Just keep the big ones in your lake and let the small ones breed. Then we will see what kind of catifhs are left.

Takes a rocket scientist to figure this one out.



BTW - I'll say it again. I'm not totally opposed to people keeping big fish. They just need to understand that there is a limit. It all depends on where you fish. If your in a river above a huge lake then the fish get moved around with floods Etc.

If your in a small lake then you can hurt the overall cats much easier by keeping too many big ones.

Found this doing some research.
As for how Splash’s age compares to other fish, Buckmeier said 23 “was not young, but it’s pretty impressive. I’ve aged a blue cat from Tennessee that was in the 110-pound range and was about 19 years old. I also aged a 92-pound state record blue for Virginia at 12 years.”

Buckmeier’s findings confirmed the feeling many people have that there was something special about Splash. “We’ve been seeing that most fish 90 pounds and up tend to be fairly young relative to their size, whereas the older fish tend to be much smaller—blue cats weighing only 8 pounds have been aged at 32,” Buckmeier continued. “It appears that these really big fish are fast growers for some reason. Conditions in the reservoir are part of it, but growth can vary a lot, even in the same system. Perhaps there’s a genetic link, but we don’t know that.”

Is there another Splash swimming around in Lake Texoma waiting to be caught? Maybe, maybe not. “The growth of that one fish is not necessarily typical of Lake Texoma,” Buckmeier said. “But a lot of people around the country are starting to age blue catfish, so the database is growing.”

Bruce Hysmith, TPWD Inland Fisheries biologist whose beat includes Lake Texoma, says interest in fishing for blue catfish was sparked years ago by a striper guide who saw big, umbrella-shaped images on his sonar and wondered what they were. It turned out they were big blue catfish holding in deep water along the river channel. “The bite is from December through February,” Hysmith said. “Kill the engine and drift over the fish without putting out an anchor so as not to disturb them. Use shad for bait. Let it down and wait for a little nibble that feels like a little baitfish jerking. Set the hook and hang on.”

Hysmith said the blue catfishery is still good in Lake Texoma, but fewer people seem to be taking advantage of it. “Bright, sunny days with no wind, when the stripers aren’t biting, is the best time for blues,” he said.

Someday, perhaps 100 years from now, a future generation of anglers and big fish fans will know how Splash fits into the big picture. She may turn out to be one of only a handful of fish of her species ever to attain such size, or she may be proved to have been one of many big blues.

Either way, Splash’s memory will live on in an exhibit at the Texas Freshwater Fisheries Center, where her skeleton will be displayed along with the story of her life. During the two years she was at the center, Splash was the main attraction. “Splash had an amazing impact on visitation to the Texas Freshwater Fisheries Center,” said TFFC director Allen Forshage. “The first year she was on display, our annual visitation increased by more than 43 percent, and Splash was pictured on the front cover of several national magazines.

by this post, you don't even know what i advocate as far this topic is concerned ...

thanks danny ... an 8 lb fish checked out to be 32 years old ... interesting info

Does anyone on this board have any training on how to age a catfish?

The other thing can someone show me any proof that keeping a 40 pound fish does not hurt the genetic gene pool.

I have kept big fish and I have released big fish. Just be respectful and do not keep more than you need. That goes for eating size to. I laugh every time I run into to someone who will go out everynight and catch their limit of catfish and their freezer is full ( I am talking box freezer) and continue to go out catch their limit every night and have to find people to give it away to or they are selling it illegally. One father ans son duo claim to have over 1,000 pounds of fillets in ther freezer and were still keeping their legal limit of fish. IF they have stocked piled a 1,000 pounds of fillets they are not eating catfish near enough but hey it is legal so who cares right. If someone is actually eating that much catfish they will probably die of mercury. Trot lines and jug lines waste more big fish than people will ever catch and eat. A lot of people who trot line or jug line are to dam lazy to do it properly. If you get to your line and a fish is dead you are that person who is to dam lazy. If you are that person who looses a jug then you are that person who is to dam lazy. I am not going to lie I like catching bigger fish so let as many big fish go so I have more big fish to catch. I am not going to hide my agenda behind science. I just like to catch as many and as big a fish as I can. If I could have my way I would out law Jug lines and Trot lines. Or limit it to jug lines only and they can only be used during daylight hours and have to removed before dark. There are just too many people who leave their dam trashy jugs all over the lake and yes you are responsible for your lost jugs because it became lost because you were to dam lazy to run it enough to keep track and if a big fish takes it down and hangs it up then explain why the hell it tangled up on the dam bank. Oh and ALbert keep fighting the good fight and keep just as many flat heads as you can or want dude. Atleast you think for yourself even if I do disagree with you to a degree on a few points.

it's been fun guys

About genetics: Like albert says, no one knows if the 5 pounder they are keeping has the genetics to become a record. Someone mentioned that, had Splash been kept at 40lbs, it would never have made the record. The same would be true had Splash been kept at 4 pounds.

The point I see albert making effectively is that there is no way to know if a 40lb blue cat has the genetics to become a 100lb blue cat.

I will say, however, that it works like a filtration system. Imagine any process where things are filtered. You don't want to drink the raw material, but after stage 1, the material now becomes more reliable than before. After stage 2, the material is even more reliable than stage 1 and so forth until you have drinkable material. A 5 lb catfish is before stage 1 of the filter. Once they hit maybe 20lbs, they maybe can be considered stage 1 or 2. 30-40lbs would be stage 3 and so forth. Each progression gives you a group of remainders that, although they all may not have the 120lb genetic features, any that do will be guaranteed to get through the next filter if you allow them to. Eventually those with the genetic makeup and proper environment and lots of luck will reach the century mark.

We just have to decide, as individual fishermen, if we are willing to allow that fish the chance to make that next level. It's a risk, because the fish might be at it's max already, so if we release it we could be throwing back several pounds of otherwise edible meat.

It's a choice we make as individuals though, it's not up to anyone else until it becomes a law.

Nicely said Kat-man-do.

i understand the point of "these big fish are awready big" ... they have kinda passed a test or been thru the filter as you put it ... another point i have brought up is folks that keep 25 fish limits of fish under 10#, on a regular basis, more than likely kill more trophy fish than i do IF i clean 5-10 big fish a year ... surly before a fish reaches 10# the main, if not the only, danger it faces from predators is from man ... seems to me when a fish reaches the size that the only danger is from man, that would be the end of stage one, what else would stop it from maxing out?

don't get me wrong i would never judge any body for keeping a 25 fish limit of small fish ... it just seems hypocritical for them to point their finger at me for eating a few bigguns



i never have wished i could force any body to only keep the fish i though they ought to keep ... the other side of this argument can't say that ... you had to throw "until it becomes a law" in there didn't ya ... i know it's just a matter of time & the ones that are pushing it don't have the guts to say it ... well a fella said it on another board but so far he will not come in here & admit it ... as we speak they are trying to get a law passed that will only allow one fish over about 25 inches per day ... duh, a 25 inch blue is in the neighborhood of 10# ... who woulda thunk it ... a 25 inch yella ain't worth cleanin

that law will make it impossible for a redneck that only goes fishing once or twice a year, to get the few big fish he eats

and here i thought i was done with this thread

I agree Albert, a law like that would hurt a lot of people who do not get to fish a lot. So far we are not in need of any new catfish regs IMO. Some lakes maybe but thats just a maybe for a few smaller lakes central and west Texas and it's just a maybe.


That info on Splash is very interesting and shows why people should release big cats.

I like the filter idea. It's kind of like a pyramid. If you keep ALL the fish on the bottom level, yes you kill both good and bad gened fish BUT you allow the big ones out there to spawn more. If you keep ALL level 1,2, and 3 fish then the lake would become nothing but good gene fish real fast.

Of course you can not do that but thats the goal or it will need to become the goal sooner or later. As resources are used and abused(they all get abused sooner or later) we will need to grow fish faster. Splash proves that some fish can and do grow a lot faster than others.

If we had all splash genes in the waters that would extend our catfish resource.

I got to go fishing... CPR tonight, but only because I kept a bunch this past week and have to work early in the AM.

There are other things that cause fish deaths, disease, water conditions, food source, ect... My point was that, if you are keeping a 90lb fish, for instance, you are almost certainly removing one with good genetics.

Again, there's no way for the average fisherman like most of us here to know if the 3lb or even 30lb fish we might keep has the genetic makeup to ever reach or sustain the size of a trophy. So, let's pull a number out of our backsides and say 10% of all catfish in a certain lake that are 2-5lbs have the genetic makeup to become 60lb fish. There are very likely an exponentially greater number of these smaller fish than of the 40-50lb variety. So, given that you could have 200,000 keeper fish, and only 20,000 large fish, the odds of you keeping a genetically superior fish would be 1:10. So you keep 25 fish, your odds would be that you would have kept 2 genetically superior fish.

Sometimes you might have more, sometimes less. Regardless, you could still have that genetically superior fish in your creel at the end of the day.

Now suppose you catch 10 fish that are 20lbs or more and you keep every one. The odds are now much greater that you have a genetically superior fish, probably more than two. In fact, it's quite possible that every fish you have could be genetically superior. However, since, as you stated, you don't keep but a few a year, you would be taking fewer genetically superior fish from the lake if the ratio was indeed 1:10. I don't think it's 1:10 though, more like 1:100 or greater. Therefore, when you catch 25 fish, the odds that you have a genetically superior fish would be 1:4 or a 25% chance that one of the fish in your 25 fish creel is a genetically superior fish. Now if you consider the 10 20lb fish I mentioned earlier, it's probably a much greater chance of having a genetically superior fish, since the filter level is a couple of steps higher. There's no guarantee, but that's how I see it.

Either way though, it doesn't matter unless your purpose for fishing is just to feel the tug. If you fish for food, all bets are off. I do about half and half. I don't intentionally target large catfish, but if I caught one in the 10-20lb range, I would likely keep it just because of it's novelty. If I caught 20 that size, I wouldn't keep more than one or two. Again, that's my personal preference, I am not judging anyone based on whether or not they keep bigger fish. You can read any of my past responses on this subject to see that my stance on this is consistent.

It's not just hypocritical, it's overbearing and presumptive. It's no one's business if you keep every legal fish you catch.

My point wasn't that I hope a law passes or that I expect one to, but that the only way anyone else has any business telling you what to keep and what to release is when the law comes into play, then it's the game warden or the TP&W Regulations. I could have just as easily said "if" instead of "when".

Didn't mean to chew your ear off, it's just that I get rubbed wrong sometimes when people try to play the ethics card with me concerning legal methods for fishing, possession and such.

a quote from another forum



some folks think our texas public waters should be their own personal fish farms, to be managed how they see fit

I don't agree with that proposition, however I would abide by it. I fully support the democratic process. If enough fishermen are against it and they make it known, it won't pass. If the same fishermen are too apathetic to actually do anything about it, then those who aren't will get their wishes, which is how this country has been operating for centuries.

did yer mamma drop you on yer head when you was a baby?

Ummm... Thats exactly what are lakes are Albert.. They are fish farms. What do you think TPWD is for? Why do you think they stock and regulate and set size and bag limits?

And it not that people just pull carp out of their rears, they want what is best for the fishery. Why is that SOooo difficult for you to accept?

Why are you so against people wanting whats best?

There is a time to fight against peta and other groups. There is a time to stand up against unfair changes, but to be blindly opposed to betting our catfish resource is not right.

but whack in this case "what's best" is a matter of personal opinion & emotions ... why are you so in favor of things like this making the rules ... why is this so difficult for you to accept ... the way it is being handled right now, with the present regs, is working

this is personal preference & you know it ... if any of it happens to be good for the fishery it is strictly coincidence ... YOU know what YOU want & that's all that matters

lakes ARE NOT mine & your (or anybody elses) own PERSONAL fish farms to be managed as we see fit ... please reply to what i post

your the one that hates set lines too



what an imbecilic post

hahahahahahahaha! I knew you wouldn't take that post well!

Good luck Albert I hope you and Tiny do well in the tourney...

Listen... I've said this before... TPWD does a decent job BUT it's politics. They rarely fix something unless it's broken. I'm not listing all the near wipe out fish species from the past.

We appear to be ok with catfish. There are obviously less big ones now than 30-40 years ago. This can be considered opinion, since I can not prove it, but only a ignorant fool would say it's not so. A few lakes maybe but overall it's true.

Where do emotions come in?

And I still can not believe you can sit there and think that EVERY biologist throughout history is wrong. Every one say big superior animals have bigger superior babies. It's even the same for humans.

But since no specific data is on catfish you refute it all. That makes a lot of since Albert.

Have you ever fished a lake after it was shut down for a year? I have, Lake Georgetown. The fishing was incredible. Why? I suppose lack of fishermen had nothing to do with it. And yes I fished that same lake every year for 10 years before so I know I'm right.

your the one that hates set lines too




Seriously Albert go back to school. You are not smarter than every biologist in the state.

And if you are then why do you tell others to obey TPWD? They rely on biologists for all their data.
Shouldn't we follow you instead?

catfishin ain't broken ... that's wunna my points ... so why is everybody tryin' to fix it?


ignorant fool? ... the records keep climbing ... people report all the big fish they catch ... guides report several hundred fish yearly in the 20-40# range ... i would say that it's a few lakes that the big fish have not increased ... the current CPR practices are working ... but some are still not satisfied



only an ignorant fool would ask such a question


well good for you cuz i don't think that ... hate to disappoint ya


what i refute is folks using some report to push their own personal agenda & treating others as if they are subhuman


well duh ... let's just all not fish for a year ... better yet lets do that every three years ... by the time we die the fishin' will be out of this world ... after all it's our kids & grandkids that we are worried about ... right?

thanks bro terry