cobby wrote:Yep. Why keep something to find out these days. Quick pic on the phone then find out what you caughtcomplete-anglerz-12 wrote:look like they keep't it how can you keep it if you dont know what it is
I did make that assumption also.
cobby wrote:Yep. Why keep something to find out these days. Quick pic on the phone then find out what you caughtcomplete-anglerz-12 wrote:look like they keep't it how can you keep it if you dont know what it is
Yep it was 62cm.shazdoggg wrote:If you thought it was a mulloway it should have been released, as mulloway min size is 60cm!!!
You must the FIRST person who's EVER said that dusky morwong are "very good eating", since captain cook landed...Fishsniper wrote:Wow, poor blokw\e is just showing off what is a great catch, and they are actually very good eating, much better than salmon and crap like that.
Well done bud
The issue people have is the fact that he was not aware of what it was...therefore uncertain as to applicable size limits etc. I'm sure he won't make the same mistake again!Fishsniper wrote:Wow, poor blokw\e is just showing off what is a great catch, and they are actually very good eating, much better than salmon and crap like that.
Well done bud