MN DNR Considers New Fish Record Program

[Steve-o]

Minnesota Considers Revamping Its Record Fish Program and Opening the Door to a New State-Record Walleye

 

Minnesota’s book of fishing records could soon be rewritten according to a new proposal from the state’s Department of Natural Resources. Under the proposal that was released earlier this month, the DNR would re-classify 12 of its current state records as “historic” while adding a “certified weight” category for each of those 12 species. This change would give anglers a chance to break records that have been on the books for years, including the coveted walleye state record that was established over 40 years ago.

[Leech~~]

Minnesota Considers Revamping Its Record Fish Program and Opening the Door to a New State-Record Walleye

 

Minnesota’s book of fishing records could soon be rewritten according to a new proposal from the state’s Department of Natural Resources. Under the proposal that was released earlier this month, the DNR would re-classify 12 of its current state records as “historic” while adding a “certified weight” category for each of those 12 species. This change would give anglers a chance to break records that have been on the books for years, including the coveted walleye state record that was established over 40 years ago.

This reminds me of the Woke "everyone's a winner" BS! If record sizes can't be reached, it's because we have beat the crap out of the species, and there is no where for fish to become records. Stop trying to change history just to feel better! 

[glenn57]

Minnesota Considers Revamping Its Record Fish Program and Opening the Door to a New State-Record Walleye

 

Minnesota’s book of fishing records could soon be rewritten according to a new proposal from the state’s Department of Natural Resources. Under the proposal that was released earlier this month, the DNR would re-classify 12 of its current state records as “historic” while adding a “certified weight” category for each of those 12 species. This change would give anglers a chance to break records that have been on the books for years, including the coveted walleye state record that was established over 40 years ago.

This reminds me of the Woke "everyone's a winner" BS! If record sizes can't be reached, it's because we have beat the crap out of the species, and there is no where for fish to become records. Stop trying to change history just to feel better! 

[mike89]

2nd that

[Steve-o]

Yes, its part "Woke" and part "Sciencism."   We only accept something as true or real today if you can prove it in a court of law backed up by "scientific" evidence.  Like not using a "State Certified" scale makes a difference.   

[Leech~~]

Yes, its part "Woke" and part "Sciencism."   We only accept something as true or real today if you can prove it in a court of law backed up by "scientific" evidence.  Like not using a "State Certified" scale makes a difference.   

It's kind of funny but the Woke folks are starting to even deny Science that interferes with their agendas and life styles, like gender. Just because you like to put your pecker in a toaster, doesn't mean you get your own flavor! Records are records and cast in stone reality. I'm not for changing that so some can feel better for a dink they caught! My records are on the wall, the biggest fish I ever caught, and none are state records! 

[LPS]

Yes, its part "Woke" and part "Sciencism."   We only accept something as true or real today if you can prove it in a court of law backed up by "scientific" evidence.  Like not using a "State Certified" scale makes a difference.   

SO you are saying that if you had a state record and someone came in and said they beat you by 2 ozs but they used their Zebco $14 scale that you would be alright with that?

[Steve-o]

Yes, its part "Woke" and part "Sciencism."   We only accept something as true or real today if you can prove it in a court of law backed up by "scientific" evidence.  Like not using a "State Certified" scale makes a difference.   

SO you are saying that if you had a state record and someone came in and said they beat you by 2 ozs but they used their Zebco $14 scale that you would be alright with that?

Lets face it, there is big money in cheating these days:  fame, endorsements, prize money, social media clicks, etc.  Hell yes!  Use certified scales to weigh every NEW challenge to the state fishing records.  Apparently, MN has been doing that since 1980.  Bully for us!  And now they should x-ray the bloody things to make sure they ain't been filled with lead shot to boot. 

What I'm also saying is I'm fine with the old records - despite the fact that they were not registered on State-certified scales.

There always have been and always will be shysters in the world, but I'm good with whatever vetting process was used 40 years ago or 100 years ago to "certify" state fish records.  Just because we don't have an official government document or notarized statement doesn't mean that the fish weren't weight on a scale that a "jury of his peers" accepted to be accurate.

We should not "recategorize" the old records as "legacy" or "historic" and start from scratch so all these new blood fisherman can have their shot at stardom and fame.  In some cases the bar is set pretty high.  So be it.  If they want the fame, let then go out and earn it. 

I'm rather curmudgeonly that way and I'm guessin' I'm not alone.

[LPS]

I think most had to be weighed at grocery stores on the meat scales to be put "in the books".  Some bait shops have them too. Otherwise they were listed as unofficial weights.