Perhaps because there was no notation “Continued on other side” at the bottom of the second tablet Moses carried down the mountain that no one noticed the 11th Commandment “Fisherman, Thou Shalt Not Exaggerate.”
Going by the rate the first 10 are broken I am not sure it would have mattered a whole heck of a lot but it might at least have given fly fishers reason to pause.
We have all seen it, a fish that is held with both hands closely together with the head and tail showing at either end of the grip , shown to us then released and although all we asked was ‘what did it take’,… we are told, “Nice 17 incher” when as we could well see it was much closer to a foot . In most cases three inches can be subtracted which sometimes still allows an inch or two for stretch.
Number of fish is probably second on the list prone to this 'stretchitism>"
It has gotten so my own reply to questions on size are best answered “Got a nice fish”, or…only caught a couple of small ones. I keep my net handle and rods marked for the rare twenty incher, very rare, as that is the only milestone I care personally about. If it looks close I will hold it againt the measured section. Eighteen and three quarters is probably close enough to call nineteen but nineteen and three quarters is not twenty, not when it is for me anyway,that magical
apex of a fishing trip. It used to bother me, these obvious fibs, but now I just smile at the speaker and let it go at that.
What’s your take on exaggerations?
[This message has been edited by mantis (edited 23 October 2005).]
Hey there Mantis,
I once caught a Northern Pike in Canada that I swore was 15 pounds. Well when we weighed it, it tipped the spring scale at a mere 6. THAT taught me a lesson. I NEVER exaggerate. I even try to omit the use of the word “about” as in “about 18 inches”. “Small”, “nice size”, and “monster” are my way of describing my catch. I have no problem with those who “estimate favorably” (read exaggerate) but I simply choose not to.For my personal information, I do have my rods and net marked at 14 to 20 inches at two inch increments.
Embellishment for dramatic effect is a fishermans perogative . It has been ever thus and I see no reason to change my ways. The male of the species exagerates to show his prowess to the female and as a sign to other males he alone is the worthy one . Females apply entoxicating potions to their faces and bodys to entice the Males. This is the selection method Homo Sapian has used to become the dominant Animal on the planet .
In short it is in our nature .
I could be wrong , It seems unlikely , but I suppose it could happen.
Hey, I resemble that remark! Figure it this way. When I caught the fish last year it was 12". Now it is closer to 14 or say… 15" so if I talk about that fish I am talking about a fish that is 15". Its simple math.
Perhaps those folks who insist on exaggerating are compensating?
Personally though … I carry a tape measure with me (one of those little waterproof retractable ones used by carpet salesmen). Any fish I suspect of being over 18 inches is taped. The biggest of these get a tape around their midsection as well. Sometimes people think I exaggerate … nothing I can do about that I guess. The tape keeps me honest … relatively speaking anyway ;^)
I recommend reading “How to Tell a True War Story” by Tim O’Brien. I think O’Brien’s theories regarding war stories apply to fish tales. You see … there’s “happening truth” and “story truth.” Happening truth might be … I caught a 17" brown, and it fought well. Story truth might be … I caught a 22" brown that took me half way to my backing, and almost filled my net. Both stories speak of the same fish, but the latter elicits a more dramatic emotional response.
I’m sitting here at my desk looking at 24" folding ruler that says YOUR FISH. Flip it over and it goes to 37" and says MY FISH. Perhaps one sides just worn off.
We think alike. In conversation, I usually describe 8-to 10-inchers as “ordinary stream trout” or “stockers”;
I call 11-to 13-inchers “foot-longs” or just a few “nice” or “good” trout; 14 & 15-inchers I usually refer to as “really” nice stream trout"; 16- to 18-inchers are generally referred to, and usually wind up as “best fish of the trip”, and that rare 20-incher I call just what it is, a 20-incher with a comment like “that fish made my whole trip”. All eastern trout fishers know exactly what you mean. But you are right about a 20-inch fish being the “benchmark” for northeastern stream trout.
Many fishermen, even in times past, described a trout over 20-inches in pounds, depending on local custom, even though a 20-inch brown usually weighed in at around 3-to 4-pounds depending on how fat he was. But there’s no question a 20-inch stream trout, where no salmon or steelhead exist, is something special.
P.S. For us oldtimers, there was no way to lie about the size of a fish when you came in off the stream. We kept most everything we caught. Since the advent of catch-and-release. The lies are easily racheted up several notches when there are no fish to prove or disprove your claims.
Later, RW
“We fish for pleasure; I for mine, you for yours.” -James Leisenring on fishing the wet fly-
[This message has been edited by Royal Wulff (edited 23 October 2005).]
Around these parts many of us will exaggerate in the opposite direction when talking about bluegill and crappie. Why? We have many “meat hunters” who will fish good sized “sunnies” out of the small lakes around here. Here’s what they do. Two, but usually three, boats with three to a boat. They have a large cooler in the middle and catch fish after fish. Before MN finally changed the limit from 30 to 15, these guys would each limit out. That’s 90 fish to a boat, with usually three boats. They would return to the same lake day after day until there were no “bulls” left to catch. Stories of them returning for second limits were out there, too. So we’ve now learned to name a very large lake that is famous as a bluegill fisheries no matter where we go, and never ever say a thing about size. This group has fished “out” so many lakes around here it’s incredible. In the last couple of years four of the bigger “offenders” have passed, and with that and the change in limits we will hopefully have a chance to see the fisheries improve. Their lenten fish fries have pretty much pettered out since the passings. It was a pretty sad state of affairs, and in small towns going to the TIP line was a bit scary. In a nutshell, we’ve learned what bragging about the big ones can mean. JGW
Funny that this thread got started when it did…a couple of friends and I were talking the other day and we decided that the fisherman who can’t be forgiven for exaggerating are the ones who are trying to better you!You know the ones,they have always caught more and bigger fish than you on "better"gear on more exclusive stretches in better ways etc.As for the rest of us…We’re fishers,get over it!
I am a Minnesota boy, so I know what you are saying and feeling. These “Son’s of Great Men”…
"Bless them all the long the short and the tall.
Bless the instructor’s, those “Son’s of Great Men, who’d have us do it all over again…”
…you get the drift! Anyway, they drain the lake, then complain to the DNR that they need to do some fish stocking, because they paid $18 dollars for a fishing license.
“Fishermen probably are liars, but if we make the good stuff better than it really was,
we also make the bad stuff worse, and we believe that in the long run that balances out to be something very much like the truth.”
Regards
DuFf
Some days it’s just not worth chewing through the restraints…
I don’t exaggerate. I know the lengths of my rod handles and reel seats if I want to get a rough measurement of a fish, and I usually don’t count numbers. I can usually give somebody a guess up 'til five or six fish, but after that I will compltely lose track. Fishing is not a numbers game for me, so I don’t have an interest in keeping records, and there’s no temptation to stretch 'em when you don’t keep 'em.
