# 279 Trout.....??



## ANYBDYHERE (Mar 16, 2007)

Friend of mine sent this to me today. Says that these folks fished in the Landcut this past weekend, and this is what they brought to the dock. 279 Trout. Something does not add up. Thoughts?


----------



## Reel_Blessed II (Jun 24, 2004)




----------



## johnmyjohn (Aug 6, 2006)

I think he will not be your friend long.


----------



## hammerin'fish (May 22, 2009)

if it is true = sickening


----------



## Fishin Tails (Mar 21, 2007)

Where's TXWPP when you need them? I sure hope they werent driving that big cuddy over them flats to get them!


----------



## justinsfa (Mar 28, 2009)

Hard to see any signs of a photoshop.... but if it is, its good.

Guess it could be a ton of boats throwing in their sandtrout catches together though. I doubt very seriously that someone would be that stupid to try to pull that off, but, I have been wrong before.... Only once, but it did happen.... haha


----------



## Red Line (Jun 9, 2009)

Let's hope this picture was photo shopped. I see five kids in the picture, having said that there is no need to keep that many fish. To keep that many fish you have to have 28 people fishing, where are the rest of the people?


----------



## big john o (Aug 12, 2005)

Cant tell if they're specs or sandies... Cant imagine anyone being stupid enough to show that many specs off at the boat ramp...


----------



## SV_DuckBuster (Sep 18, 2007)

Hard to tell if they are sand trout or specs.


----------



## SJAdventures (Mar 18, 2008)

Looks like a photo from somewhere in La, maybe Venice. That would be very possible and legal with 8 people fishing in La on a good bite for 2 days.


----------



## FISHUNTER (Dec 4, 2007)

Sand Trout


----------



## ROBOWADER (May 22, 2004)

If those are sandies they sure are big.


----------



## Timemachine (Nov 25, 2008)

Just an ordinary guy..._*with his common sense switched off!!*_


----------



## SJAdventures (Mar 18, 2008)

ROBOWADER said:


> If those are sandies they sure are big.


+1.


----------



## bzrk180 (Jan 7, 2008)

Put the evidence in the car Jr.! WOW!!


----------



## TooShallow (May 21, 2004)

Must be LA.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

bzrk180 said:


> Put the evidence in the car Jr.! WOW!!


lol... when i get home, i'm gonna punch yo momma in da mouth


----------



## aggie9701 (Dec 27, 2004)

How do you know it wasn't a 7 boat family reunion guided trip with 28 total people, they were 1 short of their limit, laid all the fish out on the dock and took turns taking pictures with the fish? Just because you see a few people posing with a lot of fish doesn't mean that they were being illegal. If you see a pic with 40 trout and a guy with his son posing with them, should we call the game warden? Is it a law that you must have the appropriate number of people in the picture that when all fish are claimed are within the limit? It's amazing how people get so riled up over a picture with no story attached to it.


----------



## gigem87 (May 19, 2006)

It would take a long time to lay out all of those fish, and then to pick them back up again. Hot as it is outside, I would think that some of them would start to cook on the dock...

Those can't all be sand trout, some are way too big.


----------



## SurfRunner (May 22, 2004)

Pay back comes when they gotta clean all of them. I wouldn't keep more than our Texas limit just because; #1) it's not right, and #2) I wouldn't want to clean all of them.


----------



## Spec-Rig.006 (Nov 2, 2007)

That's just another day on the water for a pro like me ... ! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ...

I wonder how many croaker they burned ... ?!?!


----------



## Captain Dave (Jul 19, 2006)

Guess they are having a church fish fry, Looks like a pics blown up or a cheap cell phone shot. 

This is one of those questionable guesstimate overestimation threads.. 

Bet some feech might of spoiled . It was in the upper 90's and took a bit of time to line em up on a dock

. I loose count after 10 so I throw em back..


----------



## Lat22 (Apr 7, 2005)

I feel bad for the 28th guy that came up one short.


----------



## Timalgrath (Jun 21, 2011)

thats pretty hardcore I've been out once or twice at night and kept 120 trout between 6 of us but that's only cause it was a 2 day limit and we gave over 3/4th to the 2 catholic priests we took fishing with us for the local parishes and the poor. but that picture is just retarded amount of fish is just insane i hope alot are sandies. so wasteful part of the reason i don't like to keep any fish anymore cause if they arn't used whats the point.


----------



## RigitRight (Oct 26, 2007)

*What if?*

Couldn't you have a group of 15 fishermen down at the lancut fishing Friday-Sunday with a 2 day possession of fish and be under the limit. 15 people x 20 trout = 300 fish you could legally keep? I wouldn't do it, but doesn't mean a group that gets to go fishing once a year doesn't have the right to keep the fish they caught.


----------



## wellconnected (May 30, 2005)

RigitRight said:


> Couldn't you have a group of 15 fishermen down at the lancut fishing Friday-Sunday with a 2 day possession of fish and be under the limit. 15 people x 20 trout = 300 fish you could legally keep? I wouldn't do it, but doesn't mean a group that gets to go fishing once a year doesn't have the right to keep the fish they caught.


X2


----------



## fishnstringer (Oct 20, 2006)

*I don't doubt it.*

I have a friend with a cabin in the cut, and he said his guest had fished under the lights all night, while he slept, and had kept 86 legal sized trout by the next morning when he got up. They have a fish basket, and I guess he just lost count and kept throwing them in there, or just didn't care. I agree, "where are the game wardens when you need them".


----------



## cloudfishing (May 8, 2005)

Did anyone here count the fish?


----------



## CaptDocHoliday (Feb 3, 2011)

You'd need a bunch of coolers to tote those around...


----------



## Bocephus (May 30, 2008)

Do you think if these fish were illegal these people would drive up to a public dock....line up all the fish on the dock, take pictures, and send the pictures to friends....IF...they were illegal ?

Clam down Junior Game Wardens......LMAO !

If they are legal it doesn't matter if it's 10 fish, or 279 fish. They have the right to have them.


----------



## paymerick (May 19, 2010)

Actually, that picture was taken from the JFK causeway....

It will also be the last picture I send to your friend in confidence he will not share...


----------



## kylebhouston (Jun 10, 2006)

*too many*

You should of seen the 1 that got away


----------



## Timalgrath (Jun 21, 2011)

Bocephus said:


> Do you think if these fish were illegal these people would drive up to a public dock....line up all the fish on the dock, take pictures, and send the pictures to friends....IF...they were illegal ?
> 
> Clam down Junior Game Wardens......LMAO !
> 
> If they are legal it doesn't matter if it's 10 fish, or 279 fish. They have the right to have them.


legal or not IMO its a waste total waste 9 people (including camera man ) thats 31 fish a person........ but pictures can be misleading if there are 6 more people not in the photo..... i enforce my right to state my opinion leaving legal issues out of it.


----------



## ROBOWADER (May 22, 2004)

*LMMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*

OWNED!



paymerick said:


> Actually, that picture was taken from the JFK causeway....
> 
> It will also be the last picture I send to your friend in confidence he will not share...


----------



## CaptDocHoliday (Feb 3, 2011)

Just gonna throw this out there....I don't see any wet wood on the dock. Had the fish been dumped from a cooler there would surely be some melting ice and wet wood. Instead, I believe these folks have layed out 279 REPLICAS....makes for one well talked about pic!

In all seriousness, not many cell phones these days will take a picture that bad. This has got to be photoshop.


----------



## Mrschasintail (Dec 8, 2004)

Bocephus said:


> Do you think if these fish were illegal these people would drive up to a public dock....line up all the fish on the dock, take pictures, and send the pictures to friends....IF...they were illegal ?
> 
> Clam down Junior Game Wardens......LMAO !
> 
> If they are legal it doesn't matter if it's 10 fish, or 279 fish. They have the right to have them.


X2


----------



## InfamousJ (May 21, 2004)

they need a trash bag instead of ziplocs... guess nothing is legal these days... sheesh.. looks like the making of an heirloom photo to me.. :rotfl:


----------



## paymerick (May 19, 2010)

Timalgrath said:


> legal or not IMO its a waste total waste 9 people (including camera man ) thats 31 fish a person........* but pictures can be misleading if there are 6 more people not in the photo*..... i enforce my right to state my opinion leaving legal issues out of it.


That's the point, who knows?

Dock looks a little crowded, maybe there wasn't enough room to fit in the other people who were on five additional boats in that party?

What if this is just a "pool" of fish caught by a ****-load of guys that are gunna be fried up for a cancer benefit, charity, wounded vets, etc...?

Then again, what if the person behind the camera is just a passer-by, the lady in the picture baby-sat all of those kids that day and those two guys went and caught 'em all by themselves up the Lavaca River?

Do you know?

Well neither do I, which is why my only serious comment on this is that the picture was taken near Bolivar...


----------



## wc (Jul 28, 2010)

I saw that pic last week on a buddy's ph. so it would date it later then last weekend. I was also told that there were a few boats involved over a two day period, atleast that's what I was told.


----------



## hammerdown (Jan 10, 2009)

Looks like fun!


----------



## offshorefanatic (Jan 13, 2011)

I say we get 10 boats together with 6 guys in each and go catch a total of 120 snapper and lay them out and put 2 guys in the picture and let the fun begin. Seriously it looks like a bunch of people having fun on their probably 1 a year family fishing trip.


----------



## paymerick (May 19, 2010)

offshorefanatic said:


> I say we get 10 boats together with 6 guys in each and go catch a total of 120 snapper and lay them out and put 2 guys in the picture and let the fun begin. Seriously it looks like a bunch of people having fun on their probably 1 a year family fishing trip.


Shhhhh... Don't let 'em in on it...


----------



## Timalgrath (Jun 21, 2011)

CaptDocHoliday said:


> Just gonna throw this out there....I don't see any wet wood on the dock. Had the fish been dumped from a cooler there would surely be some melting ice and wet wood. Instead, I believe these folks have layed out 279 REPLICAS....makes for one well talked about pic!
> 
> In all seriousness, not many cell phones these days will take a picture that bad. This has got to be photoshop.


I agree it was a trout mount swap meet......green for that


----------



## CT750 (Jun 10, 2006)

Bocephus said:


> Do you think if these fish were illegal these people would drive up to a public dock....line up all the fish on the dock, take pictures, and send the pictures to friends....IF...they were illegal ?
> 
> Clam down Junior Game Wardens......LMAO !
> 
> If they are legal it doesn't matter if it's 10 fish, or 279 fish. They have the right to have them.


X2X2X2


----------



## muchtodo (Dec 11, 2009)

Thats just wrong. Can anybody say "Catch And Release"


----------



## fishtexas06 (Jul 9, 2009)

I heard this picture was from Lake Calcasieu La, and the picture is photo shopped.


----------



## WVNative (Sep 16, 2010)

That's just way to much work to line them all up then have to put them all back into a cooler. Looks like someone just jerking everyones chain. Especially all the Jr. Game wardens on here.


----------



## bigtruk77 (Jul 6, 2011)

Hey guys, just wanted to give you the true details on this picture. It happens to be my cousins, aunts, and uncles as well as their familys who caught the fish and took the picture at my cabin in the Land Cut a couple of weeks ago. There were over 20 kids and adults in the group and they were there from Thursday to Sunday. They make the trip once or twice a year. While I do not approve of keeping that many fish, they were well within their legal limits. All the fish were cleaned and did not go to waste. All the fish in the picture were speckled trout (not sand trout) and the biggest one was under 25". 90% of the fish were caught under the lights at night using lures.
I just wanted to clear things up for yall and felt that this may help.
Im sorry if the picture offends some of you that only believe in catch and release. This is a once a year trip for them and they are very hard to convinve to throw a few of the keepers back. However, they do release the very big trout and all the under sized ones.


----------



## Timalgrath (Jun 21, 2011)

bigtruk77 said:


> Hey guys, just wanted to give you the true details on this picture. It happens to be my cousins, aunts, and uncles as well as their familys who caught the fish and took the picture at my cabin in the Land Cut a couple of weeks ago. There were over 20 kids and adults in the group and they were there from Thursday to Sunday. They make the trip once or twice a year. While I do not approve of keeping that many fish, they were well within their legal limits. All the fish were cleaned and did not go to waste. All the fish in the picture were speckled trout (not sand trout) and the biggest one was under 25". 90% of the fish were caught under the lights at night using lures.
> I just wanted to clear things up for yall and felt that this may help.
> Im sorry if the picture offends some of you that only believe in catch and release. This is a once a year trip for them and they are very hard to convinve to throw a few of the keepers back. However, they do release the very big trout and all the under sized ones.


no offense here i personally wouldn't do it. but like you just stated its was like 20 -30 ppl so there ya go. and some good point son how pictures can be misleading that why jr game wardens get in trouble here.


----------



## Trouthappy (Jun 12, 2008)

They spent a half hour lining up trout on hot concrete, then take a horribly out-of-focus picture? Makes sense to me....


----------



## tank8677 (Apr 20, 2010)

ROBOWADER said:


> If those are sandies they sure are big.


yea they sure look a little big for sandies


----------



## tank8677 (Apr 20, 2010)

Trouthappy said:


> They spent a half hour lining up trout on hot concrete, then take a horribly out-of-focus picture? Makes sense to me....


lol


----------



## capt mullet (Nov 15, 2008)

All I can say is that it would suck to have to clean that many fish!!!


----------



## songogetme (Oct 13, 2006)

Really big ice chest.


----------



## Main Frame 8 (Mar 16, 2007)

Trouthappy said:


> They spent a half hour lining up trout on hot concrete, then take a horribly out-of-focus picture? Makes sense to me....


 I am pretty sure that is wood.


----------



## driftwoodfisher (Oct 4, 2005)

*land cut*



bigtruk77 said:


> Hey guys, just wanted to give you the true details on this picture. It happens to be my cousins, aunts, and uncles as well as their familys who caught the fish and took the picture at my cabin in the Land Cut a couple of weeks ago. There were over 20 kids and adults in the group and they were there from Thursday to Sunday. They make the trip once or twice a year. While I do not approve of keeping that many fish, they were well within their legal limits. All the fish were cleaned and did not go to waste. All the fish in the picture were speckled trout (not sand trout) and the biggest one was under 25". 90% of the fish were caught under the lights at night using lures.
> I just wanted to clear things up for yall and felt that this may help.
> Im sorry if the picture offends some of you that only believe in catch and release. This is a once a year trip for them and they are very hard to convinve to throw a few of the keepers back. However, they do release the very big trout and all the under sized ones.


 I have fished the land cut a number or times and have never seen a cabin
big enough to sleep that many people. I call BC (Bull Cr---). Sounds like spam to me. Why do people do this?


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

If its the landcut, it is a good example of why there should be a 5 fish limit in the cut. I see it every year down there, groups come down for a (once a year) trip and kill every fish they catch. This picture is nothing compared to how many fish are taken between march and may down there. I was there for 6 consecutive days and it wes an endless parade of guide boats loaded with 4-6 people and they were all headed home by noon. We idled up and down the channel just to see if they were catching fish and every boat was hooked up all morning long.


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

driftwoodfisher said:


> I have fished the land cut a number or times and have never seen a cabin
> big enough to sleep that many people. I call BC (Bull Cr---). Sounds like spam to me. Why do people do this?


We had 22 at our cabin last spring break, and it is not the largest cabin by any stretch. The cabin i suspect hosted this group sleeps at least 30, because they have a group that size almost every weekend. The dock and fishcleaning stand looks familiar.


----------



## commtrd (Mar 18, 2006)

This is just crazy. There definitely needs to be a 5 trout limit from Corpus Christi south. Even if the catch was 100% legal it does not make it ethical to just go and meat-haul based on "it is their one trip for the year". Salt water fishermen need to learn to gauge the success of a trip by quality of fish caught rather than how many fish they killed to fill boxes with. The shame is that it only gets done when TPWD makes fishermen keep only 5; we should all just as a matter of principle practice CPR and just keep a few for eating. Fishing would improve dramatically for everyone if all would exercise some conservative restraint. Including guides. Example: trout fishing got way better at PM since the 5-trout limit was put in place. Hopefully it will be permanent.


----------



## Bocephus (May 30, 2008)

railbird said:


> If its the landcut, it is a good example of why there should be a 5 fish limit in the cut. I see it every year down there, groups come down for a (once a year) trip and kill every fish they catch. This picture is nothing compared to how many fish are taken between march and may down there. I was there for 6 consecutive days and it wes an endless parade of guide boats loaded with 4-6 people and they were all headed home by noon. We idled up and down the channel just to see if they were catching fish and every boat was hooked up all morning long.





railbird said:


> We had 22 at our cabin last spring break, and it is not the largest cabin by any stretch. The cabin i suspect hosted this group sleeps at least 30, because they have a group that size almost every weekend. The dock and fishcleaning stand looks familiar.


I was wondering when you would show up, you stinking ol fish hugger....LMAO !

Make sure that ain't a hard head your hugging....you might get stuck !


----------



## spurgersalty (Jun 29, 2010)

Aahh, junior game wardens and junior biologists, you just gotta..........well, you just gotta......well, I guess.....ignore them! 

You don't like it? Go back to school, take some courses, beg TPWD for a job, and then change it. Obviously they've set limits to encompass weekend warriors such as the afore mentioned pictures, because someone stated he sees this every year with once or twice a year people. He also states he has been there 6 consecutive days and seen 4-6 people in by noon with guides (alleging a 4-6 man limit). 

If you want to say something, say this is an example of the quality and magnitude of our fishery. Quit bashing people for their legal catches. 
We fight so hard against TWPP and their water body restrictions, yet we look down on our fellow anglers for completely legal catches from a sustainable fishery, and say, "i think we need to limit the fish cause these wkenders are gonna deplete it". Tomorrow morning, look in the mirror while your brushing your teeth. If you look hard, it might suprise you.


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

spurgersalty said:


> Aahh, junior game wardens and junior biologists, you just gotta..........well, you just gotta......well, I guess.....ignore them!
> 
> You don't like it? Go back to school, take some courses, beg TPWD for a job, and then change it. Obviously they've set limits to encompass weekend warriors such as the afore mentioned pictures, because someone stated he sees this every year with once or twice a year people. He also states he has been there 6 consecutive days and seen 4-6 people in by noon with guides (alleging a 4-6 man limit).
> 
> ...


We protect the flounder population from gigging for the month of november because they are funneled through a very tight area heading for the gulf. When the shrimp migrate through the landcut trout follow them causing a very simular pinch in travel path. Why is it unreasonable to want those fish to survive that migration without 500 people a day soaking shrimp and croaker in their path? Do you honestly believe that guides would be making 5 trips a week (100 miles round trip) if they were not limiting regularly? Stop by marker 37 around 3pm on an april weekend and watch the fish cleaning table, you will see it for yourself.

When I look in the mirror in the morning I see someone who thought like you until he realized he didn't have to kill every fish he caught to feel like a man. I hope you see him some day.


----------



## spurgersalty (Jun 29, 2010)

I'm looking, and I still see a man. Albeit younger than you, a man who can make decisions still based on sound thought.
Railbird, your a good man as I've seen from NUMEROUS people on this board and countless selfless acts you've performed for people without question. This is in no way an attack on you, although it sounded this way because you gave specifics of the purported area. I only used your statements as an example, but do believe we've altered our stance on the fishery and usage. 
I believe TPWD have their "ducks in a row" , and manage our fishery well without our infinite knowledge. Flounder are a different devil altogether. If you wanted to point out trout, you shoulda pointed to the coldest times of the year where we already have "freeze fishing events" in place. Trout are like sitting ducks in numerous different situations including chasing birds, spawning, and heading for deeper or shallow waters depending on weather. I'll leave reds out to shorten.
I just feel that we as a "fishing society" have started to look down on people that keep legal catches, when we, the guys out many times a week or month catch and release to offset this. There's a balance, and in some areas were there but others were not. 
We've all seen what our state can do with a fishery, why interfere.


----------



## spurgersalty (Jun 29, 2010)

I lost a complete sentence in that last post dagummit.


----------



## BALZTOWAL (Aug 29, 2006)

Identify the cabin and burn it down then we will have more trout.


----------



## Fball39 (Jun 7, 2010)

I was on this landcut trip and it is a true picture but poor quality on the one posted. Just one family in the photo out of several that were there for the weekend. We kept 17 sandies and 213 specs for 11 adults and 5 kids. The second night and day we threw back everything under 17 inches. Fished in the boats and under the lights. Used some live bait but a lot of artificial too. Threw a ton of fish back. Quality family time, quality fishing, quality food for the year (or until it runs out) for several families.


----------



## plasticsnaks (Sep 22, 2009)

This freakin arguement will never be setteled..you who condone the irresponsible meathaulin goin on in the landcut watch n wait..TWPP will finally get the amunition they despertly want to successfully lobby for restrictions that will keep you and I both outta very productive waters.
You people who wine about others who question irresponsible meathaul pics and cry about your rights being taken away via reduced trout limits either need to grow up or educate yourselves bout where all this could end up.You want less government but condone greed????..geez..LMAO


----------



## Fball39 (Jun 7, 2010)

BALZTOWAL said:


> Identify the cabin and burn it down then we will have more trout.


Thanks for the threat to burn the cabin, which the weekend of this picture housed 6 kids ranging from 6 years in age to 6 months. You are a decent human being i'm sure.


----------



## Timalgrath (Jun 21, 2011)

Why is my spider sense going off..... Oh cause. I see this ending. In flames.


----------



## SpotChaser#2 (Feb 28, 2006)

My math shows that these 16 people kept 13.312 specs per person. Lets say they make 3 trips like this a year. Thats only around 40 trout per person. On the other hand you have a fisherman that fishes once a month and keeps 5 specks. That is 60 specs that he has removed for the year. Personally, I would'nt keep that many fish for several reasons but i think the large number kept during one trip makes it look like overkill.


----------



## catch-n-eat (Jul 7, 2011)

Looks like a great mess of fish! With 15 people over 3 days that's only 6.2 trout per day per person (to equal about 279 - only about 240 fish are pictured.) I can catch more than that (6) in one day. Completely do-able and eat-able!


----------



## Trouttooth (Jun 8, 2010)

Yea buddy you go head on and cookem on the concrete takin 48 minutes to lay out and pick up


----------



## ANYBDYHERE (Mar 16, 2007)

paymerick said:


> That's the point, who knows?
> 
> Dock looks a little crowded, maybe there wasn't enough room to fit in the other people who were on five additional boats in that party?
> 
> ...


Not!!


----------



## ANYBDYHERE (Mar 16, 2007)

catch-n-eat said:


> Looks like a great mess of fish! With 15 people over 3 days that's only 6.2 trout per day per person (to equal about 279 - only about 240 fish are pictured.) I can catch more than that (6) in one day. Completely do-able and eat-able!


Only allowed a 2-day limit in possesion per person...They needed 21 more to make it.


----------



## spurgersalty (Jun 29, 2010)

plasticsnaks said:


> This freakin arguement will never be setteled..you who condone the irresponsible meathaulin goin on in the landcut watch n wait..TWPP will finally get the amunition they despertly want to successfully lobby for restrictions that will keep you and I both outta very productive waters.
> You people who wine about others who question irresponsible meathaul pics and cry about your rights being taken away via reduced trout limits either need to grow up or educate yourselves bout where all this could end up.You want less government but condone greed????..geez..LMAO


Explain the connection of Trout limits to TWPP please.


----------



## spurgersalty (Jun 29, 2010)

Trouttooth said:


> Yea buddy you go head on and cookem on the concrete takin 48 minutes to lay out and pick up


What concrete? Is this a new survival skill I'm missing out on?


----------



## CaptPb (Jan 26, 2005)

railbird said:


> We had 22 at our cabin last spring break, and it is not the largest cabin by any stretch. The cabin i suspect hosted this group sleeps at least 30, because they have a group that size almost every weekend. The dock and fishcleaning stand looks familiar.


Yep, it's the one we where talking about in the past. Don't know that group though.


----------



## spurgersalty (Jun 29, 2010)

Good information concerning our fisheries.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/outdoors/tompkins/7642521.html


----------



## Fball39 (Jun 7, 2010)

ANYBDYHERE said:


> Only allowed a 2-day limit in possesion per person...They needed 21 more to make it.


You have good math skills...11 adults * 20 specs = 220 specs. there are 230 fish on the dock (17 of which are sandies). 213 specs is less than possession limit of 220. add the kids limits and you've got about 280.


----------



## fishin styx (Jun 30, 2009)

oh how I love it when people post pictures

Continue, please


----------



## bigtruk77 (Jul 6, 2011)

spurgersalty said:


> If you want to say something, say this is an example of the quality and magnitude of our fishery. Quit bashing people for their legal catches.
> We fight so hard against TWPP and their water body restrictions, yet we look down on our fellow anglers for completely legal catches from a sustainable fishery, and say, "i think we need to limit the fish cause these wkenders are gonna deplete it". Tomorrow morning, look in the mirror while your brushing your teeth. If you look hard, it might suprise you.


+1


----------



## Barnacle Bill (May 21, 2004)

Fball39 said:


> I was on this landcut trip and it is a true picture but poor quality on the one posted. Just one family in the photo out of several that were there for the weekend. We kept 17 sandies and 213 specs for 11 adults and 5 kids. The second night and day we threw back everything under 17 inches. Fished in the boats and under the lights. Used some live bait but a lot of artificial too. Threw a ton of fish back. Quality family time, quality fishing, quality food for the year (or until it runs out) for several families.


:texasflag


----------



## paymerick (May 19, 2010)

You guys don't have to explain yourselves for catching legal limits of fish...


----------



## railbird (Jan 2, 2009)

BALZTOWAL said:


> Identify the cabin and burn it down then we will have more trout.


DING DING DING........We have a winner!!!!!!!!!! THE MOST IRRESPONSIBLE POST OF THE WEEK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## ANYBDYHERE (Mar 16, 2007)

BALZTOWAL said:


> Identify the cabin and burn it down then we will have more trout.


Very intelligent post.......


----------



## Fball39 (Jun 7, 2010)

paymerick said:


> You guys don't have to explain yourselves for catching legal limits of fish...


I wouldn't have thought so but apparently you do. We take the family out there once a year, get the kids involved, support CCA and get our fresh fish for the rest of the year. To all the hypocrits out there, quit driving close to the speed limit or shooting your limit of doves.


----------



## Kyle 1974 (May 10, 2006)

I wish you whiners would shut your pie holes.

there were no laws broken, people can catch 10 fish a day, with 20 in possession. As for you saying you would "never do it", it's probably because you CAN'T do it...

We have a cabin in the land cut and have slept as many as 23 people at one time. We also catch fish, and we keep a **** load of them. Why you ask? because we eat a ton of fish. If you don't like it, don't do it. 

Yeah... we need a 5 fish limit in the landcut... because there are so many trout down there people can catch a lot of fish? that makes sense. Let's set up 5 fish limits where there is an abundance of fish, and set up 10 fish limits where you rarely see a limit come off a boat. Genius!

A guy can post a photo of 10 trout, and no one says anything. Post a photo of a huge group of people and their catch, and everyone starts acting like a bunch of pantywastes.


----------



## mikedeleon (Aug 9, 2010)

Legal...it appears so. Just make sure you eat them. 

I would rather buy fish from HEB than eat year old frozen trout. Just my .02


----------



## Leo (May 21, 2004)

What's the difference between this and a guide that takes 3 different people out every day and limits out 10 days in a row? 300 fish is 300 fish. People just don't like seeing them all line up in one pile.


----------



## mikedeleon (Aug 9, 2010)

Leo said:


> What's the difference between this and a guide that takes 3 different people out every day and limits out 10 days in a row? 300 fish is 300 fish. People just don't like seeing them all line up in one pile.


The difference is 21 fish.

300-279 = 21


----------



## Leo (May 21, 2004)

mikedeleon said:


> The difference is 21 fish.
> 
> 300-279 = 21


Thanks for clearing that up, never have been accused of being a math wizard. I appreciate your help.


----------



## spurgersalty (Jun 29, 2010)

mikedeleon said:


> The difference is 21 fish.
> 
> 300-279 = 21


:cheers::rotfl:


----------



## mikedeleon (Aug 9, 2010)

Leo said:


> Thanks for clearing that up, never have been accused of being a math wizard. I appreciate your help.


Sorry I couldn't help myself. It must be the engineer in me.

I know the point you were trying to drive home. :cheers:


----------



## Mont (Nov 17, 1998)

http://2coolfishing.com/ttmbforum/faq.php #7 & #8


----------

