Just remember they're under that first 5 that you catch rule
Sent from my VS501 using Crappie.com Fishing mobile app
Well if you see a yellow 218 Sailfish out there tomorrow, come on over and say hi.
Ankona Cayenne Kevlar, Suzuki 60KHNC LIKED above post
Just remember they're under that first 5 that you catch rule
Sent from my VS501 using Crappie.com Fishing mobile app
I came over the dam yesterday around noon and I've never seen that many boats there before. I counted 20 within 50 yards of the towers. My buddy went and had his 5 at 7 AM. Me?? I decided to hit the WP at Monticello, only they didn't want to be hit. I jigged every underwater island I could find from 30 to 50 feet deep and caught one scrawny throwback.
Then I see that at Murray and I live 5 minutes from the ramp there.
I'm going with my buddy Monday to see if there are any Stripers left.
Mark 1:17 ...I will make you fishers of menBigDawgg LIKED above post
Just like before, this rule is debatable by definition. SUPER LONG post about it last year too. Article 50 definitions state "the definition of TAKE does NOT include catch and release"
So, fish can be released if you choose to. We release all healthy fish we catch. Once we get to 5 in the box we stop, otherwise we keep catching and releasing.
I know you don't agree with it but that is in violation of the law. It's 5 and done whether you keep them or not. Hate to see you get fined for this. The whole intent of this "summer rule" was to reduce fish mortality when fish are brought up from deep water and will not survive being released.
Mark 1:17 ...I will make you fishers of men
I'm with SeaRay on this Kenny. The law states "unlawful to take, attempt to take, or possess more than 5"
I too would hate to see you get fined for this and I can assure you the game warden would write a ticket. You can release fish, but you can only catch 5. Whether those 5 go home with you or you choose to release them is up to the angler.
Hooking up every chance I get!
Hey Derek, I totally understand you and SeaRay both on this. But , how do you explain the definition of "take". Seems if you are going to use "unlawful to take, attempt to take, or possess more than 5" , then "the definition of TAKE does NOT include catch and release" has to come into play as well.
I would like to hear your unbiased thoughts? If you reference one rule, you have to take the second in consideration too.
I personally think the law was written with too much gray area in it. The verbage "attempt to take" is too vague in terms of catch and release. For me, I know that the law's intent is to decrease the fish mortality rate, which drastically increases in the summer compared to the other seasons. I go off of the intent of "you catch 5 and you're done." I'm surprised with the amount of debate around the law, they haven't rewritten it to clean up the language and make it more cut and dry.
Ankona Cayenne Kevlar, Suzuki 60KHNC LIKED above post
Agreed, it just seems nobody wants to acknowledge or address the articles of definitions around this law. If they took the time to define "take" in the regulations, it is something that can not be ignored when defining the laws surrounding it. I fully understand the intent as well.
I don't disagree that there is gray area with the law. It comes down to the intent of the law vs. the letter of the law. Although the letter of the law may contradict itself through the definition of take, the contradiction goes completely against the intent of the law. Do you have an argument? Yes. Will a game warden on the water hear you out on that argument? Probably not. But, I see your point.
Hooking up every chance I get!KHNC LIKED above post