Oversize Lobsters

[scubastew]

I believe it's still illegal to remove a (non-legal) bug from the water even for pictures, but agree likely "no harm,no foul" if that was the case.

Also agree with Matt_Unique, "we are supposed to be stewards of the environment we enjoy" where is Rodney Harrisson when you need him?

 

[Soggy]

I believe it's still illegal to remove a (non-legal) bug from the water even for pictures, but agree likely "no harm,no foul" if that was the case.

You are correct, but it doesn't seem to stop people.

 

[scubastew]

nah I dont think taking a picture is all that bad and shouldnt cause much damage/harm, especially with a large bug, since they are not likely to be exposed to any other preditors in the mean time.

I have seen a striped bass "swoop" in on a short that I was trying to put back in their bug-den. But a big bug likely doesnt worry to much about preditors

 

[Soggy]

nah I dont think taking a picture is all that bad and shouldnt cause much damage/harm, especially with a large bug, since they are not likely to be exposed to any other preditors in the mean time.

That doesn't change the fact that it is illegal and still is torturing and an animal by removing a salt water dependent creature from the water just to snap some lame pictures.

Don't get me wrong. I'm all for catching the food you eat and eating the food you catch, but pulling a gigantic lobster out of a hole, throwing it in a bag, bringing it on to land only to hold it up by its claws just to get a dumb snapshot is idiotic and can't be fun for the lobster.

 

[scubastew]

AGREED!!
>>Plus if someone likes/needs pictures that much, buy and underwater camera!!
>>Did NOT mean to suggest that I condone the activity!!

 

[ClassAction]

The description below the picture reads: " 28" approx 10 pounds. Caught then released." Why don't we all lighten up and give him the benefit of the doubt.

 

[MSilvia]

That doesn't change the fact that it is ... still is torturing ...an animal by removing a salt water dependent creature from the water...

I doubt it was a much a torture as an inconvenience. So long as their gills are wet, lobsters can survive out of the salt water for days.

 

[ClassAction]

I'll bet the scalding pot of water is more akin to torture (even though recent studies have shown that lobsters don't feel pain). And I have to admit that I find the self-righteousness here (which is admittedly well-intentioned) to be a little crazy. A while ago, I posted a comment asking if there was any wiggle room on the max size. The response was pretty intense. Let's just remember one thing -- the regs are arbitrary to some extent. There has to be a cut off, and 5" must have sounded like a nice round number. Taking a 4.99 inch lobster probably does as much damage as a 5.01 inch lobster, except the latter is illegal. How about taking 15 1-pounders every day? Probably more damage. If you're extremely concerned with preserving the lobster population, don't take any. Am I excusing the taking of a short or a long? Absoluletely not. I'm just saying that its all relative. Some people drive 55. Others drive 60. Are the people that drive 70 evil, while those driving 69 are stewards of the road? Would I say something or alert the police if I saw someone coming out of the water with a bunch of shorts? Yes. But its pretty crazy that so many people are dying to be hall monitors for such a minor infraction (e.g. taking a 'long to get a photo then returning it to the ocean).

 

[LobstaMan]

If being out of the water is "torture" to a lobster, then the ride home in your cooler certainly qualifies. Not to mention the 212F bath upon arrival.

I've got no problem taking pictures and then putting the lobzilla back, although it is technically against the regs. Better than the other potential result. But, with that said, I don't think I'd pose with the incriminating evidence either.....

All this lobster chat is making me hungry!

LobstaMan

 

[Soggy]

Apparently people aren't reading what I wrote...

I have no problem with catching lobsters for food...I do it myself, but leave them alone if you don't intend to eat them. I find it akin to catch-and-release fishing...both put a hook in the fishies mouth, but one leads to a meal and the other just pisses the animal off and/or hurts it. If you need a picture of a lobster that isn't legal and don't intend to eat it, buy an underwater housing.

Taking it out of its habit certainly does it no good, especially since it may have lived in that particular hole for quite some time and when you release it, it now has to go out and find the hole again or make a new hole, during which time it is somewhat vulnerable.

Regarding the legality of it, the laws have to be drawn somewhere. It just happens to be 5". We all know that the difference between 4.99" and 5.00" is miniscule...going down that slippery slope is pointless.