|
|
| Hey Guys,
I know we've beat this topic with a stick, but I am wondering where my time should be spent to catch the next world record? Take the poll...add any you might think are worthy. There are so many, I'm not sure where to start!
Donnie
Edited by Donnie3737 4/26/2007 9:20 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 720
| Hi Donnie,
I'm curious to know where you think the next world record might come from. I know you spend a lot of time on Eagle and was wondering if you ever manage to fish any other of waters listed above. If I could spend one summer fishing just for the record my choice would be Saint Larry. There always seems to be some large fish in there. Like I said I'm just curious what your choice would be.
Dave |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Never underestimate the river....so many places to hide, so much food!!!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32890
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | According to one of the top authorities on Muskies anywhere in the world, the next World record is more likely to come from the St. Lawrence.
Watch the Casselman video from the Muskie Symposium from last year. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 468
Location: Not where I wanna be! | im gonna try to catch on here in Iowa.......... 
or ill just dream about it..... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 203
| I recall seeing a very very big fish caught out of greenbay/fox river out of season not to long ago....more anglers the better the chances |
|
| |
|
Posts: 332
Location: Michigan | 007
J.Merics
Edited by Slimeball 5/11/2007 12:29 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2024
| After snorkeling and seeing the enormous forage the St. Lawrence has to offer... St. Lawrence all the way. Dr. Casselman is right on. |
|
| |
|
| One of those places for sure, Ottawa River, St. Lawrence River, Georgian Bay, Green Bay, or Nipissing are my guesses and I am trying to fish them all at some point in my life |
|
| |
|
| I believe it will come from a lake not listed above in Ontario |
|
| |
|
| I think past records were of questionable validity. Therefore, I think it may be possible that with the accuracy required in the current day old records may NEVER be broken. |
|
| |
|
| Hunter4,
I have seen what I feel to be one of the world records right on Eagle Lake, in the West Arm...but then again, I am sure alot of people have seen their share of HUGE fish over the years. I think we have eclipsed the 50 lb. mark a few times over the years on Eagle, and with everyone releasing the bigger fish, who knows! To answer your question, I think either a year spent on the Ottawa, St. Larry, Georgian Bay, or possibly Eagle would be the way to go!
Now, there are so many AWESOME bodies of water out there, I am not sure if there is one or two that can be singled out. Ottawa, Green Bay, St. Larry, etc. could put up the ol' WR at any time...as could LOTW, Georgian Bay, Nippissing, or even Erie.
Rick,
I agree....unless we throw out many of the old records, it will be impossible to tell what the next TRUW world record would or could be!
I put in my vote...LOL! Guess which one?-
Donnie
Edited by Donnie3737 4/26/2007 1:08 PM
|
|
| |
|
| spring lake illinois by esox ed |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2691
Location: Pewaukee, Wisconsin | I voted for the St. Lawrence because it will come from there. Huge forage and lots of room to grow. They just grow huge out East. I would like it to come from Green Bay. |
|
| |
|
| Little Green Lake. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 27
Location: FORT ATKINSON | Green Bay, their is alot for the muskies to eat out their and lots of room. Don't rule out any of the Wisconsin river and any of the flowages of the Wisconsin river.  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| Why it wont come out of Lake of the Woods, Eagle, Wabigoon???? Because it would have happened by now with all the modern equipment, fishing talent. It will come out of Green Bay or Georgian Bay, both have tremendous forage bases and nobody know's the full potential!!
Herbie and Sandy might think different but o well!
My Two Cents.
Mr Musky |
|
| |
|
Posts: 723
| I have her tied up in GB, she has been sucking down shad-milkshakes with white-fish whip-cream on top all winter long, now if I could only get the fat, lazy slob off her couch and into my boat............... wait, what are we talking about here?
I still find it funny with how many muskie fisherman there are out there today, the equipment, the knowledge, guides who fish everyday, just overall the drive to crack a record set way back when, and it hasn't been done. what gives?
Look at all the hype a 50lb fish creates........ Martin Williamson whacked a 60lber a few years ago yeah, but, you'd think you would see a lot more fish in these catergories instead of just one every 8-15 years. If there was to be a world record swimming somewhere. My guess is that its not coming from a popular musky lake that every Joe-schmo fishes. Its coming from a big water in an area that has yet to be fished, She has been waiting for someone to find her,
the sad thing is, she will die of old age before meeting her fate with a BLACK N SILVER bucktail.....
|
|
| |
|
| You Wisconnny boys are cracked that the World Record will again come out of Wisconsin... Canada or MN will have it.
 |
|
| |
|
| I think Donnie hit it on the head. The next WR if caught, won't be from Lake X it will be from a major body of water and probably will be a Muskie previously released by someone. |
|
| |
|
| Fish over fifty pounds come out of Georgian Bay a LOT more frequently than guys hear about on the internet, trust me on that. For every one that gets 'leaked' probably three are released. I think there's dozens of fisheries that have the potential. Nobody mentions the French above, but it got top marks at the Odyssey up here this month for Record potential. Navigation, size and access are three huges pluses for growing and maintaining huge fish in addition to the forage and the other stuff. Both sections of the river are book-ended by Nip and GBay, some have already mentioned them as possible candidates, and both sections are large, tough to learn and tough to fish. The ability to host fishing pressure is a double-edged sword: you need low(er) pressure to make big, dumb fish, BUT, you need lots of lines in the water for the Law of Averages and chances at them. Any of the water listed already could do it. I have no doubt it'll be caught on a worm harness or 1/4 ounce jig |
|
| |
|
Posts: 3518
Location: north central wisconsin | Tigercat. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 41
Location: Minneapolis, MN | Mr Musky - 4/26/2007 9:50 PM
Why it wont come out of Lake of the Woods, Eagle, Wabigoon???? Because it would have happened by now with all the modern equipment, fishing talent. It will come out of Green Bay or Georgian Bay, both have tremendous forage bases and nobody know's the full potential!!
I agree it will most likely come from one of the big lakes. It could be any one of them, but Georgian Bay does put out beasts on a regular basis. I hope the person that does manage to catch it catches it on a muskie lure and not a jig and minnow. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 59
Location: WI | pete's bar |
|
| |
|
Posts: 761
| Don't care. Kdawg |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32890
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Watch the Casselman video, seriously. He stated Wabigoon has an upper confidence limit in the high 50's, Georgian Bay at a bit over 60#, LOTW and Eagle were, I think high 50's, Green Bay is too new but has potential, and the St Lawrence over 70#. Since he is regarded as one of the top Muskie minds on the planet, I'll listen to his ideas.
We will have to see what happens on Mille Lacs. New fishery reaching top end now through the next few years. So far, plenty of 50# plus fish, so another 12 pounds may not be impossible. Same with Bay of Green Bay and Lake Michigan. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 108
Location: Toronto, ON | Loon Lake over Ottawa River?????? C'mon! |
|
| |
|
| "I think past records were of questionable validity. Therefore, I think it may be possible that with the accuracy required in the current day old records may NEVER be broken."
---I would subtitle "honesty" for "accuracy" here. I also agree it will never be broken will the current records in place, but the next low 60lber will come from Green Bay... 56X30". Whoever gets it SHOULD rightfully have the WI state record too.
.................................................................................................................
"The REAL question is will anyone BELIEVE it, even if it is verified by every agency witnessed by Jesus himself and weighed on 5 different certified scales..."
---Some people don't understand that the reason no one believes the current records is because they are so obviously bad. |
|
| |
|
| To Whoever Wrote the Last Post,
Very good observation. I totally agree, as do many of the people who frequent this board! Am I remiss in remembering some time ago, they started another "record keeping" committee, to handle everything from the O'Brien fish forward? Or did I actually dream about that?
Any insight for this old guy would be great!!
Donnie |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1430
Location: Eastern Ontario | Wow goes to show you that poles are useless. 1.41% of votes for a water body that puts out more 50+ pounders on a yearly bases and then a waterbody that's got one ever and receives 26.29% of the votes.
I guess it's more like wishfull thinking then common sense. Only a body of water that consistently puts out 50+ pounders can produce a 65 pound fish. And the list of those water bodies is very small.
There's just no way a fish can hide from 40lbs to 65+lbs. As well a fish will have to be released a few times over 50lbs to grow to 65 +. |
|
| |
|
| Donnie, I think Larry Ramsell is the guy heading that up now, no fish (min 60lbs) have been entered after one year. There was a lot of people concerned that people were going to be clubbing fish left and right because of it. Guess those fears were unfounded...it was formed because the FWFHoF didn't do their job.
The rightful WI record will be caught out of Green Bay in the next couple years, what a sham.
BTW, I'm of the opinion that ALL the 60lb muskys that have even been caught have been kept so far...both of them:) |
|
| |
|
| Richard,
I agree to a certain extent with your observation. What I think this "useless" poll did, was see where peoples "opinion" of where it will come are. I know the Ottawa, St. Lawrence, AND Georgian Bay are awesome bodies of water. Keep in mind though, that as of late, Green Bay has been putting up some HUGE fish! And, the fact that a good number of people on this board are from Wisconsin, probably gives a few more votes than normal. A poll is opinion....NOT FACT!
Now, why did I vote for Eagle? There are only 3% of all those who checked a box voted for it! Did you know that "factual" records, that have stood the test of all the witch hunt's, have Eagle with 12 muskies over 50 pounds, and two over 60? The reason for this point is simple....Eagle has put up as many as any body of water, and if you look at it's size, (very small in comparison to many of these other trophy producing bodies of water) it has produced some jumbinos.
Everyone has their opinion. Daily we try to convince people of OUR opinion. I spend 10-12 hours a day selling big trucks...Peterbilts, Volvo, Kenworth, etc. I am always trying to "convince" people we have the best trucks. But a poll is just that! It is an "opinion."
When can I come and catch a hawg with you? I want to make a weekend run with the boys your way!!
Donnie |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1291
Location: Hayward, Wisconsin | Hey Donnie:
Check the articles section of this site on the Home page early last year. Couple there on the new WR Program.
Muskie regards,
Larry Ramsell
www.larryramsell.com |
|
| |
|
| I've seen a Tiger Musky in very shallow water that leisurely swam around in the summer sun shine with complete disregard for my 20ft extra wide canoe. And he actually ended up gliding directly under the center of the canoe ( how his belly didn't drag on the rocks is beyond me). The canoe was 3 ft wide.
As his monstrously, plated head passed the one side (which was almost 2ft in itself), I estimated there to be 3ft still out the other side. That would put him at a length of 7ft +. His tiger bands were beautiful and very prominant and had a nice dark green coloring to him.
We actually had enough time watching him to cast our tiny bass lures at and around him with totally zero reaction from him (as if our equipment would've lasted more than 15 seconds before it went---tink). I had enough time to put the rod down and draw my handgun. I saw him approaching perpendicular to the stern side of the center of the canoe and waited on the port with the barrel directly above the water surface and watched as his skull approached. The round would've easily penetrated his skull platelets at less than 24" depth. As his skull passed, I looked on the other side of the canoe and saw a good yard sticks worth of fish left.
I've spent 9 years thinking about him and trying to catch him. I gear up bigger and better every year. I never looked at the river the same way since. Because I never thought that a fish that monstously huge could be in it.
Obviously, you realize that I never did pull the trigger. And it totally changed me as a fisherman ever since. That fish would've made a million dollar mantle piece. He makes these normal 50# muskies look like palamino trout.
I'm sure everyone is wondering where...........
Point is that it's not any body of water on your poll list. |
|
| |
|
| Trophymuskie - 5/1/2007 6:45 PM
There's just no way a fish can hide from 40lbs to 65+lbs. As well a fish will have to be released a few times over 50lbs to grow to 65 +.
Absolutely there is!!!! In water that isn't properly fished (or even recognized) for fish of that size.
And who says that fish of extreme size and age aren't selective in their food or eating habits?????
How many people do you know that troll with live 18" carp? |
|
| |
|
| Here's my two cents. If the world record were to come out of Lotw or Eagle it would have been caught allready. The St Lawrence or Ottawa could produce it but the weights dont make up for their length, not taking anything away from those giants! So I believe it's going to come from the Double GG's Green Bay or Georgian Bay!! GB is on the verge and Georgian bay is so close! GB has verified 50lbers Georgian B has verified 60 lbers and the pressure is just not there like the other bodies of water so the shamu's get a chance to grow grow, and grow.
And Grow...
Mr Musky
(what is the life span of the Great lakes spotted musky?) |
|
| |
|
| It will come from somewhere and I have seen giant fish in places known and unknown, and so have a few others who like to explore, they just don't talk about it online. Fish caught last year that would make your head spin and never will be shown. Muskies bigger than you can imagine exist in needle in a haystack proportions and most of them will never see a lure. One of us will be lucky enought to cross paths with a 60 pounder soon, it will happen and in a few years new places will be putting up serious contenders in the 50 and 60 pound class. The good old days of musky fishing are NOW and IN THE FUTURE! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 366
| A record fish is a genetic FREAK, not just a luckily caught specimen of the largest sampling of muskies in a given body of water! Having a large percentage of #50 fish come out of a lake means nothing in terms of catching one that is #70, unless someone is doing genetic research and altering of fish in said lake. The tallest human being on record was 8'11", but his dad was 5'11". Most documented research on record size beings shows that true extremes come from gland abnormalities that result in unusual growth. That being said, with the time and chance opportunity a freak could happen anywhere. Having lots of #50 fish only means that you have a better chance at catching a #50 fish, because a #70 fish is just as likely to be born from a fish that tops out at #35 than #50. The "holy grails" are a factor of our society that although are only stories at least they keep things interesting.
|
|
| |
|
| I am very suspicious of people who say they have seen numerous giant muskies because they just do not exist in reasonable numbers.
Now, I'm not so sure it would have to be that much of a freak *IF* there were as many 60" muskys as are reported lately. Reason is the girth of an average 60" should be 27", and that's just an average for all seasons and would be more in the fall. So really, we're not talking about a freak at all, just an above average 60", or well proportioned fall 60" musky.
Frankly, I don't think most of the fish we think are 50lb releases are really 50lbs either. I'm not trying to start something here, but take a good hard look a Tom Gelb's 51lber again because that's what a 50 should look like. I'm not faulting the angler for keeping it, or anyone else for releasing theirs....or even us for believing. It's just that the 50lb mark has been thrown around so much lately it's diluted the event.
Using Tom Gelb's 50lb 53X28" extreme girth musky as an example, it would just be a normal girth for it's length if it was 60" in the fall, and be darn close to a record. My point is that if 60" fish existed in any numbers then we would have had at least a couple legitimate 60X30" on the books.
There has never been a picture of musky that I've seen that comes close to the recorded dimensions of those 2 Hayward records of 63 1/2 X 31 1/4" and 60 1/4 X 33 1/2"....anyone with eyeballs can see they are only of average girth mid- low 50" class fish.
Unfortunately, a 55 inch musky with an extreme girth is not going to cut the mustard, however, if you do the math on what just a well proportioned 60" would be, that should be enough. Do they exist....they haven't so far!
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 697
Location: Minnetonka | Good post. I haven't seen a great number of insane freak muskies myself, but I have seen results from a guide who consistently flirts with the length and girth required for a world record fish. The link below is pretty much what I based my vote on. Anyone else know of someone CONSISTENTLY coming closer than this guy???
http://www.1000islandsfishing.com/muskie.htm |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32890
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | May be this season someone will pop a new record... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 203
| CAPTAIN CLARK IS DEFINITLY THE FRONT RUNNER FOR THE NEXT WR!
THAT GUY JUST PUTS THE IE OR Y IN MUSKIE/MUSKY.
BRET |
|
| |
|
| "The ability to host fishing pressure is a double-edged sword: you need low(er) pressure to make big, dumb fish, BUT, you need lots of lines in the water for the Law of Averages and chances at them."
Now that was smart...
|
|
| |
|
| Clark is tops, but he not good enough to beat the Louie fish! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32890
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | The fish has to be there to get caught, unlike the old records that were....well.... |
|
| |
|
| Shot |
|
| |
|
| ...from a bridge? |
|
| |
|
| Cal Johnson's record musky fish was beached and not shot from a bridge like Louie Spray was known to have done. Not that Cal's record is any more believable because he said his July fish had a 33 1/2" girth. If you believe that's possible, then you also have to believe his musky fish would have a 36" to 38" girth in the fall........... |
|
| |
NEXT World Record....