|
|
Posts: 1636
| fishwizard - 10/12/2006 5:51 PM
Do I believe that there are 60" fish out there? Yes, but in my opinion on the number that is likely out there, all of them have been seen by the individuals of this post.
Ryan
You are wizard, indeed!
Now someone can guess on how big a 30-50" Muskie is based on experience... now the argument that someone can guess and be right about seeing a fish that is 58-60" just because they have caught multiple 50" and even 55" fish is invalid because of the fact that they have not measured a 58" or any fish over 60". Thats right, over 60". Has anyone here ever measured a 58" muskie? If so please speak up...and I'm not talking about walleye fisherman. How about a 60"? I think we went over that already... 
Edited by Reelwise 10/12/2006 6:04 PM
|
|
| |
|
| I have 1- 58 incher and 9 over 55 this year /4 on TV,6 over 55 last year
God knows how many 50s over the years not even consider the rest over 55,ya think with a few hundred 50s I'd see 1 freak or have one scare ,Nope
I have no idea how long they are till I measure em
Like I said ,they come in all shapes and sizes,little one,long ones,fat ones and broad ones but they all look the same till your truelly measure them in their natural state
Do fish like this exist,I am sure that there are great big fish out there
I measure em in a cradle in the water,dont pinch the tail,seldom measure girth because I have not seen a TRUE over 26 inch girth fish in years measured in the water not on a carpet of a boat
Thats my way of measuring em in the water in their natural state and enviroment to get a true natural measurement
Be nice if N.A had one method of measuring em,I think we would see different size fish and some lenght and girths suddenly loose a few inches,thats my observation.
Its all un-intentional,its the method and process that create the errors
All great big nonetheless
Interesting read and perceptions I must add,tks I appreciat it
Be well
Marc Thorpe
|
|
| |
|
| Hey Fishwizard,
Thanks for bringing some reality to this topic.
Years ago catching and seeing fifties was a pretty rare event, and it was the benchmark for “Big Fish”.
With catch and release and great management from our states DNR, Fifty inch fish are not that uncommon anymore.
It seems that some Muskie fishermen feel that they have to prove something or to be someone in this sport, so they have set the bar much higher.
I couldn’t agree more that if these 60”+ fish were swimming around out there as some want us to believe, it’s funny that some aren’t caught with some regularity.
Maybe these “Super Fish” are a lot smarter than the average Muskie angler out there, or if we had a better imagination more of us could see them also.
Dave
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Like the scuba diving shirt I've seen:
"Dive naked, things look bigger underwater!"
Mike |
|
| |
|
| And please do not forgot the 4 inches rule: a 48 inches fish that you boat and measure should have been at least 52 inches if you lost it at boatside without measuring it |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32930
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I have a couple mid fifties under my belt and a replica from Rick lax on the wall of a low 50# class Goon muskie. The same day I caught that fish I missed another, at boatside after several 8's, and it was quite a bit longer. Not quite as girthy, but longer. My son was with me, and he didn't say a thing until we had dinner after that absolutely magic day. We had caught a 49, a couple mid 40's, the Big Girl, a COUPLE real 20# class pike, and swung at and missed an even larger fish in about 4 hours. While we were doing dishes, he looked at me, shook his head, and said," At LEAST half a foot, Dad." He didn't have to tell me what he meant.
I've fished the right water for twenty years looking for a fish in the 50# class, and have seeen a few. A Sixty? Maybe. Just maybe that fish was the ONE. I missed her the next day in 4' seas and a blistering NE wind when she blasted a Glider and I plain didn't get her pinned up. Never saw her again.
So I guess I've been around the block some fishing TONS of what were labeled as big fish waters, and have seen ONE I am sure was over 60". I've seen some really huge fish since, but had no immediate point of reference like I did that day. Why are the reported 60" fish not getting caught? Just a few years back a 55 was a near impossible to think about fish, but not anymore; more folks in the sport, more good water discovered and fished, and better management protecting the fish so they can BE big fish in many areas. Perhaps that mark will also become not as impossible, we will see.
I think it'd be rude of me to insist that a man who feels he saw a 60 didn't, folks who DID shoot a record buck or catch a record fish would have had the same story if a miss or loss had occured; I wasn't with the fella, and it's totally possible he saw what he thinks he saw. Bottom line is, to me it doesn't matter what anyone else thinks, that experience with that Goon fish is burned into my memory. The experience with my son fishing that day is one of the best days we have ever spent in the out of doors. I think the only day I remember as well was the day when Keith, at 16, stalked and took a heck of an Wyoming antelope at over 375 yards with a perfectly placed shot from his A Bolt .270. |
|
| |
|
| The most interesting thing about this thread is the one constant that no one seems to be catching........
Most of the people who have seen or lost a big fish have referenced a different large fish they caught earlier or later that day. As in "I caught a 52 and lost one WAY bigger later in the day" the interesting thing is these larger fish have all become available at the same time as weather and seasonal patterns come together to create favorable conditions for catching these fish.
Probably a subject for a new thread, just an observation.
BT |
|
| |
|
| And no I haven't seen a 60, I have held a few 54's and seen a few I believed were 56" no 60's.
Still looking though, probably should try and spend some time with Mr Hunt or mr Thorpe on their waters and up my odds considerably. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 19
| Wow, alot of awesome posts. awesome reading. I have to agree with alot of the previous posts in that it takes alot of experience with the big gals to know a super fish from just another big one. My personal best is a 48 x 22 and that catch is burning in my mind. I have only seen 1-2 that were bigger. I am also an avid whitetail hunter and have had the privelage of hunting trophy managed land where only trophy bucks are allowed to be shot. I could say that after years of letting small bucks go by as well as mid size bucks that I am pretty confident that I know a trophy class buck when I see one. I could only wish to have seen this many big fish. I can be honest and say that I do not have the experience to guess the length. Hell, I just want to get her in the net first. ha ha....I do believe that alot of "muskie fever" does exists. No to take away from anyones stories but they are awesome and just to have the chance to dance with a big one is what it is all about. I also think that a new topic regarding trying to establish a weather/presentation pattern when all these big girls where sighted would be an education.
|
|
| |
|
| In the past I was told about a fish that was about 72 inches long. Rumors had the fish as way huge. 5 footer for sure etc.. etc... I worked the fish for a few months. I finally caught her at full moon late in the year. When her head came out of the water she had a huge head. I knew I had caught her. At boatside I also realized she wasn't a 6 footer, let alone a 5 footer. She was in the lower 50s. I was suprised that so many people thought she was that big. It is really hard to know sometimes without actually catching a fish. It sure is fun to dream about the one that got away though. |
|
| |
|
| Everyone do the math on this one. Im not sure what equation you would use. Im 6' even and have been standing on the center of a dock which is 48" wide. Underneath me was a muskie of outragouse proportions. I could see at least five inches of its head and five inches of its tail. Stating five inches is being as concervative as possible may have been more on the head side this makes the fish to be at least 58inches. still with me. now you have to factor in that if i was able to move and look down directly at the fish from each side of the dock it would obviously be sticking out further than 5 inches, of course due line of site this wasn't possible. But i think it is fair to say she was at least 58 but more likely longer. This was on Vermillion so obviously this fish lives in a lake big enough.
This is not an exageration. this fish actually swims in the state of minnesota!
You dont have to believe this however if you think about it i wasnt fishing for it so i dont have a skewed view. I think that some fisherman do over estimate fish bot side and who ever gets a real good look because lets face it when you go into whatever boat side lure movement you prefer you are looking at your lure back at the fish and back at your lure and so on you dont get that good of a look. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 10
| Only have seen one fish that I consider a "super fish", was at Cedar lake in Canada. Was out looking for a meal of walleyes the first day/evening, so we had dinner. Our dinner budget depended on it and muskes were a sure target for later in the week. That first afternoon casting a #9 rapala there she was, she came in real lazy 6-7' from behind the lure, under the boat she went and came out the other side and never to be seen again. We worked the spot multiple times all week to hope to get a glimpse of her again. Biggest we landed that week was 45" and surely moved a few fish in the 48-49" mark, but she was by far the biggest ski I've yet to see to date. BTW, I've speared sturgeon in the past so I do appreciate the magnitude of large fish in clear waters. |
|
| |
|
| Marc,
Very nice fish, nice webpage, are most these fish caught trolling or casting? |
|
| |
|
| Go to www.1000islandsfishing.com. This guy (Rich Clark) has been catching the biggest muskies in the world for years. On one hand it certainly appears that this guy is going to break 60" at some point. On the other hand, look at all these monsters he's caught and realize that He's never broke 60". Do they exsist??? If a 58.25" exsists its only 1.75" away from 60" They are just extremely rarely and you might see one in your life if you LIVE on the water. The odds of catching her is like winning the lotto. |
|
| |
