While searching for the state record smallmouth for Pennsylvania I came across this as one of the qualifications for a record in the state of Pennsylvania. Maybe California should follow suit and do away with all those "records" from those BS amuzement park lakes.

"Fish must be caught in Pennsylvania waters open to the public without charge or fee. Fish taken from farm ponds, fee-fishing lakes, ponds or streams or in waters restricted to use by club members or their guests do not qualify."

Streams! Since when does catching a fish from a stream not qualify it for a record!? Hmmmmmmmm.....so if I happen to a catch record breaking fish from a small mountain stream, I'm screwed? But I didn't pay anyone to fish there. Hmmmmmm. Where do you draw the line?

Hey leapin', I here ya. I know where you're coming from, really I do. But...........those, as you call 'em, "BS amusement parks" offer good fishing to those of us who can't afford to take vacations every week and head up to prestine freshwater destinations to find those trophy fish. If I could I definately would but I can't, so I take my kids and we head to SARL or Irvine or wherever. I pay the money about four or five times a year so I and my kids can have an oppertunity to hang some nice fish. If it weren't for the "amusement parks" my girls wouldn't like freshwater fishing as much as they do. These "amusement parks" are definately not "BS" to alot of us fisherpeoples. JMO. And hey, you still have to bring in that big baby on your comparitively puny little rod and 2 lb test. Just my $.02, that's all.


GO BRUINS....GO RAMS....GO FISHING....!!!!
FLOWING THROUGH MY VEINS!!!!

GO BRUINS....GO RAMS....GO FISHING....!!!!
FLOWING THROUGH MY VEINS!!!!

Here we go again

I screwed up and said "BS Amusement Park Lakes". I have nothing against the lakes themselves and know where you're coming from. I only meant that I feel the records are BS.

Actually, I don't even feel that the records are BS. I just think they should create separate categories for genetically altered fish.

Streams - I had to read through it a few times. Although it's not worded right I believe they mean ponds and streams that are not open to the public. I could be wrong.

I use to work at " the " amusement park back in the day - Irvine. Ya, I think the whole thing on whether or not the big fish should qualify for records or not - it can be a fine line on some species. The big trout that are stocked and taken out a day later, well to each his own on that one. I'm with that other guy who stated that this is at times the only water close by and you got to work with what got to fish with. Now the largemouth aren't stocked but get roped into the category with the stocked fish. And the big catfish, man Irvine use to stock them big time back in the day when Steve Miller and Outdoor Safaris had the concessions. We would stock them in at 50 lbs + ! But now, ya right. No one has the $$$ to put forth and buy them. You know Texas and Florida has their own " pay " lakes and the good old boys back their pay big bucks to have " pure " Florida strain bass put in their. Look at what Texas is doing, in Texas the state has some program where they want your big bass alive. They keep your fish ( I think they gotta be over 10 or 12, I'm not sure ) and they try and get it to spawn with some of the other big boys they have. This way they keep the genetics in the family ( go figure, gotta be a southern thing !). This ensures the gene pool full of fry that have a better chance to reach toad status. The State of Texas in return for your fish will give you a fiberglass mount of your fatty, cool idea huh ? Texas is intent on breaking the next world record and taking it away from California. I heard that IGFA will closely look at any records coming from this type of lake, being that alot of people fish at these types now - I forsee more controversy. But hey, we all know the next world bass is coming out of Tri-City Park, right Kevin or is it Yorba Linda Country Club ?

Actually, the current world record bass was caught in Georgia.
It's #2, 3, 4, etc that are California records.

Cause we all know we got it.

Muskyman, shut your mouth!!! Don't be giving away Kevin and my's secret spots. We've transplanted several fish back in the day to these fine urban fisheries.LOL...
The Texas operation is called "Share a Lone Star Lunker", and they are probably the most progressive state in researching and coveting the genetics of lunker bass. We in California have big bass almost inspite of our states fishery management. All I want the DFG to do is stock trout, quit poking and prodding my fish. It doesn't do any good.

Hey guys, and more importantly Leapin' Bass. If I gave you the wrong impression about how I feel on this subject I do apologize. In no way was I angered or perturbed about what you said Leapin', I just want to make that clear. We just all have opinions and that's what makes this board so great. We can all express our feelings and hope to get some feedback on these issues by our fellow anglers, or as I prefer to call us, brothers and sisters. After all, that's what this board is all about, right? We're all a fellowship of brothers and sisters when it comes to fishing and should have comfort in knowing that we all care deeply and passionately about this greatest of pastimes( or as I prefer to call it, lifestyle! ) No one should expect us all here to share in the same ideas or opinions of the next person and we should all be encouraged to voice our own as one would with his/her family members. This is how I feel about this board folks ( Thank you Rob, for making this all possible. )and I hope that all of you share in this philosophy with me. Again, leapin', I am sorry if I gave you the wrong impression. There were absolutely no ill feelings whatsoever.


GO BRUINS....GO RAMS....GO FISHING....!!!!
FLOWING THROUGH MY VEINS!!!!

GO BRUINS....GO RAMS....GO FISHING....!!!!
FLOWING THROUGH MY VEINS!!!!

No apology necessary.

I'm not a trout fishermen so it really doesn't affect me one way or the other. I try and imagine what would happen if they started genetically engineering largemouth and a day after a 30 pounder was put into a tiny lake someone caught it on an M & M and it was considered for the record - that would be a shame.

Separate genetically altered (or engineered) fish into another category. That's my vote.

So let me get this straight Leapin'

Are you trying to tell me that this beautiful "Lighting Trout" caught at SARL should not be a contenter for a record.. state or otherwise?