Originally Posted by cockatouche
This may sound like a strange twist but, every time I fish, my attitude is that I am fishing for survival. If I can't eat the fish if I choose to, the fish is not caught.
Let me get my two cents in here before this thread gets too old. I agree with Cockatouche, I always seem to measure a "catch" in the context of why humans started fishing in the first place - for food. I never consider a fish caught unless I could have walked back to the cave with it. I can only imagine my neanderthal tribes' reaction if I plodded back to my home cave and grunted that even though I did not have any fish for dinner, I "caught" a bunch.
But, in the modern times of C&R fishing, I have broadened my definition of "catch" just a tiny bit because I have occasionally lost a fish that was at my feet when I was spending too much time trying to land it without hurting it. I always felt like I should get full credit for those fish. So, when defining a "catch," I usually try to determine whether my neanderthal twin, who would have just swung the fish onto the bank without regard to the health of the fish, would have been able to get it in hand and walk back to the cave with it on a vine.
As you can see, I fish alone alot and sometimes my imagination gets the better of me!