|
|
| - Length?
- Girth?
- Weight?
Thank you  |
|
| |
|
| Probably the one caught by Ed Beers November 30 on the St. Lawrence river.
It was reported to be 59" X 28" and weighed 56#. Capt. Bob Walters was the guide. Pictures are on his website. |
|
| |
|
Location: Sun Prairie, WI | Oh boy, be prepared for possibly many different opinions as people will pick apart reported lengths, girths, and weights and the methods used to record them. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4080
Location: Elko - Lake Vermilion | 60X29= BIG
I can't divulge any more info, as I will be hunted down and killed.......BaaaWaaaaahahahaaaaa.....
Let the fun begin!
Edited by Top H2O 12/27/2010 11:13 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 717
Location: Grand Rapids, MI | Top H2O - 12/27/2010 12:12 PM
60X29= BIG
I can't divulge any more info, as I will be hunted down and killed.......BaaaWaaaaahahahaaaaa.....
Let the fun begin!
There's no such thing as 60"ers. And a 60"er couldn't have a 29" girth. A muskie can only have a girth that is 45% of it's length. That would give it a 27" girth. But that all depends on if you measure it in the water, or on the floor.  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 20258
Location: oswego, il | Ello Beasty!
Attachments
----------------
 061910 006.jpg (42KB - 195 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2865
Location: Brookfield, WI | I have no idea how big the biggest muskie caught in 2010 was, but rest assured it was a Wisconsin strain musky. They are the largest when allowed to grow under the proper circumstances. Few people realize that St. Lawrence River fish are Wisconsin strain. Stocked there by the Oneida Indians hundreds of years ago during a one time easterly migration of the tribe.
Kevin |
|
| |
|
Posts: 829
Location: Maple Grove, MN | OK, I'll bite. Why would the Oneida Indians want to stock the St Lawrance with Muskies? And how would they carry them that far? We all know that WI strain Muskies can get really big. Just the fish in Mille Lacs prove that out. Whether the fish are WI or Leech Lake strain, it doesn't really matter to me. They are all fun to catch in my book.
There were a number of very large fish caught and the fact is that the largest may not even have been reported. No one knows for sure what the largest fish was. Maybe the largest reported fish..... |
|
| |
|
| JimtenHaaf,Muskie Girth is not limited to only 45% of length.I've seen many muskies under 55" that had a girth of 28",one 50"er had a 29" girth from Lake Erie.
There are many Big Muskies caught & released every year that are Bigger then the ones Reported,I know of two that were bigger then any reported this year.There are many muskies over 57" that never get reported at all,those fishermen do not see a need to give up information to bring in a crowd!
Capt. Larry D. Jones |
|
| |
|
Posts: 717
Location: Grand Rapids, MI | Larry, I'm well aware of that. I was just refering to some old posts that have taken place here over the past few years where that argument was used. I was just making fun of it. Hence my little *winking* guys. All in good fun, my man. I know of a fish that was 55.75 x 27 by a friend of mine. That is 48%. And by looking at the picture, I would've guessed more like a 28" girth. And just look at Dale's fish! I know you yourself catch hawgs monthly that blow that theory out of the water. I was just trying to keep the mood here light, that's all. As I know this thread will soon go to pot.... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2361
| Larry Jones - 12/28/2010 8:24 AM
There are many Big Muskies caught & released every year that are Bigger then the ones Reported,I know of two that were bigger then any reported this year.There are many muskies over 57" that never get reported at all,those fishermen do not see a need to give up information to bring in a crowd!
Capt. Larry D. Jones
Hmmm, evidently somebody gave up some information. I'll take a little pepper with that too, please. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 556
| Yes many big ones go unreported and all you have to do is view the comments made by many when someone does report a large fish to know why---I have 2 that I know of and have seen proof of along with the fact they were caught by friends of mine that never made any web boards---A 55 1/2 x 26 and a 57 x 29---Yes large fish and caught where many here have fished but they don't want LOCATION, Bait , or time of year revealed--so they will stay hidden until the fisherman themselves choose to let the info and pics out. I would have to believe that most of the largest fish caught by experienced Musky Fisheman go unreported--and I hope it stays that way ! And I also do not care what strain of fish they are or what Indian Tribe planted them there. HA!!!!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32934
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Darn those anglers who post images of big fish to this evil website---that awards a lucky winner a free Lax Replica of their released Muskie---it most certainly will ruin muskie angling as we know it. Oh...that's right, we don't require the angler to disclose the water where the fish was caught, that's right....
Posting all sorts of things here doesn't seem to bother people when they need to sell something on the BST board, get a question answered about a gear or electronics question, or enjoy one of the many other benefits of a free visit here. God forbid anyone posting a big MN, WI, Ohio, MI or Canadian fish here, or perhaps even one from the Larry...no one has a clue those fish are there and the rush to go would clog highways for thousands of miles.
|
|
| |
|
| Only problem is if certian persons post that big fish picture,it will be known right where that fish was caught and the meat hunters will come!
Capt. Larry D. Jones |
|
| |
|
| Honestly, what were the biggest fish caught this year? What was the biggest fish caught per state? WI, MN, MI, NY, etc... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2361
| esox911 - 12/28/2010 5:30 PM
Yes many big ones go unreported and all you have to do is view the comments made by many when someone does report a large fish to know why---I have 2 that I know of and have seen proof of along with the fact they were caught by friends of mine that never made any web boards---A 55 1/2 x 26 and a 57 x 29---Yes large fish and caught where many here have fished but they don't want LOCATION, Bait , or time of year revealed--so they will stay hidden until the fisherman themselves choose to let the info and pics out. I would have to believe that most of the largest fish caught by experienced Musky Fisheman go unreported--and I hope it stays that way ! And I also do not care what strain of fish they are or what Indian Tribe planted them there. HA!!!!!
I'm a thinkin you're right, these guys fish for these things all their life, catch their biggest one ever, and don't tell a soul, but......wait, they must have at least told you or YOU wouldn't know about them, so evidently there was once again some "reporting" going on.
I'm not doubting anybody, but an unverifiable story, boils down to a ......story.  , biggest one of the year? kind of hard to identify unless it was weighed, I just accept that big ones are caught, and not really worry about end sizes. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 50
| I personally know of two 58's that were caught. One on LOTW and one on Lac Seul. I even have a picture of the 58 on Seul. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 556
| There is no doubt there are so many large fish caught that are not talked about--The 2 I know of are friends / occasional fishing partners of mine--They are way more Hard Core than I am and have work schedules that allow them to fish all over the midwest and for weeks at a time. Simply put they have the $$$ to fish when and where they want. They have chosen not to show their catches and even though they are members of this site they mostly just sit on the sidelines. I am lucky enough to be inside their small circle of fishing friends who have seen the fish--the fish are real--just not spread around on the internet boards. Ther is noway to know for sure what the largest fish caught could be---I just like knowing the fact that there are many more large fish out there than we know about---Keeps the thrill of the hunt alive for me anyway. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2361
| Oh wait, there goes my detector, dinging like crazy again!!!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| 58" incher taken out of LOTW? LOTW doesnt hold those kind of superfish, have to go to eagle for those |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1767
Location: Lake Country, Wisconsin | I did see a picture of a 58" LOTW fish this year on a Minnesota fishing site, the length did look legit but the fish was incredibly skinny and looked like an old fish that didn't have much time left on the earth. Not sure if that is the fish you guys are referring to or there is another one.. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 402
Location: Eagle River, WI | ugghhhhh........this again. I'm sure it's bigger than any I caught this year. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 999
| Im just being sarcastic after reading the LOTW vs Eagle post on Fishing Reports/Destinations. |
|
| |
|
| Why has the Musky fishing been so bad in the Eagle area the last few years? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 14
|
Edited by Musky Art 6/18/2012 12:53 PM
|
|
| |
|
| Right on brother!!!! son catches a 58, 2 years back... doesn't brag....just teases me about all the big cats he catches on the croix....cant be my son ,,,,lol |
|
| |
