|
|
Posts: 221
Location: Detroint Lakes, MN |
Dr. Casselman's studies don't say a muskie will or has reached 70 lbs., he claims that it's possible with his studies of growth rates.
While I do think there is one out there, agreeing with MT that it's very unlikely isn't a discredit to Dr. C.
Funny how guides are great fountains of knowledge when you want them to be, but apparently not in this case?
JS |
|
| |
|
Posts: 123
| "Just remember if there were 60 pounders we would be catching them". Maybe, but maybe not. Maybe those fish are old and seasoned enough to have limited their choice of food sources to a very specific one and are not as succeptable to lures? Maybe those fish are feeding strictly on eelpout in 45 feet of water and never going shallow where anglers are? How can anyone know? Most people who want to fish Bass in Minnesota target the reeds and lilly pads but I've caught largemouth in 27 feet of water out in the middle of the lake while fishing for other species. Fish aren't always where they're "supposed" to be.
I do find it strange that in 2010 there are muskies in more waters than ever and way more people are targetting them by a number of tactics but still not putting the quality of fish in the boat like they did in Wisconsin so many years ago. The math really doesn't add up, as most would say we're in the "golden age" of muskie fishing as we speak. So either the fish that size aren't there, or they are there but they're extremely rare and/or exist in areas where anglers simply aren't going to catch them. I lean toward the latter. Good fishing, and good luck.  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1291
Location: Hayward, Wisconsin | Interesting stuff and I wish I had more time to get into ALL of it, especially Marc's very interesting and well thought out post, although I think there is some "discussion" (not "debate") needed there too.
A lot of recent posts referring to age...The Malo fish (once referenced above), which I sincerely (now) believe was taken illegally and therefore could not be a RECORD contender DID prove two things: Muskies CAN get to 70 pounds and get VERY old...it was "scale aged" by Leon Johnson, WDNR research biologist at the time, at 33 years old. Since then scale aging has been proven (by Dr. Casselman and others) to be off to the "young" side on fish over 10 years or so and could have been off by several years on the Malo fish...who knows, it may have been nearer to 40 years old than 33!
Some food for thought!!
Muskie regards,
Larry Ramsell
Muskellunge Historian for ALL of North America
www.larryramsell.com |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32884
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | When it comes to the science I tend to listen pretty carefully to scientists.
I spoke with Dr. Casselman at the Symposium on the issue, and he didn't waver much on the data. I admit, if he changed his stance on the subject, I'd change mine....
Big picture.
Biologists ARE very interested in 'layman' experiences, I speak with fisheries folks all the time as well. That doesn't make me an expert on the subject; I still listen when the most respected scientists on the subject are asked and then answer a question. I believe a World record Muskie has been caught and released in the last few years. I believe that fish was much larger than any ever caught in the States. I don't know how big they can get, I'm not an expert on that subject. I've read about everything out there on the subject too, because it interests me. I know what the preeminent scientist IN that field told me at the Symposium and that many other highly respected fisheries professionals tend to support that learned opinion, so I'll go with that until it's proven out to be incorrect.
I believe perhaps there's a fish out there in a 'perfect storm' place and time scenario that might weigh over 70#. I don't believe there are very many....in fact, I believe there are precious few, or someone would have killed one in the last decade and this conversation wouldn't be occurring. |
|
| |
