-
- Species
- Whitetails
- Big Game
- Small Game
- Birds
- Special Methods
- Bow Hunting
-
- Species
- Bass
- Trout
- More Freshwater
- Saltwater
- Special Methods
- Fly Fishing
The Big Pull: Record Steelhead?
Recent Comments
- Ralph the Rifleman on Shotgun Shell Review: A First Look at Federal's New Prairie Storm Pheasant Loads (15)
- shane on 200 Reasons To Get Back In Your Treestand (29)
- jtboles on Video: Carp on the Fly (14)
- jtboles on 11-Year-Old Idaho Boy Shoots Problem Bear Off Front Porch (26)
- jtboles on Chad Love: Predators Behaving Strangely (16)
Categories
- Bass Fishing (8)
- Big Game Hunting (1)
- Bow Hunting (1)
- Close Calls (1)
- Fishing (37)
- Fishing Gear (2)
- Fly Fishing (184)
- Gear (2)
- Guns (1)
- More Freshwater (12)
- Other (6)
- Quick Tips (2)
- Saltwater (18)
- Shooting Gear (1)
- Shotguns (1)
- Survival Food (1)
- Trout Fishing (36)
Recent Posts
- Video: Carp on the Fly
- For Better Fly Fishing... Glass or Plastic?
- Fly Fishing Film Tour 2010
- Would You Take a Photo with a Foul-Hooked Fish?
- Is Drought Still Effecting Your Fishing?
- Fins to the Left... Fins to the Right...
- Slide Show: Fall Fishing in Colorado
- The Best Camp Dinner Ever
- You Pick, Wild or Hatchery steelhead?
- New Caption Contest: Iaconelli with Fly Rod
Archives
Syndicate
FlyTalk
in your Inbox
February 27, 2009
The Big Pull: Record Steelhead?
You are looking at what might be one of the largest steelhead ever caught on a fly. It almost certainly will be an IGFA record for 8kg tippet if verified.
After scrolling through my inbox yesterday I had one with a subject line that read, "wanna see a really big steelhead?" Turns out Mr. Peter Harrison caught the slug on the Hoh river in Washington state just last Friday. He was fishing a double handed rod, swinging flies. Apparently after a long drawn out battle he brought the fish to shore only to find out it was bleeding profusely from the gills.
Mr. Harrison stated, "My intention was to let it go, having first measured the fish, but it was bleeding quite heavily from the gills. As it seemed likely not survive the ordeal, and because it was the fish of a lifetime, I decided to take the fish. In 10 years of fishing Washington state rivers this is the first fish I have ever taken, of any kind, from a river."
On the bank a couple of boats pulled up and the measured the fish. One said 31 pounds. One 32 pounds. Hours later they managed to get it to a certified scale and by then it had lost fluids and blood. It read 29.5 pounds, still seemingly breaking a record set 24 years ago on the Skeena in BC.
After it was all said and done Mr Harrison wrote to the blog (The Big Pull) where his email was first published.
"I certainly have bittersweet emotions. The elation of hooking a giant fish and beaching it but real trauma and actual stress about killing the fish. I am still upset at that part, believe you me I did not do it lightly. Emotionally I am scarred, I still have knot in my stomach over the whole incident. That has led me to ask myself the question: isn’t it time that all wild steelhead be released? After all, if they lived long enough, and evaded seals, net’s and hooks, all those smaller wild steelhead that are killed each week, would stand a good chance of growing up to be a large size too."
If true, I say good on ya mate. You did your best. You were throwing flies. You wanted to release the fish and you actually gave some thought to it.
What would you do? Pursue an IGFA record or leave the fish in the river where some say it belongs.
TR
Today on Field & Stream
Visit Our Sister Sites at Bonnier Corporation
| Enthusiast | Kiteboarding | QUAD | SKI | Skiing | Scuba Diving | Sport Diver | TransWorld Ride BMX | TransWorld Business | TransWorld Motocross | TransWorld SKATEboarding, | TransWorld SNOWboarding | TransWorld SURF | WakeBoarding | WaterSki | Warren Miller Entertainment | WindSurfing |
|---|---|
| Travel | Caribbean Travel & Life | Destination Weddings & Honeymoon | Islands | Meeting Traveler | Resorts & Great Hotels |
| Lifestyle & Shelter | Florida Travel & Life | Garden Design | Home Ft. Lauderdale | Home Miami |
| Luxury | SNOW | Spa |
| Marine | Boating Life | Cruising World | Fly Fishing in Salt Waters | Power Cruising | Marlin | Motor Boating | Sailing World | Salt Water Sportsman | Sport Fishing | Yachting | NewBoats.com | UsedBoats.com | YachtBroker.com |
| Outdoor | Field & Stream | Outdoor Life | SHOT Business |
| Parenting | Babytalk | Parenting |
| Science | Popular Science | Science Illustrated |
| Saveur | Saveur |
| Working Mother Media | Working Mother |
| Entertainment / Events | World Entertainment Services | World Sports & Marketing |
FieldandStream.com is part of the Bonnier Outdoor Group Network
Copyright © 2009 Bonnier Corp. All Rights Reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.
Comments (60)
Leave it in the river. If you fish for the record, your not enjoying your time on the water.
great fish!
mutiny... read to post before commenting
After, "fishing for ten years of Washington state rivers, " Mr. Harrison has probably released hundreds, if not more, of fish during this period.
This being his first "keeper," I say he has been an example, of a conscientious angler, who meticulously and somewhat painstakingly, thought this over, and his compunction led him to his decision ...
I say, "have no regrets ... and a Big Congratulations on your decision and your record steelhead!"
Same thing happend to me, and that is the only reason I have a mounted fish. The smallmouth was going to be released after I weighed it, but the DNR takes forever and even in a livewell the fish died. (The fish was 6.2 pounds, and was a short lived state record.)
Keep it and make it a mantel piece. He has all the right after 10 years of catch and release. Great fish!!
I'm calling Bulls*%t. Bleeding profusely from the gills? I don't see any blood? Do you? I think he knew exactly what he had when he got that fish in and wanted an IGFA record. He killed an amazing fish for no reason.
Maybe it was bleeding from the opposite side gills? If hooked by a single hook fly, how could it be bleeding from both gills at once? If I were taking a photo of my fish, I would wash the blood off anyway.
His fish. Don't let yourself be too high and mighty.
read the linked post
http://thebigpull.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/as-alas-bleeding4.jpg
Sweet fish. Wish we had some that size out here.
ramcatt,
so what?
Really nice fish of a lifetime.
Great fish, have no regrets. If it is an open season and not violating the rules keep the darn fish, just don't waste it. If your worried about to many being kept and damage to the fishery, contact the game department, it's their job to maintain fisheries and set limits. I admit to throwing most fish back because I enjoy the catch more than the meat, but fishing at its heart is about catching dinner, and I am tired of others making people feel ashamed for keeping a fish now and again. In our area you have to release all wild steelhead, and can keep hatchery fish. Many now look down their noses at you for keeping even hatchery fish. This is ridiculous since the hatcheries around here end up with way more returns than they need and either close the gates or retruck the fish back downstream so anglers can have another go at them. If you don't want to eat it, throw it back, but don't think the overall population is going to be damaged by keeping a hatchery fish.
Bleeder or not? We’ll never know. I say lets give the angler the benefit of the doubt. The real point is - IGFA records are totally outdated BS. Killing the biggest fish in the gene pool for cocktail party info/bragging rights is just retarded. Also, considering the state of steelhead populations, the fact that WA regs even allows for the killing of ANY wild steelhead in a river like the Hoh boggles the mind.
Oh for the love of Benji, keep the damn fish...we have gotten so panty waisted in the last 15 years. The guy releases the vast majority of his fish, this one was likely played out, and it probably was bleeding from the gills. Good lord, has it finally gotten so bad that we have to make up 15 good reasons to keep a legally taken fish? Keep it up and the idiots at PETA and the like will eventually have their way. We as fisherman have gotten ourselves about 60% of the way there. I am as big of a conservationist as the next guy but once in a while fish die and that's just the way it is. And I say all of this whether it was a record fish or not.
Wags… are you on crack? The catch and release ethic is an argument AGAINST the idiots at PETA. And yeah, we ought to have really good reasons for killing fish and IGFA records ain’t one of em. Big fish spawn other big fish, so if you’re cool with killing them, don’t ever ask where all the big ones went. Also, what does legality have to do with anything? The future of the sport might be more important. If killing wild steelhead in depleted populations is legal, then maybe the law is haywire – ever thought about that? Sure, some fish die, and sometimes we kill them – it’s the nature of our sport – no problem. But killing fish for records? Gimme a break. Rock on dude….
That fish is a HAWG and to catch it off a spey rod is even better. What a fight that must have been.
You boys can argue about anything or everything about this fish but the smile on that guys face is priceless.
As for releasing a record fish, I wouldn't keep a line class record but if it was the largest of all caught I'd have to think twice.
larger steelhead have been caught and released by more thoughtful anglers and in places that had regulations that protect wild, native fish. this is a sad state of affairs. I hope "English Pete Harrison" enjoys his new fame. i hope his ego is satisfied. the fish was hooked in the top of the upper lip, how is it that it was a bleeder? i don't buy it.
something like that happened to me I caught a decent rainbow trout and it swolled the fly I didnt want to lose the fly so I ate the fish i thought it was ethicall
great fish! i don't think killing a fish for a record is ethical. i also don't know why it would be bleeding from the gills but i wasn't there. easy to see how that would be thought of as just an excuse. it's a shame to see a fish like that wasted. either way you look at it, the fish was wasted for no good reason.
I am not sure why everyone is attacking this angler? He did nothing illegal and he used his best judgement that the fish would die if he released it, so opposed to letting the fish die, rot, and go to waste, he did the ethical thing and kept it. If people are angry that its legal for him to keep the fish, attach the DNR and not the angler. In times like these, all fishermen and hunters should be uniting and supporting one another opposed to fighting amongst ourselves.
I release most of my catch but occasionally I do keep fish and feel no regret at all. FIshing would be bordering on pointless for me if I did not occasiobally eat some. With a fish like that I would have steaks all year to eat and not have to kill any more. We ahve become so cynical it is sickening. It was that guys decision, hopefully based on good judgement. Hopefully if one of us ever catches a fish like that we will do the same.
wow
A guy who is much more accoplished and exprienced than you makes a judgement call and you want to crucify him...
if there was a video of him reviving for 45mins only to have it go belly up and float away everyone would scream bloody murder...
It was legal... he's not a meat hunter
he made a judgement call... one that only he could make
i'm sure no one would love to have seen that fish swim aaway than him
he was swinging flies on a 2hander... not sitting on a cooler dunking bait (like the new FlyTalk readership)
i've said it before...
this blog was much better when it was fly fisherman
TR and KD... sorry guys
what once was a great read has been diluted by the homoginlization that is F&S
Homoginlization? I always thought it was a pretty manly publication myself...
ramcatt,
same question I asked wags.... are you on crack?
no... it was beer
i am 100% C&R
and think killing just for the record is wrong
Nick English let the world record swim earlier this season
but i won't question this guy intentions
he made a judgement call to harvest a fish that would have not survived
read the linked post...
his thoughts were for the fish... not the record
I was fishing the Rio Paloma outlet of Lago Elizalda last week in Chile. The only reason I mention that is that I know Tim, Kirk and Roy Tanami have been there in the past. I hooked a beautiful ancient 24 or 25 inch Brown on a big streamer. We had the fish out of the water only momentarily and discovered the fish had inhaled the big fly and was bleeding a little. We tried and tried to revive the fish but it was to no avail. We eventually gave up and left the fish for dead. I asked Claudio what he was going to do with the fish. He said we would just leave it. My first thought was hey it is dying lets take it back to the lodge, not a short distance. Maybe a mount of the fish or something. We decided to let the river take it. I ultimately believe that either way of thinking is fine. Leave the fish for other fish and bugs to eat and they will, circle of life kind of thing. Or take it home and do something with it, maybe it is a record and the one fish you remove from that river in your life, hardly a sin.
For those of you who are C&R only I commend your committment but realize that a blanket philosophy does not always apply to the health of a fishery. C&R has lead to the slot limits and other creative managment tools that states are now implementing. C&R has not always proved to be best for a fishery. I hope the philosphy continues to be used on fragile fisheries but not everywhere; fish are good to eat. No more fish ceviche' would be crime!
chad; why didn't you eat the fish?
I realize that I'm putting myself out there to take soem lumps, but when did keeping a fish become a crime. I'll admit I probably release 90% of fish I catch, but sometimes I'm fishing for dinner. There's species I'd likely never keep because of local scarcity, like muskie here in Pennsylvania where MI-50 puts a lot of effort into getting thier numbers up. Trout, however, are delicious and are almost entirely stocked by the commission. There are waters where I won't keep them, but some where I start envisioning trout on the grill before I get my line wet. Catch and Release is a good practice, but the mentality came up as a response to the damage of unlimited takes. If you're within the law and on occassion take fish, why apologize? Fresh fish is delicious and satisfying when you've donethe work. Certainly why would other fisherman attack? For those who are bringing the animal crazies into this, they just want you to stop. In thier mind if you eat the fish then you're a barbarian, if you're not eating the fish then you're torturing them for sport. There's no reasoning with that. Let's keep these discussions based on our own sense of ethics and conversation and not try to pander to a lunatic fringe. I have danced around to the question why didn't he eat the fish. To the angler, it's was a heck of a nice fish, good job, be proud.
Amongst all of my other typos, that certainly should have read "ethics and conservation" not "conversation". My apologies.
I'm pretty sure people's objections to the taking of this fish have to do w/the state of WILD & NATIVE stelhead. The state of WA and its' fish management policies on the Olympic Pennisula are in question as this is the only place in the state where these regs are in place. Do some research regarding the state of WILD & NATIVE steelhead. The anglers story of the fish being a bleeder is in question as well, as the fish was hooked in the top of the upper lip(how is it that it was bleeding from the gills?) and even the picture in this post shows a fish without bleeding and apparently red healthy gills. If he wanted to take the fish man up and do it but don't come up with a story after the fact. As I stated before, larger steelhead have been caught on the fly and released, I hope English Pete Harrison enjoys his new fame, as his name is mud in my book and many others as well.
Respectfully,
Willie G
i am in no way opposed to keeping the occasional fish but in the area i live, people are of the mentality that they have to keep everything they catch wether it is legal or not. i have always been under the impression that steelhead are not very abundant in the first place, so keeping them is taboo. i love to eat fish but steelhead in my book should be released immediately.
jamesti,
I would have considered it but with the time spent travelling back to the lodge and no ice the chance of the fish being edible would have been in serious doubt. It take considerable time to travel the road back through the Paloma valley to the lodge.
Come on guys. Everyone knows it's the rod that kills the fish and not the fisherman. I say we outlaw spey rods before all the fish are killed. Move over HR 45, here comes HR 46.
Mr Harrisons response: "from my cold dead hands".
sure outlaw the speys then they come after your spincasters. man, where will it all end?! we should put a 500 percent tax on all flies and those dangerous fish killing lures. you know the ones with those lethal treble hooks? here comes h.r.47!
to the last two posters: wtf are you talking about? address the issues that have been brought up regarding the killing of this wild and native steelhead. if this was a hatchery drone i doubt that this discussion would have the same sort of response. why should wild and native fish be allowed to be killed? WDFW knows better but it's a shame the crowd in Forks and Port Angeles don't know better. This is the issue and the anglers changing story on why he killed this fish.
Respectfully,
Willie G
Willie,
I have stated my opinion in an earlier post. I have also read all the post and agree with some and disagree with others. I also understand the importance of releaseing fish. I am strictly C&R myself but also will be the first to compliment a nice stringer of fish.
On the other hand the significance of the death of this one fish on the survival of the steelhead population in the NW is close to absolute zero. If you want to have a serious discussion about the survival of steelhead let's talk pollution, dams and sediment.
Word out of Washington is that Hillary Clinton is jumping in to support HR46. In a news conference in the nations capital she said " any rod large enough to require two hands must be outlawed!"
Having fished this and many other rivers in the area, I say congrats to the angler. I hope that he made the right decision for the right reasons, we will never know. I think the thing to dicuss is why the native americans can gill net to their hearts desire and no body says a thing. I know guides in the area who took pictures of fish out of the water, released them, and have been harassed to no end, even lawsuits, just for taking pictures and releasing these beautiful fish. If I landed this fish and though it important to have the record, I would NOT take a picture and release the fish. I might get sued!!!
I think that there is too much political bullshit now days. What ever happened to the days when a person could be proud of thier catch. It seems to me that this guy's is getting grilled by some of you for keeping one MONSTER fish that he says would have died anyway. I just have one question, how many of you were there when he caught it. I say give him the benifit of the doubt.
willie; calm down. we have addressed the issues in earlier posts. if evrything had to be serious we would be in the care of the state. you get all upset because of a little humor. do you have any friends?
I guess we who also hunt are completely unethical and will continue to be so long as we don't devise a method of catch and release hunting. If the death of a fish upsets you to this degree, why chance it? Stay home and the fish will be safe from your intervention. While you're at it, ban bears, because I've never seen one intentionally release his or her catch. If the man is within the bounds of the law, and he doesn't leave the carcases to rot on the bank, more power to him. I'm sickened that he even felt the need to apologize for taking the fish. If blood sports are not for you, that's fine, but don't pretend that fishing isn't one.
I guess we who also hunt are completely unethical and will continue to be so long as we don't devise a method of catch and release hunting. If the death of a fish upsets you to this degree, why chance it? Stay home and the fish will be safe from your intervention. While you're at it, ban bears, because I've never seen one intentionally release his or her catch. If the man is within the bounds of the law, and he doesn't leave the carcases to rot on the bank, more power to him. I'm sickened that he even felt the need to apologize for taking the fish. If blood sports are not for you, that's fine, but don't pretend that fishing isn't one.
Sorry for the double post. The old browser stalled there for a minute. I was so fired up, my mouse finger was twitching!
It is a common practice to wipe away any blood before taking a picture of a catch or a kill. I'm not sure why anyone wants to call conspiracy because no blood is visible in the photo. If you had caught a world-record steelhead, would you want it to be bleeding in the picture? If I'm going to call BS on something it's some of Alex's stuff. At least his post was somewhat relevant and thought out this time.
Ive never seen such a dislay of selective morality. If you all really dont want to kill SteelHead then dont fish for them. there is always a chance of a fish dying , often long after release . Most C&R practisioners will have been responsible for some deaths .I hope you all put the same ammount of energy into other conservation philosophies , particularly as the worlds biggest per capita polluters .
As for the bleeding arguement , decent size trout seem to regularly injure their gills during "the fight " , mostly with the fly stuck firmly in their lips. It is eithier caused by the line running behind and into the gill cover or some of the violent movement the fish makes in order to escape . Ive never been able to figure it out but it probably happens every say 30 to 50 fish. These are things we need to accept as random but inevitable consequences of hauling struggling creatures away from the places they prefer to be . C&R reduces the number of fish killed , its a good thing.If this guys fish was a mere 10 lber and he kept it because it was very likely to die anyway what would you be saying ?
Good thing he did, taking it for dinner. Releasing a dead fish THAT big is like having your Ford Excursion break down beyond repair on the side of the highway. And instead of having it towed to a junk yard and sold for all that metal, you just leave it there for someone else!
Great fish. Yes it is to bad that it couldn't be released, but any fisherman is in there right to take a fish legally. Why should they have to explain themselves, it's there preference if they decide to keep it or release it. We troll for rainbows on inland lakes and quite often they hit pretty hard and they swallow the hook. Sometimes they are to small to keep, so legally your not allowed to keep them, but morally I think it's wrong to throw back a dead fish. What's right? I don't know, but it's not worth a ticket. Sounds like a good question for me to post.
As long as keeping it was legal, you have no damn reason to apologize. Quit grilling the man over whether or not it was bleeding or whether or not he kept it because it was bleeding or because he wanted a record fish. It doesn't matter why the hell he kept it! As long as it's legal he really owes no explanation! I am a diehard hunter and fisher but sometimes you purist, snob-nosed, spoiled brats piss me off more than the antis.
hunt_fish_sleep,
Let me guess? Your god given right, huh?
moron.
He looks like he's a happy fisherman.
I live and fish in Washington. Am a member of local chat boards and fish the Olympic Peninsula very frequently. What most of you who are commenting do not understand and may not know is that these rivers with relatively healthy runs of Steelhead are also netted by local tribes for commercial purposes. A law from the past has allowed the tribes 50 percent of harvestable fish and if the state was to abolish the retention of wild fish the tribes get to ramp up the amount of netting they do to harvest the portion sportsmen have given up. The tribes themselves have been in question about the numbers they report they have harvested and if you take the anglers off of the local streams during the period when wild fish are running, no one would have a clue to the numbers of fish being harvested. Currently the state looks at annual harvest and negotiates net time with the tribes accordingly. The less we take the more tribes get. If we let go of the right we will never get it back but the fish will continue to be harvested regardless. I personally congratulate Peter for his awesome catch, but am dissapointed that he was pressured by anglers to the point of the "bleeding" story. I was also disgusted with the divisiveness(sic) of anglers on local chatboards. It was a legally caught fish and an awesome one at that. Any fisherman who says he doesnt brag about his catch is a liar! Nice fish Peter!
Congrats..enough said
thats some good eating right there.
Just a question for msmiller: Do you think anyone who believes he or she has God-given rights is a moron? I didn't really understand your comment, and I don't want to criticize without understanding your point.
Well you must understand the msnmiller is a moron.
As a side note to the story above, and to some of the comments,the WDFW allows retention of 1 wild stealhead per licencse year, and then only if that 1 fish is caught in one of 11 specifically identified rivers. Given this fact, does this change anyone's opinion?
Well WAangler, since you put it that way, I'm going to venture on up to Washington and deprive those damn injuns of one more steelhead.
hey all, how about a view from the other side of the pond.
Firstly, wow, what a fantastic fish. I only wish we had migratory rainbows in this country. Unfortunately we only have 1 river in England that has a wild population of rainbow trout at all, the Wye in Derbyshire, and that aint anywhere near the sea.
The closest we have to steelhead is our 'sea trout', e.g. the migratory brown trout which run back into rivers and the record is around 25Lb i think. These are wonderful fish both for their fighting prowess and their taste and the fact that they're generally caught after dark which adds to the whole experience.I have no issue in knocking one or two of these on the head for the pot, they're absolutely delicious for a start and secondly that as they're so bloody hard to catch...the odds are definitely in their favour. Having said that, I wouldn't take more than 1 or two and if it was sizeable would try and return.
We also have this whole C&R debate in the UK going on as our native wild brown trout diminish in number and unique strains get diluted with stocking etc. I generally don't kill wild brown trout, but will definitely kill grown on stocked trout. There's also been a massive swing from killing Atlantic salmon (which can do multiple returns from the sea) to C&R which has been really benefical for stocks in some river systems but maybe less benficial in other rivers as far as the economy goes as some anglers want to kill what they catch so go elsewhere.
Anyway back to this monster.... if you looked at the link earlier in the post, http://thebigpull.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/as-alas-bleeding4.jpg , the fish is clearly bleeding profusely from its lower gill area.
The angler sounds sounds like a fairly decent chap and it seems would in all likelyhood have returned the fish if it was looking like recovering. Unfortunately, bleeding or not, a big fish like that, played for probably quite a while on a double hander, may have died regardless. Such is the nature of our sport, which was never intended to be a C&R activity.
I think if you go 100% C&R, in many ways, you're kind of supporting the anti's point of view that we're doing this purely for sport and have no intention of eating what we catch. I don't abide by this point of view and as I say do kill the odd wild fish.
I think if a species is so endangered in a river that its damaging to kill the odd fish, you probably shouldn't be fishing there at all.
I can't belive all the crying im hearing over this man keeping this fish. Unless you have never killed anything in your life and are a vegatarian,I dont know why anyone has any room to judge. We are all fishermen and especially the fly fishermen want to protect,preserve and follow all laws to sustain our fisheries. Living very close to this river for many years, I have had a chance to fish the Hoh and many others. I agree these systems are unique and the native fish should be protected.It is the Biologists duty to decide if any fish can be taken or if the river is in jeopardy of being damaged. One fish a year if decided is very reasonable. It is not very sportman like to persecute and harass a man who is following all the rules and just out to have a good time. The gill netters,dams and pollutants in the rivers are all these beautiful fishes true enemies. Lets congradulate this man on making the best decission he could at the time and lets get out and catch a pig like that instead of attacking a fellow fisherman.
As everyone else has said excellent catch.I think it is very admirable to release a trophy fish or pass up a shot on a giant buck.I say leave the trophy's alone.Let the strong genes be passed on and deleted the smaller and weaker for food.
I would deffinantly take this to the taxidermy... that is one massive fish. I really dont see any problem with him keeping the fish though
Post a Comment
After, "fishing for ten years of Washington state rivers, " Mr. Harrison has probably released hundreds, if not more, of fish during this period.
This being his first "keeper," I say he has been an example, of a conscientious angler, who meticulously and somewhat painstakingly, thought this over, and his compunction led him to his decision ...
I say, "have no regrets ... and a Big Congratulations on your decision and your record steelhead!"
Oh for the love of Benji, keep the damn fish...we have gotten so panty waisted in the last 15 years. The guy releases the vast majority of his fish, this one was likely played out, and it probably was bleeding from the gills. Good lord, has it finally gotten so bad that we have to make up 15 good reasons to keep a legally taken fish? Keep it up and the idiots at PETA and the like will eventually have their way. We as fisherman have gotten ourselves about 60% of the way there. I am as big of a conservationist as the next guy but once in a while fish die and that's just the way it is. And I say all of this whether it was a record fish or not.
I am not sure why everyone is attacking this angler? He did nothing illegal and he used his best judgement that the fish would die if he released it, so opposed to letting the fish die, rot, and go to waste, he did the ethical thing and kept it. If people are angry that its legal for him to keep the fish, attach the DNR and not the angler. In times like these, all fishermen and hunters should be uniting and supporting one another opposed to fighting amongst ourselves.
I realize that I'm putting myself out there to take soem lumps, but when did keeping a fish become a crime. I'll admit I probably release 90% of fish I catch, but sometimes I'm fishing for dinner. There's species I'd likely never keep because of local scarcity, like muskie here in Pennsylvania where MI-50 puts a lot of effort into getting thier numbers up. Trout, however, are delicious and are almost entirely stocked by the commission. There are waters where I won't keep them, but some where I start envisioning trout on the grill before I get my line wet. Catch and Release is a good practice, but the mentality came up as a response to the damage of unlimited takes. If you're within the law and on occassion take fish, why apologize? Fresh fish is delicious and satisfying when you've donethe work. Certainly why would other fisherman attack? For those who are bringing the animal crazies into this, they just want you to stop. In thier mind if you eat the fish then you're a barbarian, if you're not eating the fish then you're torturing them for sport. There's no reasoning with that. Let's keep these discussions based on our own sense of ethics and conversation and not try to pander to a lunatic fringe. I have danced around to the question why didn't he eat the fish. To the angler, it's was a heck of a nice fish, good job, be proud.
Keep it and make it a mantel piece. He has all the right after 10 years of catch and release. Great fish!!
Maybe it was bleeding from the opposite side gills? If hooked by a single hook fly, how could it be bleeding from both gills at once? If I were taking a photo of my fish, I would wash the blood off anyway.
His fish. Don't let yourself be too high and mighty.
Come on guys. Everyone knows it's the rod that kills the fish and not the fisherman. I say we outlaw spey rods before all the fish are killed. Move over HR 45, here comes HR 46.
Mr Harrisons response: "from my cold dead hands".
I think that there is too much political bullshit now days. What ever happened to the days when a person could be proud of thier catch. It seems to me that this guy's is getting grilled by some of you for keeping one MONSTER fish that he says would have died anyway. I just have one question, how many of you were there when he caught it. I say give him the benifit of the doubt.
I guess we who also hunt are completely unethical and will continue to be so long as we don't devise a method of catch and release hunting. If the death of a fish upsets you to this degree, why chance it? Stay home and the fish will be safe from your intervention. While you're at it, ban bears, because I've never seen one intentionally release his or her catch. If the man is within the bounds of the law, and he doesn't leave the carcases to rot on the bank, more power to him. I'm sickened that he even felt the need to apologize for taking the fish. If blood sports are not for you, that's fine, but don't pretend that fishing isn't one.
Ive never seen such a dislay of selective morality. If you all really dont want to kill SteelHead then dont fish for them. there is always a chance of a fish dying , often long after release . Most C&R practisioners will have been responsible for some deaths .I hope you all put the same ammount of energy into other conservation philosophies , particularly as the worlds biggest per capita polluters .
As for the bleeding arguement , decent size trout seem to regularly injure their gills during "the fight " , mostly with the fly stuck firmly in their lips. It is eithier caused by the line running behind and into the gill cover or some of the violent movement the fish makes in order to escape . Ive never been able to figure it out but it probably happens every say 30 to 50 fish. These are things we need to accept as random but inevitable consequences of hauling struggling creatures away from the places they prefer to be . C&R reduces the number of fish killed , its a good thing.If this guys fish was a mere 10 lber and he kept it because it was very likely to die anyway what would you be saying ?
Great fish. Yes it is to bad that it couldn't be released, but any fisherman is in there right to take a fish legally. Why should they have to explain themselves, it's there preference if they decide to keep it or release it. We troll for rainbows on inland lakes and quite often they hit pretty hard and they swallow the hook. Sometimes they are to small to keep, so legally your not allowed to keep them, but morally I think it's wrong to throw back a dead fish. What's right? I don't know, but it's not worth a ticket. Sounds like a good question for me to post.
He looks like he's a happy fisherman.
I live and fish in Washington. Am a member of local chat boards and fish the Olympic Peninsula very frequently. What most of you who are commenting do not understand and may not know is that these rivers with relatively healthy runs of Steelhead are also netted by local tribes for commercial purposes. A law from the past has allowed the tribes 50 percent of harvestable fish and if the state was to abolish the retention of wild fish the tribes get to ramp up the amount of netting they do to harvest the portion sportsmen have given up. The tribes themselves have been in question about the numbers they report they have harvested and if you take the anglers off of the local streams during the period when wild fish are running, no one would have a clue to the numbers of fish being harvested. Currently the state looks at annual harvest and negotiates net time with the tribes accordingly. The less we take the more tribes get. If we let go of the right we will never get it back but the fish will continue to be harvested regardless. I personally congratulate Peter for his awesome catch, but am dissapointed that he was pressured by anglers to the point of the "bleeding" story. I was also disgusted with the divisiveness(sic) of anglers on local chatboards. It was a legally caught fish and an awesome one at that. Any fisherman who says he doesnt brag about his catch is a liar! Nice fish Peter!
Well WAangler, since you put it that way, I'm going to venture on up to Washington and deprive those damn injuns of one more steelhead.
Leave it in the river. If you fish for the record, your not enjoying your time on the water.
great fish!
mutiny... read to post before commenting
Same thing happend to me, and that is the only reason I have a mounted fish. The smallmouth was going to be released after I weighed it, but the DNR takes forever and even in a livewell the fish died. (The fish was 6.2 pounds, and was a short lived state record.)
read the linked post
http://thebigpull.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/as-alas-bleeding4.jpg
Sweet fish. Wish we had some that size out here.
Really nice fish of a lifetime.
Great fish, have no regrets. If it is an open season and not violating the rules keep the darn fish, just don't waste it. If your worried about to many being kept and damage to the fishery, contact the game department, it's their job to maintain fisheries and set limits. I admit to throwing most fish back because I enjoy the catch more than the meat, but fishing at its heart is about catching dinner, and I am tired of others making people feel ashamed for keeping a fish now and again. In our area you have to release all wild steelhead, and can keep hatchery fish. Many now look down their noses at you for keeping even hatchery fish. This is ridiculous since the hatcheries around here end up with way more returns than they need and either close the gates or retruck the fish back downstream so anglers can have another go at them. If you don't want to eat it, throw it back, but don't think the overall population is going to be damaged by keeping a hatchery fish.
Bleeder or not? We’ll never know. I say lets give the angler the benefit of the doubt. The real point is - IGFA records are totally outdated BS. Killing the biggest fish in the gene pool for cocktail party info/bragging rights is just retarded. Also, considering the state of steelhead populations, the fact that WA regs even allows for the killing of ANY wild steelhead in a river like the Hoh boggles the mind.
That fish is a HAWG and to catch it off a spey rod is even better. What a fight that must have been.
You boys can argue about anything or everything about this fish but the smile on that guys face is priceless.
As for releasing a record fish, I wouldn't keep a line class record but if it was the largest of all caught I'd have to think twice.
something like that happened to me I caught a decent rainbow trout and it swolled the fly I didnt want to lose the fly so I ate the fish i thought it was ethicall
great fish! i don't think killing a fish for a record is ethical. i also don't know why it would be bleeding from the gills but i wasn't there. easy to see how that would be thought of as just an excuse. it's a shame to see a fish like that wasted. either way you look at it, the fish was wasted for no good reason.
I release most of my catch but occasionally I do keep fish and feel no regret at all. FIshing would be bordering on pointless for me if I did not occasiobally eat some. With a fish like that I would have steaks all year to eat and not have to kill any more. We ahve become so cynical it is sickening. It was that guys decision, hopefully based on good judgement. Hopefully if one of us ever catches a fish like that we will do the same.
wow
A guy who is much more accoplished and exprienced than you makes a judgement call and you want to crucify him...
if there was a video of him reviving for 45mins only to have it go belly up and float away everyone would scream bloody murder...
It was legal... he's not a meat hunter
he made a judgement call... one that only he could make
i'm sure no one would love to have seen that fish swim aaway than him
he was swinging flies on a 2hander... not sitting on a cooler dunking bait (like the new FlyTalk readership)
i've said it before...
this blog was much better when it was fly fisherman
TR and KD... sorry guys
what once was a great read has been diluted by the homoginlization that is F&S
Homoginlization? I always thought it was a pretty manly publication myself...
no... it was beer
i am 100% C&R
and think killing just for the record is wrong
Nick English let the world record swim earlier this season
but i won't question this guy intentions
he made a judgement call to harvest a fish that would have not survived
read the linked post...
his thoughts were for the fish... not the record
I was fishing the Rio Paloma outlet of Lago Elizalda last week in Chile. The only reason I mention that is that I know Tim, Kirk and Roy Tanami have been there in the past. I hooked a beautiful ancient 24 or 25 inch Brown on a big streamer. We had the fish out of the water only momentarily and discovered the fish had inhaled the big fly and was bleeding a little. We tried and tried to revive the fish but it was to no avail. We eventually gave up and left the fish for dead. I asked Claudio what he was going to do with the fish. He said we would just leave it. My first thought was hey it is dying lets take it back to the lodge, not a short distance. Maybe a mount of the fish or something. We decided to let the river take it. I ultimately believe that either way of thinking is fine. Leave the fish for other fish and bugs to eat and they will, circle of life kind of thing. Or take it home and do something with it, maybe it is a record and the one fish you remove from that river in your life, hardly a sin.
For those of you who are C&R only I commend your committment but realize that a blanket philosophy does not always apply to the health of a fishery. C&R has lead to the slot limits and other creative managment tools that states are now implementing. C&R has not always proved to be best for a fishery. I hope the philosphy continues to be used on fragile fisheries but not everywhere; fish are good to eat. No more fish ceviche' would be crime!
chad; why didn't you eat the fish?
Amongst all of my other typos, that certainly should have read "ethics and conservation" not "conversation". My apologies.
I'm pretty sure people's objections to the taking of this fish have to do w/the state of WILD & NATIVE stelhead. The state of WA and its' fish management policies on the Olympic Pennisula are in question as this is the only place in the state where these regs are in place. Do some research regarding the state of WILD & NATIVE steelhead. The anglers story of the fish being a bleeder is in question as well, as the fish was hooked in the top of the upper lip(how is it that it was bleeding from the gills?) and even the picture in this post shows a fish without bleeding and apparently red healthy gills. If he wanted to take the fish man up and do it but don't come up with a story after the fact. As I stated before, larger steelhead have been caught on the fly and released, I hope English Pete Harrison enjoys his new fame, as his name is mud in my book and many others as well.
Respectfully,
Willie G
i am in no way opposed to keeping the occasional fish but in the area i live, people are of the mentality that they have to keep everything they catch wether it is legal or not. i have always been under the impression that steelhead are not very abundant in the first place, so keeping them is taboo. i love to eat fish but steelhead in my book should be released immediately.
jamesti,
I would have considered it but with the time spent travelling back to the lodge and no ice the chance of the fish being edible would have been in serious doubt. It take considerable time to travel the road back through the Paloma valley to the lodge.
sure outlaw the speys then they come after your spincasters. man, where will it all end?! we should put a 500 percent tax on all flies and those dangerous fish killing lures. you know the ones with those lethal treble hooks? here comes h.r.47!
to the last two posters: wtf are you talking about? address the issues that have been brought up regarding the killing of this wild and native steelhead. if this was a hatchery drone i doubt that this discussion would have the same sort of response. why should wild and native fish be allowed to be killed? WDFW knows better but it's a shame the crowd in Forks and Port Angeles don't know better. This is the issue and the anglers changing story on why he killed this fish.
Respectfully,
Willie G
Willie,
I have stated my opinion in an earlier post. I have also read all the post and agree with some and disagree with others. I also understand the importance of releaseing fish. I am strictly C&R myself but also will be the first to compliment a nice stringer of fish.
On the other hand the significance of the death of this one fish on the survival of the steelhead population in the NW is close to absolute zero. If you want to have a serious discussion about the survival of steelhead let's talk pollution, dams and sediment.
Word out of Washington is that Hillary Clinton is jumping in to support HR46. In a news conference in the nations capital she said " any rod large enough to require two hands must be outlawed!"
Having fished this and many other rivers in the area, I say congrats to the angler. I hope that he made the right decision for the right reasons, we will never know. I think the thing to dicuss is why the native americans can gill net to their hearts desire and no body says a thing. I know guides in the area who took pictures of fish out of the water, released them, and have been harassed to no end, even lawsuits, just for taking pictures and releasing these beautiful fish. If I landed this fish and though it important to have the record, I would NOT take a picture and release the fish. I might get sued!!!
I guess we who also hunt are completely unethical and will continue to be so long as we don't devise a method of catch and release hunting. If the death of a fish upsets you to this degree, why chance it? Stay home and the fish will be safe from your intervention. While you're at it, ban bears, because I've never seen one intentionally release his or her catch. If the man is within the bounds of the law, and he doesn't leave the carcases to rot on the bank, more power to him. I'm sickened that he even felt the need to apologize for taking the fish. If blood sports are not for you, that's fine, but don't pretend that fishing isn't one.
Sorry for the double post. The old browser stalled there for a minute. I was so fired up, my mouse finger was twitching!
It is a common practice to wipe away any blood before taking a picture of a catch or a kill. I'm not sure why anyone wants to call conspiracy because no blood is visible in the photo. If you had caught a world-record steelhead, would you want it to be bleeding in the picture? If I'm going to call BS on something it's some of Alex's stuff. At least his post was somewhat relevant and thought out this time.
Good thing he did, taking it for dinner. Releasing a dead fish THAT big is like having your Ford Excursion break down beyond repair on the side of the highway. And instead of having it towed to a junk yard and sold for all that metal, you just leave it there for someone else!
As long as keeping it was legal, you have no damn reason to apologize. Quit grilling the man over whether or not it was bleeding or whether or not he kept it because it was bleeding or because he wanted a record fish. It doesn't matter why the hell he kept it! As long as it's legal he really owes no explanation! I am a diehard hunter and fisher but sometimes you purist, snob-nosed, spoiled brats piss me off more than the antis.
Congrats..enough said
thats some good eating right there.
Just a question for msmiller: Do you think anyone who believes he or she has God-given rights is a moron? I didn't really understand your comment, and I don't want to criticize without understanding your point.
Well you must understand the msnmiller is a moron.
As a side note to the story above, and to some of the comments,the WDFW allows retention of 1 wild stealhead per licencse year, and then only if that 1 fish is caught in one of 11 specifically identified rivers. Given this fact, does this change anyone's opinion?
hey all, how about a view from the other side of the pond.
Firstly, wow, what a fantastic fish. I only wish we had migratory rainbows in this country. Unfortunately we only have 1 river in England that has a wild population of rainbow trout at all, the Wye in Derbyshire, and that aint anywhere near the sea.
The closest we have to steelhead is our 'sea trout', e.g. the migratory brown trout which run back into rivers and the record is around 25Lb i think. These are wonderful fish both for their fighting prowess and their taste and the fact that they're generally caught after dark which adds to the whole experience.I have no issue in knocking one or two of these on the head for the pot, they're absolutely delicious for a start and secondly that as they're so bloody hard to catch...the odds are definitely in their favour. Having said that, I wouldn't take more than 1 or two and if it was sizeable would try and return.
We also have this whole C&R debate in the UK going on as our native wild brown trout diminish in number and unique strains get diluted with stocking etc. I generally don't kill wild brown trout, but will definitely kill grown on stocked trout. There's also been a massive swing from killing Atlantic salmon (which can do multiple returns from the sea) to C&R which has been really benefical for stocks in some river systems but maybe less benficial in other rivers as far as the economy goes as some anglers want to kill what they catch so go elsewhere.
Anyway back to this monster.... if you looked at the link earlier in the post, http://thebigpull.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/as-alas-bleeding4.jpg , the fish is clearly bleeding profusely from its lower gill area.
The angler sounds sounds like a fairly decent chap and it seems would in all likelyhood have returned the fish if it was looking like recovering. Unfortunately, bleeding or not, a big fish like that, played for probably quite a while on a double hander, may have died regardless. Such is the nature of our sport, which was never intended to be a C&R activity.
I think if you go 100% C&R, in many ways, you're kind of supporting the anti's point of view that we're doing this purely for sport and have no intention of eating what we catch. I don't abide by this point of view and as I say do kill the odd wild fish.
I think if a species is so endangered in a river that its damaging to kill the odd fish, you probably shouldn't be fishing there at all.
I can't belive all the crying im hearing over this man keeping this fish. Unless you have never killed anything in your life and are a vegatarian,I dont know why anyone has any room to judge. We are all fishermen and especially the fly fishermen want to protect,preserve and follow all laws to sustain our fisheries. Living very close to this river for many years, I have had a chance to fish the Hoh and many others. I agree these systems are unique and the native fish should be protected.It is the Biologists duty to decide if any fish can be taken or if the river is in jeopardy of being damaged. One fish a year if decided is very reasonable. It is not very sportman like to persecute and harass a man who is following all the rules and just out to have a good time. The gill netters,dams and pollutants in the rivers are all these beautiful fishes true enemies. Lets congradulate this man on making the best decission he could at the time and lets get out and catch a pig like that instead of attacking a fellow fisherman.
As everyone else has said excellent catch.I think it is very admirable to release a trophy fish or pass up a shot on a giant buck.I say leave the trophy's alone.Let the strong genes be passed on and deleted the smaller and weaker for food.
I would deffinantly take this to the taxidermy... that is one massive fish. I really dont see any problem with him keeping the fish though
willie; calm down. we have addressed the issues in earlier posts. if evrything had to be serious we would be in the care of the state. you get all upset because of a little humor. do you have any friends?
ramcatt,
same question I asked wags.... are you on crack?
hunt_fish_sleep,
Let me guess? Your god given right, huh?
moron.
ramcatt,
so what?
Wags… are you on crack? The catch and release ethic is an argument AGAINST the idiots at PETA. And yeah, we ought to have really good reasons for killing fish and IGFA records ain’t one of em. Big fish spawn other big fish, so if you’re cool with killing them, don’t ever ask where all the big ones went. Also, what does legality have to do with anything? The future of the sport might be more important. If killing wild steelhead in depleted populations is legal, then maybe the law is haywire – ever thought about that? Sure, some fish die, and sometimes we kill them – it’s the nature of our sport – no problem. But killing fish for records? Gimme a break. Rock on dude….
larger steelhead have been caught and released by more thoughtful anglers and in places that had regulations that protect wild, native fish. this is a sad state of affairs. I hope "English Pete Harrison" enjoys his new fame. i hope his ego is satisfied. the fish was hooked in the top of the upper lip, how is it that it was a bleeder? i don't buy it.
I'm calling Bulls*%t. Bleeding profusely from the gills? I don't see any blood? Do you? I think he knew exactly what he had when he got that fish in and wanted an IGFA record. He killed an amazing fish for no reason.
Post a Comment