|
|
Posts: 280
| Gregoire....these pics are not recent. If I remember correctly, the pike with the partially digested whitefish was from Tony Portincaso from the Churchill river system [1982-84 ??] . I'm not sure time of year it was caught but would guess early summer.
The musky with the bluegill and perch was from Cass Lake Mn. From what I remember the fish was caught in mid Oct. on the inside of a weedline in less than 6ft. of water. I recall thinking that was unusual since I would have thought that most of the panfish would have been deeper at that time of year. The fish may have fed in deeper water and come shallow to raise metabolism for digestion....???
I believe the musky with the perch was also from Cass Lake. I don't remember what time of year it was caught.
I will say that these pics are very unusual. Most of the pike and musky that I have mounted over the years have had little to no stomach content of any significance.
DougP
Edited by fins355 5/28/2013 10:40 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1106
Location: Muskegon Michigan | This really does reinforce my belief that a 60 pound Musky is one feeding window away from 70 pounds. Here is one taxidermist showing several examples of what these big fish can and do ingest in one sitting so to speak. So if 60 pounds is as big as they get whats for dinner will determine how heavy she "could " get. I have zero doubts that true 60 pound Muskies reach the 70 pound mark on occasion and then slowly digest that weight away. Mike |
|
| |
|
Posts: 280
| I very much agree that IF a 60lb fish does exist....it could easily ingest 10lb of forage at one time. No doubt that it could ingest more than that.
DougP |
|
| |
|
Posts: 280
| My personal best musky is 53" and 37lbs. When opened she was empty. No doubt that she could have swallowed 5lbs+++...?? of baitfish which would have put her comfortably over 40lbs. Based on what I have seen she could have weighed as much as 45lbs....IMHO. But she didn't ;-[
DougP |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1291
Location: Hayward, Wisconsin | In addition to "food", don't forget that "egg mass" can come heavily into play regarding weight as well. According to Dr. Bernard Lebeau, egg mass can constitute as much as 20% of body weight at maturity prior to spawning! A 50 could weigh 60 without eating anything...a 60...???
There are times and places where Muskies can be caught when they are FULL of spawn...toss in a decent meal and we have a new ball game...BUT, it hasn't happened...yet.
Many say you must have the length to have the weight...I don't necessarily agree, i.e., the Barbossa fish from last year...54.75 x 30.5 and weighed just over 58-pounds on a certified scale prior to release! I know other similar examples. I also know of one caught post spawn in late June not too long ago that was 62-63 inches long (59-inch fork length) that weighed only 49-pounds and another November fish that was 61 1/4 inches long that weighed only 43-pounds! Length isn't everything either... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1106
Location: Muskegon Michigan | Yes, egg mass plus stomach contents. I have to wonder what the Michigan fish at 58 pounds would have weighed with mature eggs in say April. My best guess is 62 to 63 pounds with eggs. Most seasons are closed in April. Ours opens the last Saturday of April. This gives us a short window of opportunity to catch an egg laden Female . Our Season also does not close until March 15th so in some of these warmer winters March fishing has been possible. My opinion is there are two times every year when the possibility is highest. Right before ice up and as soon as the ice is off. November/December and March / April. Mike |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1106
Location: Muskegon Michigan | My biggest fish was 53.5 on a bump board and weighed around 34 pounds. My wife has a 55 that was weighed in at 37 and released. No 40 pound fish for us yet. We have come pretty close though on that Antrim system. Mike |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1106
Location: Muskegon Michigan | So then, all the evidence I have seen in all of these discussions shows me that there are fish out there pushing 60 pounds empty. That when egg mass and stomach contents are added in they can and most likely do exceed 70 pounds. This window of highest weight is very short and many waters are closed during this time period. Just before ice up during winter months and just before the spawn.. This period includes under the ice and some of most unpleasant weather in the northern sections of the Muskies range. Knowing what I know now about Northern Michigan fish I feel I have a better chance at a world record by concentrating my efforts here at home.
Thanks for another great discussion gentlemen. Mike |
|
| |
|
Location: 31 | I honestly do not believe in a 70 pound muskie.
With any other animal or species the maximum obtainable size coincides with the largest known specimen… look up snakes for instance. Why not just use the same scientific approach when it comes to muskie?
The heaviest properly recorded muskie is 58 pounds, and rounding to 60 pounds does seem reasonable enough, but I also think it would take near perfect circumstances to achieve that weight as was the case with the modern day record.
IMHO anything after 60 is just idle speculation unless/until it happens.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1023
| DLC - 5/27/2013 8:15 PM
fins355 - 5/24/2013 2:31 PM
A couple more....
I'm calling bs on these two pictures, not a single tooth mark in any of those fish and no decomposition on a single one. Come on who do you take me for?
I believe it. I used to have a pic of a 48 with a full grown muskrat in its stomach. It got its claws through its stomach wall and got even by killing it. I found it floating and almost dead and unrevivable.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8782
| We know there have been upper 50# muskies caught. There have been some limited studies of stomach contents. It's not a stretch to imagine a large late fall musky, already starting to develop eggs, who just finished eating any of what's shown in the pictures above. I'd venture to say that there are muskies out there who at one time or another would tip the scales at 70#. It would have to be a freak, and stuffed full of forage at the time. But I say it's possible. I have my doubts about such a fish ever eating anything we would put in it's face, though. If it's down there pigging out on whatever, why in the hell would it decide to eat a lure?? 70#? Entirely within the realm of possibility. Will one ever be caught? That's a different story. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1106
Location: Muskegon Michigan | If a Giant Musky is down there Pigging out on forage I would think that is the best time to put a lure in front of her. Those guys who caught those fish pictured above did just that.  |
|
| |
