say my way is better or that they are doing the fishery wrong. I just enjoy seeing the big fish being caught and then released for another day. I don't see how you guys have enough freezer space to hold the numbers of fish you catch. It's nothing to limit out at Tawakoni or Lewisville most days and that's a lot of fillets. You must be eating fish 2 or 3 times a week.

Go cat go,,,,HMMMMmmmmmmmmm.
Name says it all as well as your statement about splash. You let them all go. Me, Albet and Danny have no problems with you at all. Heck your probably our best friend.

cuz you can't back up your points & refute what i'm saying ... just establishing the source of this topic we are discussing




nothing wrong ... just don't think i'm stupid enuff for you to dictate to me the definition of what a eater fish is

good point ... it's all about feelings


and cody could not have said hey look at me ... & splash would not have lived out her last days in a big ole tank on display for the world to see ... see this is where the genes come in ... if splash had the stupid unff to get caught at 35# gene ... well we didn't need her tainting the gene pool anyway


who are you talking to here ... i never have wasted any fish & right now i have no fish in the freezer & prolly wont have until about june

it would seem that some of you think some blues could have genes that would only let then grow to a certain size ... is this true? & if so what size is the smallest you think a bad gene blue will max out at? ... could some blues only reach 15#?


also it would seem that some of you think some blues have genes that allows them to escape being caught ... is this true?


could blues also have genes that would cause them to have better tasting meat than others? ... or genes that would cause them to have less fat & red meat?

what else does genes determine?


nobody wants to talk?

funny article here from a magazine several years ago

Nobody what to talk because it is no use, because you are the only man in the world to figure out all of this stuff.Some of your examples are just unbeliveable,but let me tell I am trying to learn from you. Because I have never talked with a man as smart as you .
Johnny

Albert,

Each animal has genes that determine every thing about that animal. I do not know enough about catfish genetics to tell you exactly how the wieight factor functions, but I can tell you they are studying this at Texas A&M or one of the other universitiesthat are into catfish genetics at this time. As you know, pond raised catfish are big business, just as are cattle and all of the other food producing animals. All are studied from the genetic standpoint.

Whether or not the genetic code determines the size or not, the genetic make-up of the catfish or any other animal, including you and me, does determine the efficiency with which we turn food to energy, muscle and/or fat. Some animals are better meat producers than others. They are also working on this at the universities.

All of the research at this time, or at least the vast majority of it, is aimed at pond raised catfish in an attempt to make them better meat producers. With food at a premium across the globe, the more successfully food can be produced, using the smallest amount of feed, the better millions of people will live. Catfish and other fresh and saltwater fish can be the solution to some of this problem.

Eventually, some of the knowledge learned in these studies will flow into catfish production in the rivers and lakes of Texas. Most likely some of this has already happened. Once again, this is going to be much like the ShareLunker program with bass I suspect.

I know nothing about the money aspect of any species of fish. I just fish. I do know about the money aspect of buying tackle; its expensive, but that's it. I don't do tournaments and never will; I'm just out for the fun and good time. As you have said before, some emphasis on genetic work may be driven by guides and others interested in touraments, but I don't know about that either.

Personally because of my background, I am always interested in the animals and how they can be best made to produce. They need to have a good genetic background, be managed intelligently, and used wisely. I want them bigger, tasting better and out there for me to catch no matter what they are, catfish, bass, perch, trout, redfish tarpon, tuna or shark; I love 'em all!



I think catfish escaping being caught is pure luck; I don't think there is any genetic factor tied into this. Michial said yesterday or the day before that he thought some were lucky enough to find distant and'or difficult hiding places most people couldn't reach. I agree totally with him on that. Size, food efficiency, etc. are determined by genetics; getting caught is not!



Yes. This should work just as in cattle or any other animals.



Albert, genes deterimine everything about an animal. In you and me, genes determined, eye and hair color, hair or baldness, height, weight through food efficiency and metabolism, everything. It does the same for fish.



I'll tell you what, Albert, when the first thread started off you and I got off on the wrong foot, but as time has passed, and I have seen the way you think, I have gotten to the point that I enjoy talking with you. You've caught some flak here you don't deserve. You've got some good ideas and some I don't agree with, but that is what makes life.

Take care!

Ray

Your right I dont have the freezer room for the amount of fish I catch. But like I have said hundreds of times over the past few years on the numerous other discussions including this one. I keep what I will eat and release the rest. And I do actually eat fish atleast 2 times a week. But at the moment I am in no need of catfish. And you have not seen me post up any pics cause I have not been fishing for them. I have shifted to prefishing for up coming striped bass tournaments. This is what I am talking about. People assume and protray us big fish eaters as just that. We keep all that we catch. If that was the case I would need to borrow all of my neighbors freezers as well as both of mine. I release the majority of the big fish I catch. I prefer Aps (flatheads) but do keep some big blues but not as many blues as I do Aps. I have enough fish to last me through the end of May. And I plan it this way cause I will need more catfish around the spawn time. Then I will restock enough till fall. Then so on. I keep what I will eat without WASTE. You all wonder why we get sarcastic or think we have a chip on our shoulder when we are well I am constantly having to explain I keep big fish but I also release them. I dont keep all the big fish I catch. I released more fish this year then I have kept. But since I keep big flatheads and a couple of big blues it is precieved that I keep all the big fish. I keep eaters too. But if I catch a Ap 20+ I will take that over any eater anyday of the week. This is my preference and is within the legal limits of the TP&W regulations. Do I abuse the law? No I take what I will eat without WASTE. I release the rest rather it be bigguns or eater size.

good post catfishd

harold ray thanks for chiming in

i do realize that genetics does determine lots of things ... but no one has proven by the genetics thing a good reason to eat only fish under 10# & release the rest ... unless you can prove there are thousands of blues out there at the 10# range & because of their undesirable genetics they have reached their maximum weight

i'd venture to say that until the fish reaches at least 80# could we even consider that it might have superior genes & then at that it would be still just guess work ... 20, 30 & even 40# fish are really still just pups & no one has shown proof that any blue will not reach say 80# or maybe even bigger no matter what genes it has ... further more there's really no way to tell which fish is growing faster than the next one ... it would make sense that fish in a certain pound range prolly did not get there at the same amount of time

this genetics thing is so uncertain that i see why some would think in order to make it work ALL big fish must be released but that is a screwy solution & really only suites a portion of catfishermen

the genes on fish 10# & under cannot be determined any better than the big fish ... & it's foolish to assume all big fish have superior genes ... their genes may have played a part in their physical appearance or maybe how fast they did grow but i think it's foolish to say that just because a fish reached what ever size, it's because of genes

some years ago i would fill my freezer in may & june & it would usually last until just after new years but it's been over 10 years since i was doing that ... i have never over harvested but while i was filling the freezer i kept all the fish i caught unless it was a yellacat under 10# ... i wont keep a yella now unless it's around 15#

albertking - with all the BIG fish you catch, I can't wait until the Cabela's Tournament at Tawakoni in 2 weeks that you are fishing w/ Tiny. I expect to see you on the board but you will have to release the BIG fish you weigh in so be ready to get upset with Cabela's.

Albert, I think you're "money" angle on all this has you're thinking a bit skewed. Just like they found a way to get monster panfish from mating 2 different species, the reason for the whole bass share-a-lunker theory, "genetics" plays a role in the reason certain fish get bigger than others. Genetics is a relatively new thing in the public fishing world. It takes a long time to get answers, facts, etc. Instead of asking for one person to show you 100% proof of either side, spend a little time and research things on your own. It may not change your mind in this life time, but at the least it should make you aware that alot of educated people smarter than you and I are already under the impression that not every fish is capable of becoming "Splash".

http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&safe=off&q=genetics+catfish+bigger+fish

Like I said in another thread, I'm not onboard with the guide mentality of release every fish over 10lbs, but I'm certainly on board when someone catches a 40lb+ fish, after the pics are taken, etc, to consider releasing that fish back into the water.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! ... say it ain't so ... you're kiddin' right?

skewed? ... the money angle is the main reason we are where we are now in this argument
i do understand the thinking towards genetics ... but where's the proof of which fish has reached the max? ... seems to me a blue or flat, maxed out on weight at 40# would just about be a midget


but there is a HUGE difference tween a 40# fish & splash ... if they are experts in the field of genetics, i want them to be more than just "under an impression" before their notions are allowed to change the face of catfishing




so far no one has shown any reason to release that 40 lb'er other than feelings or emotions

thanks for your reply dmunsie

i'm startin' to think the reason no one is talkin' about this is that they have all spouted all they have to say in that other thread ... nuther words they can't really discuss it cuz they have awready said all they know about it

come in here & spout off the same ole carp & then bash those who question what you are sayin' ... you can't debate it cuz you don't know what else to say ... have a good'un gents

how did i overlook you sandjohnny? ... very good points in this discussion

Albert I just found out you were the worlds smartest man on fishing resources. I am dumber than a rock about it and so is everyone else. Oh by the way I may not be as liberal as you thought I kept some sandbass yesterday that were bleeding.
Like you say Albert if you catch fish that don't fit in your box.... get a bigger box...they are all box fish.
Johnny

throwing fish back is not what is liberal ... what is liberal though is folks thinking we are on the brink of disaster with our catfish & that certain ones that don't aknowledge this disaster is too stupid & they need to be saved from their own selves by some elite group that has the answers to the problem & any body else's opinions are nothing but dung ... can you say global warming?

the box fish thang is prime example ... you think it's pure stupidity on my part ... & it's all cuz i refuse to cow down to the BS opinions ... now you been repeatin' the same poop every time you post ... matter of fact i can't recall any post of yours that presented any thing but this same kinda stuff ... you just know which side you're on, you just can't tell why?

Let me hear it one more time albert say it ain't so cause you said so,one more time you must have said the same thing 5o times,
IT IS NOT SO BECAUSE ALBERT SAID SO.
Albert if there were one pair of fish left in this world I can guarantee you could come up with a reason that would make it O.K. to eat them suckers.
Johnny

ummmmm ... they taste good?

I really feel like Albert keeps ig fish simply out of spite.

Do you catch enough fish 25#'s and under to keep enough in your freezer? You said you throw a bunch back so I'm assuming the answer is yes.

So why do you keep the big ones? Do you honestly think they taste better? Or is it out of spite? It has to be one of these two reasons.


I do not understand how you can agree genetics play a role in growth speed, max size and other factors yet still argue that genetics do not matter.
A 40# fish is NOT a "pup". Look at the lake records in central Texas. A 60# fish is VERY rare. even 40# fish are relatively rare.

And I can not prove to you God exists. Does that mean everyone should be atheist?


BTW - I still want to know WHO bashes Catfished or Albert for keeping big fish. I'm starting to think it's all in their heads. Every time we discuss genetics they completly freak out and start b1tching like babies because EVERYONE bashes them for keeping fish yet I still never see this happen.

Why do I keep big ones? Well to me it is a waste of meat to keep a Ap under 15 lbs. So yes I do keep the big ones and I get more meat off of them. I will take a Ap up to the biggest I have ever caught over any blue under 10 lbs. Why cause its a AP and it taste damn good. Why cause I caught it and cause I will eat it. Out of spite? Hell no just cause I like to eat Aps 15 lbs +. As far as blues I dont keep many of them unless I am having a fish fry. I prefer them smaller. But will eat one now and then. Out of spite? No cause I do like to eat them too good eatin. But I do eat the smaller onese as well unlike the Ap.

Read your post you question why we eat big fish. But since your a fuzzy bunny hugger you question why we even keep one to eat. Cause you cannot stand that fact you cannot change our ways and never will. I do my part I feel when it comes to conservation. I pay for my license and my taxes. I help pay for the fish to be stocked. And by doing so that gives me the right to harvest from the lake for a nice dinner. Rather that be small ones if that is all I catch or a biggun. I dont doubt genetics. My family owns a highfence ranch and make money off of producing trophy bucks. And the select few live like a king with about 30 doe to court and mate with for a couple of years. But once they past their prime well then it is their time to go.

I believe by me taking a fish that has lived for x amount of years it has done its part by spreading genes. If you want to talk about conservation instead of releasing all the bigguns why not just lower the limit so some of these smaller fish have a chance to prove they have the gene? We can look at it both ways. I dont believe I have cried about anything. If your going to try and post to bring the facts. Look at the state records they go back to 1937. Seems all the catfish records are recent generation. Wonder how that can be. 40-60 lb fish are not rare up here where I fish. I post pics all the time. And I release most of them. But when I say most that bothers all the fuzzy bunny huggers like you lol cause you cannot stand it. Same song different verse. Most of the time people complaining about me keeping just one or two bigguns are the ones who say bigguns are rare. But yet me and others on this forum dont have a problem finding them on a regular basis. Keep the only one crying seems to be you cause you cannot seem to get your facts straight. I dont see how me and others taking a few bigguns and releasing the others hurts the gene pool. People dont think about the other factors.

How many fish you think survive after being caught. The stress and sometimes infection gets them after a release. Then its just wasted. Oh but I guess that is ok right? Look at Splash when they did research into why she died they found it was due to an infection from the hook. Hmmmm now that is interesting isn't it. She was held in captivity for awhile before this even happened too. Magine that. I see genetics play an important part. I have never disputed that. I dispute fuzzy bunny huggers who think its the end of the world if ya keep a few and release the rest. Cause from your post up above whack your one of those whacks who likes to be a hugger and tugger and your so crossed you only see one way.

Danny the funny thing is that the big aps your catching and keeping are the same fish that thrash the fish some of the other guys are trying to catch to fit in their small boxes. Hell, they should pay you to rid the lake so they could have more "box" fish.
I know of several larger private lakes that I used to deliver forage fish that had a trotline season. They had a bounty on flatheads of $2 a lb. THe fish were donated at one of the places and used for a fish fry to raise money for their small fire dept. The fact is that when catfish get big they still eat and their diet is other fish. They must be controlled. That's why Gibbons creek flopped. They had a 16 lb bass caught within a few years of opening. Then the high and mighty bass fishermen got the TMPA to stop all line fishing because it interfered with their fishing. Guess what....??? the bass fishing has fallen apart in that lake. I know some outlaws that trotline it once a year during the week. Last year they got 7 fish over 35 lbs on two 25 hook lines in two nights. The lake is out of balance.
Don't think for a second that big blues won't eat other catfish. I've caught them on mudcats in the Trinity several times.

If you keep a large fish then you have no respect for nature.

If you set tight limits then you will have too many small fish competing for food. That will screw everything up. Are you just playing dumb or what?

And I'm sure a bunch of other rednecks use the excuse that since Splash died after being caught, that proves you better keep ALL fish or else you will "waste" them.

This thread has nothing to do with waste. It has nothing to do with you or Albert keeping a few big fish.

Did you hear that?

This thread has nothing to do with waste. It has nothing to do with you or Albert keeping a few big fish.


Did you understand that?

This thread has nothing to do with waste. It has nothing to do with you or Albert keeping a few big fish.


It is supposed to be a discussion on genetics.

And yes, I am a member of PETA. I do not cut my grass because every living thing deserves a chance to live within nature. Humans should not be part of nature. And I do love bunnies also.
Maybe you kill because you lack something or you feel like you have to be better than something.


And yes that last pharagraph was BS. I told you 10 times all ready I keep a big flat once in a while. But big here is 25-30lbs. And it is not because I suck. I got the blue cat Travis record, just got beat on the Travis Flat record.

see i knew you was runnin' your arguments off of feelings & emotions



catfishd did a fine job with the rest of your post ... although i will add that you are in denial about the amount of big fish today ... & BTW if flats & blues have the potential to get to 100# or bigger, then a 40# cat is just a pup ... & further more if that 40 lb'er has maxed put in weight then it must be a midget & needs to be removed from the gene pool ... why would you want a lake full of 40# lb fish when the same fish are known to get 2 to three times that size? ... this kinda thinking could really hurt the average size of catfish down the road

whack you have never actually tried to discuss any of this ... i started this thread for that & only a couple of fellas have replied with a sensible reply ... you & the rest keep coming in with this third grader BS but i guess that's all you can do cuz you have nothing more to say or add to the worn out arguments that you have awready stated

Albert now there is a post loaded with good data?????
Johnny

I want everyone to say this phase in the most redneck hillbilly voice they can....

"I can keep um, cause tha law says I can, and they taste guud"


Albert - there are NO 100 lbers left to breed in most lakes. You keep repeating that cr@p saying a 40 lber is a pup Blah Blah, but if thats the majority of what big ones are left then thats EXACTLY what you need to leave alone to breed.

Yes some lakes have a few 100 pounders hiding, and most lakes have a few between 70-90 but those fish are by far the minority breeders, if they still breed being as old as they are.

And please do not bother asking for proof LOL. I know in your mind the bottom of the lake is covered in HUGE fish that multiply like those fuzzy creatures, critters.

you can't respond to any thing i have actually said & refute it can ya? ... when you do respond you don't reply my actual words ... i take your posts, break it down & respond to each point ... you can't do that with mine ... wonder why

Wouldn't it be great if everyone that has posted on this site could contact TPWD, set up a "Town Hall hearing" with someone from TPWD fish department, and ask questions so everyone got the same answers from a professional authority. I for one would like to be there for that.

If you can tell me the way to properly age a fish and let me know when an adult has reached his peak weight I will be glad to listen to your argument.