|
|
Location: Contrarian Island | Where do I get a good girth tape? the fat fish we have boated the last few years just can never seem to girth over 24.5". Guys are getting all these 25", 26", 27", 28", 29" girthed fish...is my tape measure reading wrong? 
now this one did go 27" ....that I will BUY...
Edited by BNelson 12/3/2009 2:43 PM
Attachments
----------------
 fatty.JPG (281KB - 618 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 143
| tape a couple broken net handles together....oh wait no
e:
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8772
| BNelson - 12/3/2009 2:40 PM
Where do I get a good girth tape? the fat fish we have boated the last few years just can never seem to girth over 24.5". Guys are getting all these 25", 26", 27", 28", 29" girthed fish...is my tape measure reading wrong?
now this one did go 27" ....that I will BUY... ;- )
Brad... There's nothing wrong with your tape. You just forgot to cut 4" off it!
|
|
| |
|
| Mine never do either? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1080
| Fill the fish's gut full of water then wrap the hose around it, mark it with your thumb, then measure that.... |
|
| |
|
| I just use the same thing that my uses for sewing---a flexible, 1/2" wide fabric tape. It works well for circular measurements because it doesn't have the arch in it that Stanley type of carpenters tape measures do. And the material is reasoably water resistant, and will never rust.. |
|
| |
|
| I have been fortunate to see a lot of big fish caught in some lakes that are known for big fish and in November (the time of year they are there fattest). The biggest girth I have seen and measured in person is 25.5". Brad, I'll send you a pic of it when I get the pic. A true 25" girth is a freakin monster.
Edited by Baby Mallard 12/3/2009 3:22 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2010
| You need to catch them in March - I have only held one fish with a 25"+ girth and it was a prespawn pig... 53, 52.5 & 50" this year all had girths less than 23" |
|
| |
|
Posts: 400
Location: North/Central WI | Brad-
I think the measuring process goes something like this....
Joe Blow catches a healthy summer 48"er. After he releases it, his buddy says "We should have got a girth on that". Joe replies "Yea...but I know she was a solid 35 lbs." So Joe uses this formula to "measure" the girth...
(48xx)/800 = 35 lbs and determines his fish to have a 24" girth. In reality, Joe's fish was probably closer to 25 lbs with a 20-21 " girth.
Three months later his buddy John Doe catches a fat fall 48". He too forgets to measure the girth. After comparing his fish pic to Joe's, he "measures" the girth on his fish at 26".
Sound about right? |
|
| |
|
| HAHAHA I caught my first really nice fish and we girthed it. I was like "No WAY that is right...that's it?????? I have seen fish that were way bigger girths and this fish looks.....oooohhhhh wait a second.........HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHA |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1169
Location: New Hope MN | There is something seriously wrong with that fish! What a fat slob!!!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 221
| They mean centimeters.
Lol... BN we seem to have the same problem up here. Except my bumper board is also reading wrong...
Darcy Cox |
|
| |
|
| Brad,
You should never girth a fish. Just imagine what you want the weight to be and then make sure the L x G x G/800 fits the weight. True fisherman never lie??? I think that is how a lot of girths are taken.
On a serious side note. Girths can be manipulated greatly. Belly fat fish girths can really be manipulated depending on how the girth is taken. Also girths are taken and bragged about usually to say "my fish is bigger than yours". I do know of a couple of dead fish that the girth formula is closer to L x G x G/760 and others that the L x G x G/900 would probably be closer. I know of a 53 x 23 that went 39lbs and a 54 x 26 that went 40lbs both weighed dead on a scale. A square wide fish with big shoulder will weigh a lot more that a belly fat round fish.
Maybe someday fisherman will quit bragging up girths, but I doubt it. How else does one say my 50 is bigger than anothers 50. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 380
Location: Michigan | This is soooo funny... And in my world, so true too... I'm not saying they don't exist, but I will need to see one some day to really believe it. I rarely fish between November and June, so I probably never will unless I change my approach. I either have to fish different water, or when they hold eggs, or both.
Edited by Chadster 12/3/2009 6:43 PM
|
|
| |
|
| Ever notice how the stated girth magically hits 40lbs???? |
|
| |
|
| I agree with Darcy never mind girth alot of lengths are inflated |
|
| |
|
Posts: 299
Location: Nowheresville, MN | A lot of these girthing tapes must only come in whole-inch increments too. How many girths do you see reported X.25, X.75, etc. Same can be said for large lengths... |
|
| |
|
Location: Northern Wisconsin | llolol at that muskie |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8772
| Not sticking up for the snoopy pole, but a few inches in girth on a tape measure doesn't amount to a whole lot of thickness.
Are a lot of the high 20's girths you see tossed around out there fake? As fake as a lot of the 51-52 inchers you see, I suppose. When I see someone holding a muskie that they say has a 28" girth? I am reminded that I had a 28 inch waist in high school. Kinda puts things in perspective in a hurry. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Here you all go, print this badge out and pin it to your shirt. You've all been awarded positions on the Girth Police Department.
You must all report each case to Sheriff Nelson for his ultimate decision on whether to issue the offender a citation.
Edited by Pointerpride102 12/3/2009 9:50 PM
Attachments
----------------
22709.jpg (9KB - 160 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8772
| WTF, Mike...
Silver? Are 'ya serious? I want a GOLD badge, and a pearl handled .45 revolver.
Well... unless you give me one of those cool red swirly flashing lights for the top of my truck. Then I guess I can deal with the silver badge. But at least let me have the .45, will 'ya? I'm going to NEED that. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Are you sure you want a .45 and not a .44? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 203
Location: Alexandria, Minnesota | Hey Brad......... I think I know what you are laughing about when it comes to girths. I know some of the guys that fish the lake X that we both fish make me laugh too. With their 27 and 28 inch girths. My largest on those waters is a 25.5 and it could not get any fatter. It dwarfs some of their 27 and 28. I have no idea how they are screwing up their girths that bad. Ha ha ha.
I had a guy up there tell me he caught a 43 inch northern with 28 inch in girth. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 284
|
You look like you have a 38" waist/girth .... |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | Pointer, I'm no sherrif,,,but you seem to be on every musky board known to man...here is the thing... as I was talking to a friend the other day about it as well...what it boils down to is the avg joe who doesn't catch too many fish will go out and catch a very FAT fish and then he girths it..and it "only" comes to say 24...which if anyone who has actually girthed a 24 knows is very fat...then the avg joe is some what let down as he see's all these 25"+ girths thrown around on the net...so is he let down maybe? sure....he thinks he has a beast but then all these other clowns throwing around these inflated girths almost diminish his catch, when the reality is...his 24" girth is bigger than most of these inflated girths on the net....me, I could care less, my post was just to start a little funny banter about it...it actually just makes me laugh and shake my head,,...but it's the avg guys that do it all by the book that somehow get knocked down a notch....sad really.......and yes, a fish w/ a 26" girth is easy to see in a pic...sort of like someone catching a 35"er then going around saying it's 45"...it's easy to see who is just trying to make theirs into something it wasn't...
makes for good winternet.
Edited by BNelson 12/4/2009 8:19 AM
|
|
| |
|
| several years back I caught a 52 x 22 at the time it was by far my pb. The internet girths had not quite started yet but the magazine and newspaper girths were sporting 24 inch girths etc... After I released the fish I decided it must be a true 40lbr and that I had girthed all wrong. As Brad point I was depressed that my big fish while it looked just as big was nowhere near what I was seeing in publications for girths. Now many 50s and beyond in the boat later I realize that a 22 inch girth is big in the summertime. So to all who are catching the fish with 21-23 inch girths those are very nice fish.
I also notice that some individuals seem to be in a competition to claim the are catching 40 to 50 lbs fish for some sort of name recognition and as such their reported girths are questionable. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1996
Location: Pelican Lake/Three Lakes Chain | One of the first fish I ever girthed I had to check three times. I too thought I was measuring it wrong or had some weird metric tape or someone spliced a couple extra inches into it.
A 24" girth is huge, if you ever encounter one in person you will know what I mean. 25" and up....well I've never seen one in person, doesn't mean they don't exist, but...
Edited by nwild 12/4/2009 8:16 AM
|
|
| |
|
| That guy in the top picture looks like he's trying to strangle the fish, nice hold.
BNelson = girth police
Pointer = girth queen |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4080
Location: Elko - Lake Vermilion | Haa,Haa,Ha,.........He said girth queen....Haa,Haa. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 285
Location: NE Wisconsin | One of my old accounting professors called the playing with numbers to get the desired results, "Creative Accounting"
47.375 X 26 X 26 divided by 800 = 40.031875 pounds |
|
| |
|
Posts: 97
Location: Pickering, ON | If you want to get a good idea on how various girths look on various lengths of fish, check out:
http://www.1000islandsfishing.com/muskie.htm
You can see how, for example, a 24/25" girth looks absolutely enormous on a 48-51 inch fish vs. say on a 55+ inch.
Girth (and how much of the fish it extends for) is the king in terms of what the fish will truly ultimately weigh. A fish with a giant but short belly will be less heavy than a fish with a lesser girth but one which is carried across more of it's length.
There's only one way to know the true exact weight of any given fish, and that's to weigh it on a certified scale (suggestion would be for Chatillon, which you could use to weigh a fish horizontally in the net with, and then release it).
However, seeing as how 99% will never catch one that crosses 40lbs due to the fact that this is possible on a very limited number of waters, most shouldn't bother.
Edited by JeffinPickering 12/4/2009 9:34 AM
|
|
| |
|
| That site puts things in perspective. I agree wih bn's story. Too many crazy people. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1245
Location: Madtown, WI | OK, don't want to call out anyone in particular, thats not my objective. But like others said...you find one that is stated as a huge girth when in fact is a "nice fat fish" with a 23-24" girth. Then joe smo goes out and catches a REALLY nice fish...say 48 X 23 and feels he MUST have measured it wrong....based on his comparisons to other fish he has seen with 25-27" girths....
so I found a couple pics , one I thought were a "questionable" girth. See what you think. Compare these three fish...one is 47.5 by "26". Then a 54 X 22, then the larry fish of 58 X 27.
(cory 54 inch 7 24 09 #3 low res.JPG)
Attachments
----------------
47.5 X 26.jpg (158KB - 195 downloads)
cory 54 inch 7 24 09 #3 low res.JPG (62KB - 223 downloads)
larry fish.jpg (70KB - 274 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 425
Location: Roseau | This one went 51" x 23", not sure on the 23", its the only fish I have girthed.
I cant imagine a 25" plus!!
Thanks
Attachments
----------------
untitled.JPG (74KB - 181 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 97
Location: Pickering, ON | C.Painter - 12/4/2009 11:50 AM
so I found a couple pics , one I thought were a "questionable" girth. See what you think. Compare these three fish...one is 47.5 by "26". Then a 54 X 22, then the larry fish of 58 X 27.
My thoughts on these:
1. the 26" on the 47 is absolutely absurd, unless it was in a press when girthed.
2. The 54X22 looks fatter because of the angle. The middle to rear section tells the tale that 22 is probably a good number.
3. The Larry fish - a perfect example of what I said earlier. The fish is no doubt a total supertanker, and I do not question it at all. When you put a 27" girth on a 57" fish vs. a 51" fish it usually looks completely different.
In Fisher's post, you can see how chub 23" girth looks on a 51".
There, that's my internet scientific analysis for the day.
Now, I'm off to sharpen hooks for tomorrow.
Edited by JeffinPickering 12/4/2009 12:28 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1245
Location: Madtown, WI | See Fisher...now that is a prime example....look at the girth on that thing....very nice fish...and 23 to me spot on....
thanks for sharing.. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | BNelson - 12/4/2009 7:52 AM
Pointer, I'm no sherrif,,,
makes for good winternet.
I said you were a sheriff, not a sherrif. 
I know it makes for good winternet. Hence why I posted what I did.
If people feel down that their fish doesn't measure up to others fish, they are fishing for the wrong reason and will never be satisfied. And will likely be upset at every post I make. I look at the measurements of fish and simply smile because in reality I don't care what dimensions they think it is and they likely don't care if people don't believe them. I've talked to guys who legitimately believe they have caught 69-70 inch tiger muskies. "Seriously man, it was longer than my canoe. We never landed it but I measured my canoe later and that is how big it was. I know it." I've actually heard those words. I tried to tell him that he would have easily shattered the world record. "Oh I know it was a world record." I tried to explain things to him but he honest to god got peeed at me for not believing him. I just dropped it and wished him good luck and hoped he land another world record.
Whats my point? Some people simply don't know. Sure we can try and educate but some people are set in their ways and nothing we say, post, or explain will ever ring true to them. So trying to bring them out of their fantasy world is pointless. They are living happily and enjoying fishing and if they are releasing their strange dimensioned fish, who cares? The fantasy world population is much larger than the true girth measuring population. You're fighting an uphill battle and the hill is covered in ice. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1245
Location: Madtown, WI | Its one thing if people are in their fantasy world and we can't get them out....its another if they define their world based on false info they gather from wrongly measured/guessed etc fish from the 'net.
Its the newbies that this false info affects the most....not the seasoned vets who actually have measured and weight a good number of fish to know...
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 427
Location: Wausau | My boat rocks both ways...the false information does not effect my life and/or happiness...the other side...I'm somewhat disappointed that our "spotlight" professionals who make a living within the industry and are a voice for the musky community allow such "fantasy" girths to be publicly displayed. In situations of control, where the powers-to-be can delete/modify inappropriate social (internet) behavior, then why not control the information in certain situations to avoid controversy and/or detract from those who willingly share fish of true statue. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | So you're asking the moderators to judge whether a person is a liar or just measured incorrectly because they don't know how or were excited and just screwed it up? Seems like a pretty big request you're asking. It is one thing to moderate the Tom Foolery, it's quite another to question what someone may believe to be entirely true and simply not know any different. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 457
Location: Minneconia | Hey that guy's face looks familiar.... |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | so that fish is suppose to be 30" girth? interesting....look at some of the 27-29s on the thousand island site and i guess I don't see it being 30"....it's huge yes, but 30?
it takes a LOT to hit 40 lbs...the number is thrown around way too much these days...most would believe a 54" fish with a healthy summer girth would easily hit 40 lbs right? well it doesn't...
as others have stated the only way to know what they weigh is to weigh them which I have started to do on a few just to see...
what was Marc Thorpe saying in that one thread..that it is rare for a fish to have a girth 1/2 it's length? a guy who knows a thing or 2 about big fat fish...I agree..take any 48 and if you put a 24" girth on it..it's a slob, 50 x 25, slob....52 x 26 slob...
and there are fish all over the net the last season like 47.3 x 26, 48 x 28, 48x26...just to name a few...
they just are not measuring them right ...or at all...and these guys aren't newbies or rookies...they simply are doing one of 2 things..they are calling them way too big based off other (exaggerated) fish on the net...or they want them to be a certain weight...
a fish caught recently was less than 48 but by the girth measurement put the fish at 46+ lbs...c'mon.... oh and he held it out w/ both arms...he must be strong. hah.
funny all the pms and emails I've gotten since starting this thread about how guys are glad finally someone pointed this out...
happy Winternet.
Edited by BNelson 12/4/2009 5:13 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8772
| Yep, 30". Knowing who it is and where and when it was caught? I don't doubt it. It doesn't change the fact that a LOT of the lengths and girths you see out there are inflated, but I believe this one. As for holding that fish out? Brad, you're not a big guy. I'm pretty sure you could hold 50 pounds out away from your body. At least I hope you could. 50 pounds is a whole lot of muskie, but it's not a whole lot of weight... |
|
| |
|
| So, the formula would put that fish at around 60 lbs. Painters fish on the formula is around 32-33 lbs. You really think that fish is almost twice as big? I think you are looking at maybe a low 40 lber there.
Edited by Baby Mallard 12/4/2009 6:35 PM
|
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | I wasn't referring to the fish in your pic about holding it out...Ive got a few in the 40 lb mark and trust me...they are hard as heck to hold up and out for too long...it is different lifting a 40 lb dumbell and a 40 lb mass that is 50+" long....
I don't see that fish going 60...not even close to 50... what is funny is the fish I have weighed have all been within 1 lb of the formula on this site... pretty accurate...we haven't weighed one over 40...but we will...and i'm sure it will be spot on w /the formula...
Edited by BNelson 12/4/2009 5:57 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 221
| http://watch.thecomedynetwork.ca/south-park/season-13/#clip241206
...a Southpark episode every Musky Fisherman needs to watch.
Darcy Cox |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Here in lies my point of wanting moderators to make the ultimate decision on what posts get deleted vs which are kept. It is a judgment call. Saying the moderators should have to make that ultimate decisions is asking far too much. If you really, truly do not care (which most have stated) then this really shouldn't be an issue. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 366
| What do you think this one girths at?
I remember when I was a kid and hearing Hulk Hogan say he had 24" biceps, and a bunch of kids at school talking about their bicep dimensions. I remember measuring mine and thinking how full of it a couple guys were. Really no different a situation here, and obviously the same kids would grow up and lie about fish dimensions.
Attachments
----------------
IMG_0174.JPG (96KB - 240 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 427
Location: Wausau | I am not suggesting moderators judge a fish or others play sheriff and it could be that I don't have full knowledge of how a website runs. I was thinking more along the lines of just removing the measurements, but keeping the story and picture. I see this happening maybe 2x a year, when such Tom Foolery is blatantly obvious. I'm thinking more along the lines of trying to avoid group stereotypes and as Bradly mentioned false 'one-ups-menship' where "my fish must have been bigger". I'm hoping a few higher profile musky personalities/guides take more ownership in directing positive change and growth within the sport. I understand pointing fingers and calling people a lair is a dangerous game when people provide your income. Again, I think avoidance of the issue by removing the measurements, but trying to keep the pictures and story, shows one supports big fish, CPR and the hunt, but not unintentional falsehood...well hopefully unintentional. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | I would say that is probably a more fair assessment Andy. And to some extent I believe it does happen. For example the couple of fish that were claimed over 60 inches. I don't think those posts lasted too long before everyone was in agreement that they were a farce, and the fish ended up being taken down. Now some of that was likely due to the fish's claimed dimensions were questioned by everyone and their brother. But I still stand by that some really truly believe that their fish was the size they claim. The one from Lac Seul two or three years ago was refuted vehemently, yet at an outing a couple of us witnessed the angler showing off the pictures and telling the stories. All in all it is hard to be the ultimate judge in the case of is this guy making this up for notoriety or is does he really truly believe what he's saying and is just incorrect? An above average joe can make a mistake. Even a die hard can make a mistake, though less likely. |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | I do agree, some will believe it from fautly measuring....ya know the ol piece of line and net handle concoction....those are easily spotted...and i agree, they believe their fish was X" length by how poorly they measured it...those are one thing...but it's the rest that are clearly not doing something right or not doing it all that baffles me...even EA's pic above..by the formula that fish is 60.19 lbs!!! um ok yah, that 53.5 is right there with McNairs beast..um right... does anyone really think that 53.5 is even remotely close to 60 pounds?????..with the formula being fairly accurate that says one thing to me...the guy didn't measure the girth correctly...when you get over 50", inches in girth make a huge difference...so say that 53.5 above was more like 27, which is a stretch imo...well then on the formula it drops all the way to 48.75lbs...say it was more like 25, down to 41.8 lbs...girth is huge...that fish is no where near 60 lbs...which says something went wrong..
somewhere...and I don't care per say that it was or wasn't 30...again it goes back to all the girths flying around to the avg joe that gets a 24" girthed fish and is let down.....as stated by others in this thread that very thing has happened to them....call a spade a spade...
Edited by BNelson 12/4/2009 6:26 PM
|
|
| |
|
Location: Twin Cities | I just saw a pic of a 53x28 that was very recently caught but an angler who knows what the $)(*#@$ he's doing. It looks WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY fatter than the fish above with the face blotched. And the gentleman i'm referring too is a decent sized guy and can't hold it out like that.... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | I bet that 'let down' is an eye opening experience for them. That gives them a frame of reference to look at fish and realize that their dimensions are likely inflated, whether purposely or accidentally. The more people that are 'let down' the more people get educated, so to speak. I'd imagine the let down period isn't as traumatic as we're thinking here. I'd be willing to bet the reaction is more of, "it's only a 20 inch girth? Really?.....(pause as brain wraps around the fact)....Ok, some of these girth measurements guys are reporting are bogus." One more person to join the police force
As for the guys that don't measure the girth and report one, there really isn't a way to stop it. You can question it publicly, but in the end what does it accomplish? A thread like this brings to light that this happens and hopefully rings true to some people. I guess that is a small victory against these hardened criminals. |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | Pointer...I by no means am a girth or length police just calling out the recent trend of crazy inflated girths..just havin a little fun w/ it...since it's 18 degrees and I'm going fishing tomorrow....many who actually fish and catch big fish seem to agree that it was something a long time coming....you fish for 30 inch tigers in Utah so maybe you don't care as much....go over to MHunter board and debate with those guys now would ya..
Edited by BNelson 12/4/2009 6:47 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8772
| JRedig - 12/4/2009 6:30 PM
I just saw a pic of a 53x28 that was very recently caught but an angler who knows what the $)(*#@$ he's doing. It looks WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY fatter than the fish above with the face blotched. And the gentleman i'm referring too is a decent sized guy and can't hold it out like that....
Does being a full time Canadan guide for over 25 years constiture "knowing what the %^#*%^ you are doing?" How about handling more 50" - 55" fish in a season than most of us will catch in a lifetime, every year since before a lot of guys here were born?
|
|
| |
|
Location: Twin Cities | I wonder how many times I can use this picture for a reference...the fish above claimed to be 53.5 x 30.
The one in this link...51x29...
http://www.muskiebreath.com/media/articleimages/article1.jpg
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
Gotta love winter.
Edited by JRedig 12/4/2009 6:59 PM
|
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | EA I don't care how many big fish a guy has caught, to me that says they are good at catching big fish...doesn't mean they might not inflate a measurement here or there...again, go look at the thousand island site..there isn't a fish on there w/ a 30" girth...but that 53.5 is 30???? also look at the articles at the bottom of the fish that weighed 41-46 lbs..all in the 54-56.5 range and fat..and these were weighed..55x27" in the article..44 lbs...56.5 x27.5, 46.6 lbs...and you are going to tell us your friends fish was close to 50 but it was not as long...not a chance. when a number like 53.5 x 30 is thrown on a pic and then the pic is shown..it sure better look like a 60 lber...or even 50...and it doesn't...as baby mallard says...it was probably 40, maybe 45...i got a 53 x 23.5 that Im pretty sure in the daylight w/ the same hold as that 53.5 would look verrrrrry similiar... just sayin'..I know there is a pic of a 53.5 x 25.5 a buddy who caught it is going to post..might put things of your friends fish in perspective... until then....50 lbers for everyone!
Edited by BNelson 12/4/2009 7:39 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 283
| Wasn't Gelb's fish a couple yrs ago 53x28.5? My numbers might be wrong, but Gelb's fish was a lot bigger than EA's pic. |
|
| |
|
| your numbers are right, it weighed 51 lbs, and 2 ounces. |
|
| |
|
| As I always say, some people greatly inflate the length and girths of their catches... I have seen the many inflated girths others are referring too and couldn't agree with them more. One does nor have to sit back and just congratulate one on a great catch when it is BS. Oh and Esoxaddict- THAT FISH DOES NOT HAVE A 30 INCH GIRTH. A nice fish with a nice photo to back it up, yes. But a 30 inch girth... GIVE ME A BREAK.
John |
|
| |
|
Posts: 814
| What ever happened to people just saying nice fish man and go on your way??? Does it REALLY bother you guys that much what people say?? Does everything have to be a contest? How do you sleep at night. I admit when I first started this crazy game that's what I thought it was about....boy was I wrong....so wrong. All the fish posted so far are beautiful fish and I am happy that I get the oppurtunity(sp?) to hunt these crazy creatures and am thankfull for that! And I wish everyone hawgs in the future no matter what the girth is....I have only girth measured 2 fish for MY own personal reference and don't know if I ever will again, for me its just way more to it than just the girth and length. Its more about the experience,company,friends,memories etc.
Here is one fish that is 25'' that I measured, call me a liar, say spot on I don't care. What makes this fish very special to me is not the girth. It's special because it was my dad's first big fish and also was his first on the eight after many heartbreaking attemps, with a new lure (cowgirl) that not even the guides had yet!
Also here is how pics can be decieving one photo it doesn't look that fat, then the other really shows the girth and the true thickness all the way to the tail. the formula only puts this fish at 42lbs or so....I know that if killed this fish would easy go over 42lbs.
Let the comments begin....I'll just sit back and chuckle.
Attachments
----------------
P8150022.JPG (85KB - 238 downloads)
P8150020.JPG (92KB - 172 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
| Mskyhntr. Don't you register your fish in the muskies inc contest? |
|
| |
|
| Mike- That's a really nice looking fish and I believe your measurements. Pretty cool you got to share it with your dad.
Edited by Baby Mallard 12/4/2009 9:07 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 814
| yes I do.
I am not against you or anyone else. i do it for myself and for future references. IMO that is more of a log than a chest thumping contest like girth measurements.
Edited by mskyhntr 12/4/2009 9:10 PM
|
|
| |
|
| so then don't measure them then. If you are all about the experience you shouldn't care how long they are. They are all "nice fish". |
|
| |
|
Posts: 814
| guest not really gonna argue here. That's like saying don't even take a photo. cmon man. like I said I do what I do for myself and no one else. I like to keep a log so I can look back and see if I am improving or not just something I like to do. And like I said again its for me not you. |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | now wait a second Mike....how is girth measurements more of a chest pumping thing than lengths or entering fish? it is in your opinon...imo I measure girths just to see what fat fish are...I simply like to know ... do some do it so there 50 can be bigger than the next guys...sure that is where the inflated #s come into play probably....I have girthed 6 all yr, some were just plain fat and we wanted to know..others we wanted to weigh and see how they came out on the formula ...I see your points but can you sit there and tell me you can look at a pic of a reported 48 x 28 that clearly is nowhere near that and think even to yourself..."not a chance"...if you can...you are a saint...I guess it's not in me to not call bs.
also imo both the pics of your dads 52 look fat to me.., those types of fish and pics are not the issues..it's the crazy numbers of 26/27/28 on fish that are not even 50......oh and it is a nice fish!
oh and for guest below...half the ones I girthed weren't even fish I caught...
anyway, been fun....winternet is upon us...good luck rest of season...50 lbers for everyone.
Edited by BNelson 12/4/2009 9:49 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 814
| Braggin rights, glad I got a chuckle out of ya! Does it bother you that I like to keep track of my records? And could care less about yours? Or what you think about mine.
Brad, I think the chest pumping all starts with the girths as stated earlier in this post. There really for the most part is never a huge debate over length, its always about the weight and to get weight you need a girth measure. People just seem to get more satisfaction these days when they post the girth, don't know why but they do. As for my opinion....sure I disagree on alot of them but I won't call them out on it, just not me, I'll say nice fish and be on my way.
Good luck to everyone still fishing the fish are as fat as they are probably gonna get so we should see some real beauties here in the next few weeks.
Mike |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | agreed...good luck tomorrow!
bn |
|
| |
|
| Iv weighed a few fish in the last 2 years. I carry a bathroom digital scale and weigh the fish on the casting deck with myself and the fish over it. A real wake up call to myself and what a fish really weighs  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8772
| Ryan - 12/4/2009 10:14 PM
Iv weighed a few fish in the last 2 years. I carry a bathroom digital scale and weigh the fish on the casting deck with myself and the fish over it. A real wake up call to myself and what a fish really weighs :-O
I don't trust those things at at all. I got on one a while back, and that stupid thing must have overestimated my weight by 30 pounds. I sure wouldn't trust it weighing a fish, no way. |
|
| |
|
| Ryan,
I like that idea of using the bathroom scale. It seems like a good way to weigh a fish safely...for the fish's sake. Just curious, to the rest of you catching and weighing your huge muskies, what methods are you using? Or I guess, how are you weighing them? |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | pretty simple actually...I have Salter Brecknell, Electro Samson 99 lb digital scale...I tested it w a 40 lb weight and it was accurate...we put the fish in the net, over the side of the boat, in the water...then take the handle part of the big kahuna off, just leaving the hoop....we attach the netting in 2 places to the hook on the scale...lift the entire hoop up out of the water and read the scale..fish is supported across it's entire body in the net...no harm to fish, not vertical what so ever...
back in the water she goes...then after releasing simply weigh the hoop... |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | here is a recent 53.5 x 25.5....not the greatest pic but you get the idea... the fisherman who got it is no small man as well...
this baby has some girth!
Edited by BNelson 12/6/2009 6:15 PM
Attachments
----------------
25.5.jpg (291KB - 215 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
| That is too easy to answer I just read recently something from the biggest of muskie experts or was that the best muskie catcher. Whatever he is he said it was measuring them out of water that ads those extra inches. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1106
Location: Muskegon Michigan | I love this discussion. Any topic that involves speculation backed up by educated guesswork is real science. ha ha ha ha . The truth about girth vs weight is that no girth formula is acurate because stomach contents dont change girth that much. I have done this with Pike after killing them. Weigh a dead pike30 inches then stuff a 8 ounce sucker down its throat. The girth wont change at all unless you relax the tape. Big fish can have the same girth at say 26 and add a 4 pound pike to her gut and the girth wont change a bit. Its like a plastic bottle empty or full. the full one is heavier but the girth doesnt change enough to show in the tape. Also 20 guys can measure a girth on a fish and all twenty get a different measurement. There is no standard way to do it the same every time. So girth formulas= weight is pure speculation and guesswork. At best we can get withing a few pounds on big fish. Weighing them is still and always will be the only way to get an acurate reading. Cheers. Kingfisher |
|
| |
|
| That last pic Brad posted, that girth measurement was taken out of the water with the fish lieing on the bumpboard. I find it hard to believe that it would have been much different in the water, but I guess I'm not one of those experts you refer to either. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1106
Location: Muskegon Michigan | BNelson - 12/5/2009 8:41 PM
pretty simple actually...I have Salter Brecknell, Electro Samson 99 lb digital scale...I tested it w a 40 lb weight and it was accurate...we put the fish in the net, over the side of the boat, in the water...then take the handle part of the big kahuna off, just leaving the hoop....we attach the netting in 2 places to the hook on the scale...lift the entire hoop up out of the water and read the scale..fish is supported across it's entire body in the net...no harm to fish, not vertical what so ever...
back in the water she goes...then after releasing simply weigh the hoop...
That is about the only way anyone can get an Idea of true weight. On a calm day you could use a stand on scale like for weighing yourself(house scale). Stand on the scale for your picture and weight at the same time. Release fish then weigh yourself again. Difference is how much the fish weighs. Of course this is not certified so its just close. But yes I like your Idea using the net. Its about as good as you can do in a boat. Kingfisher |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1245
Location: Madtown, WI | Now this is my personal opinion, based on some experience. I don't think you will get 20 different measurements if you had 20 guys girth a fish....From what I have seen, and girthed...the most you will have is probably 0.5 to 0.75 inch girth swing each way....
so a 22 inch fish might be 21.5-22.5 or 21.25-22.75. Personally, that 21.25-22.75 range is HUGE. We have girthed fish then had another person girth it (fall, cold water, kept fish in the net.) We were nuts on with each read or 1/4 inch diff depending on how tight the person got the tape.
Where I am going with this, is this. a 22 inch girth is REALLY hard to screw up a tape job and get 24 inches out of it.
Now, this is a different topic then girthed fish vs weighted fish. For the most part the calculations are usually with in a couple pounds. But there are those fish that just don't follow the calculations that well. And extremely build fish...head to toe will weigh different then a bulged belly fish with the same Girth.
However, the discussion was around girths.
Oh and by the way....scaling it in the boat still is tough...ANY type of movement (you try holding a 40 lb fish in a net up high enough so someone can read the scale) and the scale will bounce around a 1/2 to a 1 pound at least. But at least you have a better feel for what that fish was..versus geussing. And this is for those that want to know...others don't care...and if you don't care, don't rip on those that do...personal prefference.
Cory
|
|
| |
|
| Cory,
I have to disagree with you slightly. Some people girth in the water. Some girth on a bump board. A person could girth with a vertical hold. A person could girth with a horizontal bear hug. These ways could vary a girth a some. I think the way to obtain the largest girth would be to do so while the fish is being held horizontal and the way to obtain the thinnest girth might be to do so while being held vertically. Flabby fish also girth less in the water. I have tried that numerous times about 5 years ago.
Given all the variances I feel the most consistent way to girth would be while the fish is laying on a bump board. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1245
Location: Madtown, WI | hmmm...interesting, didn't think of vertical, vs horizonal, vs etc.....I guess blindly I was thinking everyone will either do it in the net...or lay the tape down on the bump board and then wrap it around as your bumping the fish. Thanks for pointing out that option.
I have been told that a fish will girth different on a bump board vs in the water/net. We tried this and did NOT see a bit of difference...this was a 22 inch girth fish. Get a grossly sick 24" and maybe there is but I haven't personally seen the difference. |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | I think Marc Thorpe maybe said fish in the 26+ range would girth more out of the water and less in...I still find that hard to believe it will be off by more than even 1/2" but I will take his word for it until I'm able to test this...the fatty above was 25.5...out of the water....
I can see how many guys might do it differently but as Cory says, I would think the 2 easiest ways are:
on the bumpboard, or in the water....if in the water and it's suppose to be less than out...still cracks me up how many 26" girthed fish are posted on the net
go catch a true 24+" and you'll know why it cracks me up.... ; )
|
|
| |
|
| Here's a thought
1. Keep the fish in the net
2. Hook a hand scale to the net
3. Weigh the fish
4. Subtract the weight of the net,
5. Forgoe the "girth" measurement
And voila... a true weight is obtained.
Repeat and rinse. |
|
| |
|
| What if you want a replica made? You need a girth, not a weight. |
|
| |
|
| mskyhntr - 12/4/2009 8:46 PM
with a new lure (cowgirl) that not even the guides had yet!
:)
Isn't that a Herbie (a guide) in the background? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 305
| land it in treated cradle or BIG treated net. have ACCURATE scale handy. weigh fish in device. subtract weight of wet device. fish is out of water for 5 or 10 seconds for this proceedure. less deslimage compared to bumpboarding/girthing it. but i guess this defeats the whole purpose...less room to claim 'mine is bigger...' |
|
| |
|
Posts: 305
| buckman-twins of different mothers! deciever-for the one or two fish per lifetime one wants replica u add the length/girth measuring to the routine. |
|
| |
|
| BN I agree with your winter debate - take it for what its worth and enjoy the photo first of all im not a poster just another die hard ski addict that looks online when not at work or on the water. Yes there are alot of guestimated girths out there but there are more stretched lengths than any ! you did get some toad fish this year and from what i hear reliable. im jealous of the #s! my point is there are fish out there with girths over 24" oh my now you want pics. yes girths and lengths do very alot and it dont matter what formula you use it does not come close to actuall weight unless you phyisicaly weigh them like you did and that is why i agree with you cause we did weigh a few toads this fall also 40+#s and have pics and vid to back up not the point the post earllier of the 53 x 28 from one the last days of the season is LEGIT ! let the musky porn and ?numbers? roll in enjoy focus on the pike this winter ! haha i also live in madtown area se ya out there |
|
| |
|
Posts: 295
Location: mad chain | Hey Brad, well said!!!!! This drives me nuts a guy gets a real nice fish and he has to lie about it. I have seen guys catch nice fish do a quick measurement a pic and back it goes (just like you should), the next on the internet it will have 25" girth. Why do guy's feel they have to lie about a nice fish, give the fish the justice it deserves. What wrong with calling a fish a real fat 48"er, there is nothing wrong with not getting a girth but don't lie about it. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1185
Location: Wishin I Was Fishin' | Here is a 50.5" x 24"
It came from GB November 21, 2009
I took a few girth measurements and it was 23" about 9" towards the head and the tail from the largest spot about in the middle of the fish which really was 24". She was a very heavy fish with a huge head. Most definetely the heaviest I have ever seen in person. I haven't girthed many fish, I usually forget in all of the excitement. The 2 we caught this day stuck around a few minutes at the boat so I was able to get my wits together and tape their bellies. I use the Musky Hunter retractable soft tape, they have them in the magazines. I was a little disapointed in the formula weights when I plugged this one and the 51.5x22 into them. However, it really doesn't matter, it was great to just be able to have the experiences.
Boy it's already to long of a winter.
Attachments
----------------
100_6616sm.jpg (180KB - 195 downloads)
100_6617sm.jpg (94KB - 188 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | dissapointed with the 50.5 on the formula that goes just over 36 lbs??? here in lies the problem...so many times guys want their fish to be a 40 lber, because of all the guys before them throwing around the term 40 lber like it was simple to hit..well in reality it takes a lot more fish than most would think to hit 40 lbs on a scale....you got a fish just a hair over 50 in the boat that is a tanker, and it probably would go 36-37 lbs on a scale...for a 50 that is a toad...I would never be dissapointed with a 50.5 going over 35 lbs!!!
there are a lot longer fish that don't hit 35 lbs that guys want to call 40 and better...
I think this thread did highlight the fact that girths in the 22-26 range (as noted by some of the pics in this thread) are FAT fish, and girths over 26"...well they can be spotted a mile away....and are a lot more rare than pics on the net would lead us to believe...
great fish JoMusky!
Edited by BNelson 12/14/2009 2:27 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 97
Location: Pickering, ON | Couldn't have said it better.
It takes a BIG, BIG fish (the likes of which most will never ever see) to cross 40lbs. By and large they have to be 53/54" and up, and carry girths of 24" or better. There's a few exceptions (the odd late fall mis-shaped 51X26 and the like) that might cross that mark, but they are very easy to spot. Contrary to popular belief/reporting, legit 40lb'ers are almost as rare as legit 50lb'ers. The just don't exist in more than a handful of waters. I would never be disappointed with any 50+" fish, be it 30lbs, 35lbs, or north of 40lbs. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1185
Location: Wishin I Was Fishin' | Yes I was disappointed because the 40# bar has been set. I have never thumped one and girthed only a few so the weight thing has only been a guess for me so far.
I am certainly not at all disappointed in the fish. It just throws a reality check to it. Now I really need to catch a 57" fatty, but the next one will mean a lot regardless of size, even a 26"er. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 723
| i personally havnt really girthed many fish at all. only a couple. so I cant argue what girths are what, only agree that fish that are slated to be 24 nxt to an actual 24 dont look like what they claim.
on the contrary, I have done the weighin the fish in the net with the scale, minus the net weight. seems simple enough, and has given us a ballpark figure to go by.
I cant see how you can mess up doing it that way enough to overshoot it unless you are bouncin up and down in 4 footers. so it seems like it works pretty good.
even pluggin them into the formulas, ones weve weighed, and taped LxG.
have seen 2 that hit the round 40 mark, and 1 that hit a 55lb mark.
take it for what its worth, take 5#'s on that fish, it was still a 50lbr.
id post pics, but its not my fish. all 3 were GB fish. plumb to the gills with shad, late fall or spring. poopin all over the boat. Ive never seen another fish anywhere else where ive fished, that carry girths like shad hoarders.
All I can say is that the 55 was huge, and both of us took the time to make sure things were right. ive argued with guys before about it, until they see the pic,
then things set home. it is what it is. a ginormous fish that Him and I will prolly never see again. that in itself is what keeps me going, knowing that they do exist.
I dont know why guys think they need to lie or inflate a number on a fish,
really, does it do you as a person any good knowing that its not what you say it is?
Ive called a 39.75 a 40, or a 40.75 a 40, usually dont need to get too technical on a quick measure in the water with a floating stick. I can see a bump board for those that want to pinch a tail and see that it could be bigger,
ive always come up a half inch short from what I prospect.
been stuck on a certain number for many many years, I'll know when that day comes, and most certainly will feel better knowing the truth, than havin to tell someone it is what it isnt.
I know that if i do legitimately hit a 60+ lb mark, it will be verified, signed, sealed and delivered, live if at all possible in a DNR truck tank.
with tons of footage, news line 9, and the pope there to swear it in.
Its sad thats what it takes to convince people nowadays.
On the other hand, pop the cloud above my head, fizzle the dream out,
and I will be just happy catching any size ski in general with the people I love to fish with.
Slimy handshakes and celebratory drinks for everybody!!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 203
Location: Alexandria, Minnesota | That photo looks huge and I would think it is all of 24 inch girth. The photo of the 25.5 inch girth above that Brad posted was caught in my boat by a good friend of mine. He is 6 foot 5 and weighs over 250.So the photo does not do that fish justice.
I don't like coming across like a know it all, but I have had some very large fished released in my boat over the last few years and I have had only two other fish with 25 inch girths caught. It is just not a very common thing to see a fish carrying that much weight. But I constantly hear about fish on the lakes that I guide on that have 27 and 28 inch girths. When you finally see a picture of these fish they just don't look even close to those measurements. I don't think they a girthing their fishing wrong. I just think they are lying about the actual girths. I mean some of these fish are lucky to go 23. I know people will still be telling fish stories long after I am done Muskie fishing, but please don't post these fish on the internet and say something stupid like 61 by 28 when it is actually a 54 by 23. I personally would rather see pictures of some real monster like that one on Muskie First home page right now.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 380
Location: Michigan | This is an awesome thread... It really puts reality back in to what is a big fish... I know i have girthed a dozen 50 inch class fish, including a couple mid to upper 50 inchers. I have not seen a fish over 24... A few 23's, but all the fish around 50 have been 19-22. |
|
| |
|
| BNelson - 12/3/2009 2:40 PM Where do I get a good girth tape? the fat fish we have boated the last few years just can never seem to girth over 24.5". Guys are getting all these 25", 26", 27", 28", 29" girthed fish...is my tape measure reading wrong? now this one did go 27" ....that I will BUY... ;- ) a regular "fat" 50+ incher is between 23 and 25 in girth. So dont worry your tape is fine! There's is nothing wrong with a 24.5 in girth! those 29in girths.. are extremely rare. Some even argue (with valid points) that they dont exist. |
|
| |
|
| He was being sarcastic! |
|
| |
|
| ohh sarcasm... love sarcasm! I'm surprised the thread remained clean of any McReferences. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 229
| There was a picture of a fish posted in the Wisconsin State Journal Outdoors section today- 12/17- that was reported as 47.75 X 28. I have to admit it is a very nice fish with a great photo. How does everyone feel about the girth of this fish? Did it make 28 or was it just an estimate?
John |
|
| |
|
| Here is a claimed 25" girth walleye. http://www.youtube.com/catsontheredcanada Truely an amazing fish regardless if it is 25" or not.
Edited by Baby Mallard 12/17/2009 11:24 AM
|
|
| |
|
| I was blessed to spend a bunch of time on a "Fathead Factory" (Mille Lacs) the last several years and only girthed a couple fish over that period of time, on the board and in the Kahuna.3 oddballs, one long fish and 2 ungodly fat fish. Just had to know. It gave us an idea of possible weight of the fish. I think of those fish now(all released) and it puts a smile on my face and I didn't even catch one of 'em. Memories not statistics.Just by catching such a creature means you've already "won". The focus needs shifting. |
|
| |
|
Location: Sun Prairie, WI | Wimuskyfisherman - 12/17/2009 10:15 AMThere was a picture of a fish posted in the Wisconsin State Journal Outdoors section today- 12/17- that was reported as 47.75 X 28. I have to admit it is a very nice fish with a great photo. How does everyone feel about the girth of this fish? Did it make 28 or was it just an estimate?John This may, and I reiterate MAY be one that some are challenging, altho I won't speak for others.EDIT: Regardless of the girth, I would have LOVED to caught it!! It was a very nice fish!
Edited by gtp888 12/17/2009 11:54 AM
|
|
| |
|
|
Fish must get bigger on camera too. They are saying 32" x 24" in the thread below. Some really nice pictures of that fish in there.
http://www.hotspotoutdoors.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/2098845/...
Edited by muskydeceiver 12/17/2009 11:51 AM
|
|
| |
|
Location: Northern Wisconsin | I agree with alot of what has been said. People even say 35 inch fish are 40 inches, 40 inch fish are 45, and so on, and these are the ones I dislike the most. I have only musky fished for 6 years and truly enjoy every muskie i catch. But after looking at all these internet fish that are largely exaggerated in size it really made my catches seem insignificant. I am completely satisfied catching a mid 30 inch musky. I know many of you are not, but why? is it because of all the large numbers you see online or in the magazines? Sure the bigger the better, but If i ever get the point (where many of you are at) where i need to lie to myself and say a musky is bigger to even enjoy catching it, then i know im not musky fishing for the right reason.
also, I caught a muskie that I thought was an absolute slob, it measured ONLY 46 inches. I was fishing by myself and I had never been happier or more excited in my life when I got it into the net. But when i found out it was only 46 inches it was almost a letdown because of all the HUGE numbers I see online and in the back of musky hunter.
Now, i really try not to compare my catches to others. I truly love and enjoy every musky i catch and hope i never get to the point where im disappointed to catch a smaller sized musky or need to exaggerate my measurements for the internet.
I have also noticed in many smaller baitshops the owners will report they are catching 53 inchers or 50 pounders regularly. For that reason, anytime i give a report to someone in person i only say it was a nice fish. If you think us musky fisherman are bad then talk to some baitshop owners or resort owners, they are the worst imo. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32880
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Glass houses, gentlemen, glass houses. Mind your business RE: girthing a fish, and those who give a rip what you think will mind theirs.
Until then, it's all academic, some images show the girth of a fish, some don't so well. Anyone...IMHO...who gets all crazy bent out of shape about a mis-measured or exaggerated fish needs to push their chair back and evaluate why that might be. The propensity to call the ball when it's really no call of ours to make has done far more damage than good...who really gives a hoot if a guy calls a 45" fish a 46?
That said, there's no good reason to call a 45 a 46 other than being afraid the Muskie Cops will denigrate because it's a 'small fish and shouldn't be measured or girthed'.
Quickly and efficiently measuring and girthing a personal trophy is a personal call, thank God. If you think it's 'your's' (speaking about us all, here), I won't listen anyway. |
|
| |
|
| Sue caught a pike and I lost a nice one on a weagle. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4343
Location: Smith Creek | who really gives a hoot if a guy calls a 45" fish a 46?
The WRMA.
As long as no one is trying to make a profit by promoting themselves and their accomplishment by exaggerating lengths, it shouldn't matter. They are the ones who have to look at themselves in the mirror. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32880
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | The WRMA is worried only about World record fish. Weak attempt at humor there, if that's what it was.
The guest comment makes absolutely no sense.
It's officially winter here on MuskieFIRST! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 697
Location: Minnetonka | Check this out...
Walleye with a 25" girth... next to a muskie with a 25" girth.
Attachments
----------------
mckay_33x25.jpg (266KB - 187 downloads)
hoyer_52x25.jpg (151KB - 193 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 4343
Location: Smith Creek | I guess our generation is so cynical now we have to question everything. I think our muskie guides/educators/role models might have some part in that. I look up to darn near every one of the notables in the WRMA, and I'm not the only one who does. |
|
| |
|
| I guess our generation is so cynical now we have to question everything.
motivation is important.
no one likes it when every fish is questioned in a way that suggests it's someone just being a jerk or whatever. at the same time, it is (or should be) okay to call a spade a spade, especially when the people doing so have firsthand experience with those kinds of fish.
the simple fact is that it DOES diminish all of our catches when fish are exaggerated.
and isn't that essentially what the WRMA is doing in a formal way? trying to inject a dose of reality into the claims about those record fish?
what would happen if the cold scientific eye of photogrammetry was applied to some of the fish pictures that show up here each week?
picture #1: Joel Michel with the rarest of rare of fish. 49.5" long x 23" girth (not 50" and not 27"!). this fish is an early-spring pre-spawn pig...and the one thing i don't recall Joel saying was that he was "disappointed" in this fish! when people claim 27" girth on mid-summer 50"ers? it's an insult to a great fish like this one.
picture #2: the latest entry in the Big Fish contest. this fish is 45"? not only does a claim like this diminish other entries in the contest, but what if it was drawn as the winner? lying matters.
Attachments
----------------
495x23.jpg (65KB - 240 downloads)
45xLie.jpg (260KB - 208 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
| Give the guy a break pictures are hard to judge.....maybe he is 8 ft tall? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 457
Location: Minneconia | Maybe they use different forms of measurement in Utah. The big fish contest is getting out of control, I'm gonna start taking pics of every 34" and entering em!
Edited by Dirt Esox 12/18/2009 3:45 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8772
| So I could enter this one as 50, then right?
Pictures don't always tell the whole story, but...
If someone said this was 45, who would actually believe it?
Attachments
----------------
is it 45.jpg (93KB - 192 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | you can enter and call any fish you want as any length or girth you want...fact. you can call all your fish 50"ers and 28" girths if you want... but then nobody will ever believe you when you actually do catch a 50...if you ever do....
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2427
Location: Ft. Wayne Indiana | I have never really understood the whole "GIRTH" thing... I have boated and have had clients boat ALOT of really fat fish. Who cares what they weigh??? They are all going back anyways. In my opinion there are 3 different types of muskies out there...Skinny..Normal and Fat. No reason to girth a fish in my opinion. What will come next...measure the jaw spread, measure the fork in the tail, measure the diameter of the bung hole... Muskies are muskies...skinny, normal or fat....besides that I don't really care if a fish has a 20 inch girth or a 25 inch girth....fat is fat, skinny is skinny and normal is normal.
Edited by MikeHulbert 12/18/2009 5:07 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 283
| The latest big fish entry looks like it's 32inches |
|
| |
|
| Dude. People measure girths for the same reason you measure lengths. Becuz they want to know. Same with weight. To each their own right??? |
|
| |
|
| the only fish that could measure 33"x25" would be a 25lbs carp not a 12lbs walleye!! Don't know why people exaggerate measurements but they do! The Washinton state record walleye from the Columbia river was i believe 33.75"x22.25" and it is an official 19.3lbs. I've personnally seen a lot of 12lbs-15lbs late nov-early january Bay of Quinte walleye and never seen one with a true girth over 20". The walleye in the pic is a nice one but no way in the world is it's girth anywhere near 25". Very close to the camera at arms length makes for nice pics but come on!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 281
Location: ROckford IL | Yeah I only got one 50 incher and she was 50.5 by 20, that was a legit girth measurement that will did with a soft tape, I do believe that some girths are just not real, people just want there fish to be bigger then it actually is, Brad gave good examples of what the girth should look like on a fish that has a 23+ girth on her, Tom Gelb had some fish he showed at the Madison meeting that were very girthy, even those were not over 26 I believe. |
|
| |
|
| Most girths of muskies over 50 inches from the Niagara River have 20 to 23 inch girth.The Buffalo Harbor will be the same in June after spawn and in late October or early November,with 20 to 23 inch girth.But if the water temps get below 45 degrees early enough in November to pull in massive schools of gizzard shad that are 5 to 6 inches long and the big hawg muskies gourge on the shad,those girths move up to 24 to 27 inches and some have been as big as 29 inches.Its the genetics of riverine muskies that are capable of getting bigger,but they still need the forage base to get there.Great Lakes Muskies have the capability to reach massive girths if the conditions are all in place. |
|
| |
|
| Larry,
I'm a little confused. Please explain a little further. You said that "riverine muskies" are "capable of getting bigger." Does that mean that muskies that live in rivers are capable of getting bigger or "riverine" muskies muskies are capable of getting bigger? Is "riverine" a certain type of muskie??? Like say a "WI strain?" Don't all strains of muskies originate from rivers? Please clarify or help me understand.
I am assuming that you meant muskies that live in rivers are capable of getting bigger? That's an interesting point. What about the muskies that live in Georgian Bay, Mille Lacs, Vermilion, Bemidji etc. It seems the girths of those fish will rival the girths of any "riverine" muskies. I am not educated on the issue or arguing but want to know more. Please enlighten me. Thanks. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 221
| I still don't understand why some people defend liars.
The fishing industry is so full of IT that it makes me sick. Apparently the biggest BSers deserve the clients because all the Pickeral Petes hang on their every word of 30" girths and 10+ fish days.
Whatever, maybe I am insane and that's why it bugs me....
Darcy Cox
Ps- The new story on that walleye is that guy measured the girth with his hands.... uhhh yeah. |
|
| |
|
| Riverine Strain(Great Lakes Spotted Strain) |
|
| |
|
| thank you |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8772
| 50inchGrinch - 12/19/2009 4:41 PM
I still don't understand why some people defend liars.
The fishing industry is so full of IT that it makes me sick. Apparently the biggest BSers deserve the clients because all the Pickeral Petes hang on their every word of 30" girths and 10+ fish days.
Whatever, maybe I am insane and that's why it bugs me....
Darcy Cox
Ps- The new story on that walleye is that guy measured the girth with his hands.... uhhh yeah.
Darcy...
I don't think anybody is defending liars. We can all look at a fish, like the hybrid picture that's floating around out there that was claimed to be 45" and chuckle to ourselves, because it's probably not even 35". I agree that the guy probably didn't measure, and had no idea how big it really was. No experienced muskie angler would try to pass that fish off as 45".
I think on some level it bugs ALL of us. A LOT of anglers are so full of crap it has turned their eyes brown. I used to fish with a guy like that. Had a low 40's fish up on dawg, raised it twice. We all agreed at the time it was maybe 42". By the end of the day it was pushing 45 and tried to eat but missed. A week later it was 47". The last time I heard him tell the story, it was "at least 48", and not only did he hook it on the 8, but he had the fish on twice and it threw the lure both times. I WAS THERE, I saw the #*#*. I saw the fish, I saw what happened, and he STILL stood there in front of me, claiming he hooked the fish twice, and added a good 6" to the length on top of it.
Like it or not, muskie fishing is a lot of stories, and swipes and near misses, and big fish that just sort of take a sniff at a bait and go on their way never to be seen again.
I think we've all seen so much BS we've grown immune to it, and don't even pay attention anymore. Perfect example -- the fish I posted a picture of earlier... Is it 45"? Nobody even questioned that fish, because to a lot of people out there who might have only fished a few times, or are in their first season or two or whatever? You tell them 45" and they just think "oh, ok. 45". Wow."
The guys out there who know? I am sure people looked at that picture and said "that ain't 45". He's full of crap..."
That fish was 40" on the nose. Camera angles and the way you hold a fish can play tricks on the mind. I've got fish that WERE 45" that look a whole lot smaller than the one in the picture does.
There are also those who would look at a picture of a fish that WAS 45", and immediately reply and say "no way, that fish wasn't even 40! Look at how he is holding it, look at his hands, look at this or that..."
Those are the same people posting pictures of 46-48" fish and calling them 51", posting pictures of a fish and saying it has a 28" girth...
Hmph. 28", eh? I had a 28" girth back in high school. I've seen a few fish that could reasonably go that big, and some that you could look at and think "yeah, that fish could actually be over that!" When I see numbers tossed around that are in the 32" range? Yeah, okay, whatever.
I have a challenge for everyone here. Take a flexible sewing tape, and find something that has a 26" girth. I don't give a crap what is is, just find something.
Then find something that has a 28" girth.
Or try this: Blow all the air out of your lungs. Meausre your chest. Take a huge breath. Meausre it again...
It doesn't take a lot of thickness to make a few extra inches in girth, does it? The difference in how fat a 27" girth looks on a fish compared to a 28" girth? Nobody can tell from a picture. The only people who can look at a picture and say the girth wasn't what it was claimed to be are people who have caught enough really big fish with girths that didn't even come close, and know how rare and freakishly huge a fish with a 32" girth would have to be.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1290
Location: Hayward, Wisconsin | Guest:
I'd like to expand a bit on Larry Jones "Riverine" defination:
"Riverine" muskies are populations of muskies that have historically co-existed with northern pike. "Most" are spotted, but it isn't a "rule". Evironment often control coloration and in fact there can be multiple colorations within the same (most often large) waterbody with multiple environments and water colors in different sections (i.e. Eagle Lake runs from gin clear west to green clear middle, muddy while clay colored east to reddish southeast).
"Lacustrine" muskies are natural populations of muskies that have always existed in the absence of pike, almost always in landlocked lakes or watersheds where pike never invaded (although some of these water systems now have pike in them and have "muddied" the water a bit, so to speak).
Hope this helps clear things up a bit. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 272
| sworrall - 12/17/2009 1:45 PM
...who really gives a hoot if a guy calls a 45" fish a 46?
Are you serious, Steve? I just can't believe someone would say something like that. I'm sorry, but that's just terrible. Where does it stop? Is an inch of exaggeration OK, but two inches isn't? Is three....four.....the cutoff?
Everything with fishing is on the honor system. Legal lengths of fish, bag limits, talking to your buddies, etc. And it's all honor, unless the warden or the WRMA, or whichever body of officials is keeping track of the true number.
So, yeah, I guess I give a hoot if you catch a 52 incher up in Canada and call it a 56.
-Eric |
|
| |
|
Posts: 7037
Location: Northwest Chicago Burbs | muskie-addict - 12/20/2009 6:08 PM
sworrall - 12/17/2009 1:45 PM
...who really gives a hoot if a guy calls a 45" fish a 46?
Are you serious, Steve? I just can't believe someone would say something like that. I'm sorry, but that's just terrible. Where does it stop? Is an inch of exaggeration OK, but two inches isn't? Is three....four.....the cutoff?
Everything with fishing is on the honor system. Legal lengths of fish, bag limits, talking to your buddies, etc. And it's all honor, unless the warden or the WRMA, or whichever body of officials is keeping track of the true number.
So, yeah, I guess I give a hoot if you catch a 52 incher up in Canada and call it a 56.
-Eric
OR, you COULD just enjoy your catches, and allow the successes, exaggerations, heartbreaks, and stories of accomplishment or failure of others be a positive and nothing more. Why does someone saying their fish is X or Y really impact YOU? If your fish are measured perfectly, then I say GREAT, you know that your fish are what you say your fish are. If someone measures or eyeballs something incorrectly, it is only a matter of them either being less skilled in measuring versus yourself, or they might be feeding some internal need of success. If your own accomplishments are somehow sullied by the exaggerations of others, maybe it's time to reassess the reasons you take to the water. Or maybe I just have bigger things to worry about. |
|
| |
|
| Why does someone saying their fish is X or Y really impact YOU?...
...If your own accomplishments are somehow sullied by the exaggerations of others, maybe it's time to reassess the reasons you take to the water. Or maybe I just have bigger things to worry about.
part of the fun of catching big fish (for at least a significant number of people) is getting to SHARE that catch.
you know that as well as anybody, Slamr, since this website lives and breathes by the fact that people are willing to do so. nothing drives site traffic more than pictures of big fish, and that's a fact...it shows how much people enjoy a little "showing off" as well as admiring the catches of others.
so yes, when people lie about the size of the fish they caught when they post a picture, it does impact everyone else who looks at it, because by unfair comparison it diminishes the accomplishments of those who share their fish honestly.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 7037
Location: Northwest Chicago Burbs | lambeau - 12/20/2009 7:00 PM
Why does someone saying their fish is X or Y really impact YOU?...
...If your own accomplishments are somehow sullied by the exaggerations of others, maybe it's time to reassess the reasons you take to the water. Or maybe I just have bigger things to worry about.
part of the fun of catching big fish (for at least a significant number of people ) is getting to SHARE that catch.
you know that as well as anybody, Slamr, since this website lives and breathes by the fact that people are willing to do so. nothing drives site traffic more than pictures of big fish, and that's a fact...it shows how much people enjoy a little "showing off" as well as admiring the catches of others.
so yes, when people lie about the size of the fish they caught when they post a picture, it does impact everyone else who looks at it, because by unfair comparison it diminishes the accomplishments of those who share their fish honestly.
Or, one could look at it as enjoying your catches, and looking on the others with enjoyment. At some point it should be about having fun, no? Does someone stating their fish was bigger than yours make your fish smaller? If you know your fish was the size it was, and you KNOW that someone is exaggerating, can you not look at this and still appreciate the size of your own catch?
Or maybe I live in my one-man utopia where I can appreciate the fish I catch without having to compare these fish to those of anyone else. |
|
| |
|
| people are...people. and always will be.
this means that to some degree we're all both noble and petty, humble and proud.
it's fine to aspire to rise above such things, but it's not wrong to compare yourself to others, in fact that's an inherently normal thing to do. telling people they should "be happy with what they've got and move on" is in many ways telling them not to be human, because people constantly compare themselves to others.
there's some very interesting research that shows people respond more strongly to whether or not they feel things are _fair_ than to whether or not it's _good_ for them. in fact, people will consistently give up something that benefits themselves in order to stop someone else from getting something better if the situation seems unfair.
so yes, the sense that someone else is lying to increase their fishing success is something that most people will predictably resent because it seems unfair.
when we do so we're just being human; but hey, keep dreaming Mr. Hythloday.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32880
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Eric,
I didn't say it was 'OK', I asked who really cares...if someone calls a 45 a 46, it shouldn't ruin your entire day because of so many reasons, which could include an honest mistake or innocent 'bad guess'. In general, lambeau made the far 'right' point, and Slamr made the far 'left'. There's reality in both interpretations, and I fall somewhere in the middle because I have to. So from that perspective, yes, I was serious.
It's my observation that some folks obsess so much over this that they become hypercritical, blasting and insulting some fish based on nothing more than their immediate reaction to the image, a reaction which usually is not very well thought out or considered for perspective, distance from the camera, etc. The hypercritical attitude alienates one from those of us who actually DO measure carefully and offer accurate girth and length measures yet get called out and insulted by the self appointed, self anointed Muskie Cops anyway, sort of like your post to me....it's that attitude to the extreme that marginalizes those who simply seek reasonable accuracy.
That said, if someone maliciously and with 'bad' intent misstates the size of a fish, it's not a good thing.
'You'? Are you addressing me with your last statement? Far as I can remember, I've not yet caught a 52" fish in Canada, nor a 56". Smaller and larger than both, yes, but not either exactly.
By the way, I don't measure my own fish and never have...ever, even all the way back into the early 80's when I had Barry Thiel do the honors on Pelican ..especially if the fish is truly exceptional. I allow someone else in the boat the pleasure and let them call the ball on tape in the past and now the bumpboard, so I never have to worry about 'revisionists' (a nice word for another that would not get past the foul language filter here) accusing me of anything. Most of the time I don't measure fish I've caught these days (just Sue's muskie if it's a possible personal best), I just stick 'em back in the puddle with an educated guess everyone in the boat is comfortable with, as do most of the folks I fish with. I ask the net man what he thinks, and go with something a bit smaller for good measure...or lack of one.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1937
Location: Black Creek, WI | Scratch the thread I recently started. This one from 2009 is much better. |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | it was a classic! |
|
| |
