I think its just a case of taking a more conservational approach.
For example:
If you want to break the record for Samson Fish , then you'll have to kill a 53kg+ sambo to take it home to weigh it;

Not something most people want to do, and most of the people with gear aimed specifically at targeting 50kg+ samsonfish (i would think) would be more than happy to release a 53kg+ samsonfish in a hurry. Otherwise this record would have probably been broken a dozen times last season.

Also applicable (probably) to sailfish and marlin.

Which is actually a good and responsible thing.

Does it say - that as anglers we are more mature in not needing our name in a book or to be a 'tournament winner" in order to have confidence in ourselves as anglers and that we just enjoy angling for it's own sake than for trying to bust often meaningless "records".

I seem to recall a story about a marlin angler who held the 2 kilo class record!

Story was in a nutshel that he hooked the fish on such ridiculously light tackle when the skipper of the boat did everything right and it litterally freejumped into the cockpit of the boat where deckie dealt with it!

One world record, bloke in the chair still doens't know what he did coz the fish landed itself!

He holds the world record! :rollseyes:
(hey look guys a fish jumped in my boat, that makes me the worlds best)!

Sorry Andy, but I have somewhat of a contemptuous position for the records books. I reckon I've released the odd potential world fly caught record fish of a species or two...and never given it another thought!

Reckon I'b be embarrassed to want to add my name to such a book!
Not saying others shouldn't, if thats what rocks their boat - why not!

I wonder if that Shark Bay Nor West Blowie Morsie caught at boneheads back in 2000 would have gone a world fly record???

Frankly who cares! ;o)

Are you suggesting it's an indication - that resource is under threat in some way?
If so I reckon your probably right!

Then again maybe people are more like me and couldn't give a toss about records if you have to kill a fish to get it! Maybe fishing for records is something of an anachronism from the 2nd millenium not the 3rd?

Good discussion point all the same!

Cheers!

The lack of recent records could point to many things as you rightly suggest. I think that there are definate parallels with the state of our fisheries in terms of size and quantity of larger specimens for a number of species on that list. Also your point on conservational approach Kasey makes sense too.

I didn't go into it in depth, just thought I would flick through the dates as I hadn't heard of any records being set for ages and some of the fisheries management threads got me thinking about data and evidence etc. Just thought I would check it out and it kind of jumps out at you that everything seemed to stop after the eighties.

I had looked at that site a while back when I caught that huge harlequin just to see if it was close to a record, and then again when I challenged Adam to a leatherjacket contest. I'm damn sure I have caught potential state records for a couple of species in the past and never bothered to check. Hell the thrill of the capture is what gets my boat rocking. Never stopped to think of a record before, too busy smiling for the camera and "Whoo Hooing" to notice. As others who have fished with me will attest no doubt.

Well, I'm still waiting for the Whoo Hooing Andy, think there was something a miss the day I was out there, even thou those salmon certainly did have you on your toes and back to life after some bad luck on the bottom. :))

As for records, I think theres only a very small percentage of the fishing population left that actually target records. The game boys still target big fish for their records, but I think the mentality has or is changing towards respecting and releasing the fish you caught rather than needing some record to prove it. With the development of cameras and video technology having to kill your sport fish is going to be a thing of the past, here's hoping.