|
|
| I have been wanting to reply to the thread about which record should stand, but since I can't get into "reply" but can "edit" and start a "new topic", I thought I would try it this way.
As for the records mentioned in that thread, all have been researched to death. The only "controversey" that remains is only in the minds of those wishing it to be so.
The Lawton fish was proven to be a fraud.
The Spray fish is legit and recognized by the Hall of Fame as the current world record.
The Malo muskie is legit and undoubtedly weighed "at least" 70 pounds. Politics prevent it from being the "official" record as listed by the two record keeping bodies, the Hall of Fame and IGFA (a private club with rules that will reject any new record proposal, even if legally caught in the state or province where caught, if it doesn't comply with its rules!). As an author and muskie historian, I am satisified that the Malo muskie is the largest ever caught legally (or by any other means-verified for that matter)!
The O'Brien 65 pounder, while recognized as the Ontario record, WAS NOT weighed on a "certified scale"!! Did it weigh 65 pounds? I would say yes, within a few ounces, but EXACT weight will never be known due to the scale used!
Let's not forget the Cal Johson 67 1/2 pounder, which is recognized by the IGFA.
And Jason, how would you feel if YOU had caught a record fish in the 1990's, and someone suggested that the slate be cleared for the new millenium. Let's be fair to those anglers of old that accomplished something that we would all like to do.
Muskie regards,
Larry Ramsell
www.larryramsell.com | |
| | |
| Great point Larry.
I was only kidding by the way.[;)] | |
| | |
| Hi Larry et. al.,
I'm not at all critical of your historical fact finding; more power to anyone who has a rewarding hobby that doesn’t infringe on the rights of others. But as I think about it, maybe it’s best to downplay word-record fish in order to better promote CPR? Aren’t the two concepts in conflict with each other? Just a thought, not an argument. Thanks.
| |
| | |
| I agree with both keeping records, and how it DOES promote C&R. Not to say you don't have a good point Ranger, but understand that having a WR allows us to have a GOAL to shoot for, something to keep releasing skies so that we can reach. With no WR, who is to say what is that ULTIMATE fish? I think we would find there are MANY on this board, and throughout the muskie community that who will ONLY kill that WR fish. I used to think I would bonk a fish over 57", but the more I think about it, she would have to be a really heavy 63"+ to get the bonker-oo in my boat. I don't begrudge anyone who feels differently, and I highly doubt I will ever have to execute on my bonker-ooo limitations, 57"+ or otherwise, but I do believe that having the WR allows many people to have that ONE fish that they would consider ending the life of, at least on purpose. Just my not-so-humble opinion.
Slamr | |
| | |
| Larry,
Could you tell us how the Malo fish was weighed, I have heard conflicting things about the process used.
Also, are you aware of a book that Malo wrote about the catch and if so, was the book legit?
Thanks for any insight you can share. | |
| | |
| Do I think we should keep records on fish...I guess I'd have to say yes. Although, they will probably never be in jeopardy of being broken from my boat.
The "GOAL" thing got me to post though. I can see your point about having something to shoot for. But, do we really need to have something to shoot for in order to enjoy ourselves?? Shouldn't time on the water and the catching of any fish suffice. I can't believe how much I am looking forward to this year. My 12 year old daughter has shown an exteme interest in ski fishing with me. Is able to ID baits, asked to learn how to sharpen hooks and talks to my wife about muskie fishing with me.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not berating you for having goals. But at least in my book what it's all about is spending the time on the water with family or friends and having opportunity to catch a fish and watch it swim away.
I have fished low pressure tourneys for 10+ years now. And even those are for the purpose of spending time on the water and if I catch a fish to register well and good. If I get a trophy or win a prize or something even better. But, fishing for the puropose of breaking a world record, doesn't that kind of take the fun out of it??
Again, not saying what you or someone else does is wrong - unless it's unethical, illegal or immoral, but these are my opinions.
Scott | |
| | |
| I for one can't wait for the record to be caught. It is kinda sadening to know we may have 2 or maybe 4 or is it 5 now that can be the record. We have a shot fish, a stuffed fish, one weighted on a bad scale the other on a real scale but not recongnised by anyone.
Just like the release record is a big joke one place says it's 62.25 the other 62 1/2 and the only picture available is missing an amasing 18 inch long tail. [:(] | |
| | |
| That explains it...me wife must consider me a "world record" as she has tried to hit me over the head for the past 13 yrs, 4 mos. + 2 days! Never mentioned "mounting" me though......[:(] [:sun:]
** As far as "never" catching a record...my Dad who is 72 went fishing just to get out for awhile 2 days ago....never did he dream he'd reel in a rockfish 34lbs....not a record fish but the largest one taken in that small lake as far as anyone ever remembers!...SO....it IS possible for anyone...[:sun:] | |
| |
|
Which record?