|
|
Posts: 50
| http://www.fishinfo.com/fishing-articles/article_604.shtml
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1453
Location: Kronenwetter, WI | That's crazy talk, right there....crazy talk, I tell 'ya!
Congratulations to the angler. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 425
| WHAT!!!!!!!!
Congrats to the angler!!!!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 313
Location: Bemidji, Lake Vermilion | Great catch!! They do exist, the mythical 60inchers! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 567
| thats a seriously looooong fish. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13
| it's possible.. Nice fish either way. But why is it that all the 60+ inchers seem to come out of Vemillion? 60 is the new 50!  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2865
Location: Brookfield, WI | 10 K - 11/8/2010 6:26 PM
it's possible.. Nice fish either way. But why is it that all the 60+ inchers seem to come out of Vemillion? 60 is the new 50! ;)
The forage in the lake has allowed the Wisconsin Strain fish stocked there to thrive. What's happening in Vermilion is the result of a perfect combination of environment and genetics. C & R is a contributing factor. It's similar to the amazing growth of largemouth bass in California.
It can happen with many species. For instance, I have a very specific genetic makeup. I am big boned and have glandular issues. Couple those genetic traits with my home forage base, which as of late has been rich in bacon double cheeseburgers, pizzas, Reeses Peanut Cups, and other candies that make an appearance every Fall. The combination of these factors can result in unprecedented growth in the girthal regions.
It's science.
Kevin
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Please note the angler who caught this fish made no claims here at all. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 956
Location: Home of the 2016 World Series Champion Cubs | Yes long and lean but still a nice fish. Congrats.
Conspicuously absent (at least in my opinion) in the article was the bait used. He got all his "plugs" in inlcuding the hooks by Muskies Innovations.
Karl |
|
| |
|
Posts: 69
| Guest - 11/8/2010 7:43 PM
Interesting, a 60" fish that only weighs 45 lbs. in October. It would seem much more likely the fish was 55" with a slightly above average girth of about 25.75".
At 60" and 45 lbs. this is one very skinny October muskie. If this fish had just an average girth of 27" which would be considered average for a 60" fish, the fish should weigh over 54 lbs. At 45 lbs this fish would have a girth of only about 24.5" which seems very unrealistic considering the fish should be developing a fat layer as well as an egg mass.
An average girth on a muskie is about 45% of it's length. This fish would have a girth of only about 40.8% of it's length which I feel is next to impossible in October.
I'm definately NOT convinced this fish is 60" and feel it's just another 45 lb. 55"er.
I agree, looks more like 55 to me, but still a great fish |
|
| |
|
Location: Twin Cities | Guest - 11/8/2010 7:43 PM
Interesting, a 60" fish that only weighs 45 lbs. in October. It would seem much more likely the fish was 55" with a slightly above average girth of about 25.75".
At 60" and 45 lbs. this is one very skinny October muskie. If this fish had just an average girth of 27" which would be considered average for a 60" fish, the fish should weigh over 54 lbs. At 45 lbs this fish would have a girth of only about 24.5" which seems very unrealistic considering the fish should be developing a fat layer as well as an egg mass.
An average girth on a muskie is about 45% of it's length. This fish would have a girth of only about 40.8% of it's length which I feel is next to impossible in October.
I'm definately NOT convinced this fish is 60" and feel it's just another 45 lb. 55"er.
Ever heard of a bell curve? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 697
Location: Minnetonka | Guest - 11/8/2010 7:43 PM
Interesting, a 60" fish that only weighs 45 lbs. in October. It would seem much more likely the fish was 55" with a slightly above average girth of about 25.75".
Looks like a 60x24.5 to me. 24.5" girth is enormous, nothing average about a 60x24.5. Congratulations to the Walsh boys. Awesome fish.
|
|
| |
|
| Doesn't look like 24.5" x 60" to me. 24.5" girth is extremely skinny, far below average for a 60" fish. |
|
| |
|
Location: Twin Cities | Guest - 11/9/2010 10:42 AM
Doesn't look like 24.5" x 60" to me. 24.5" girth is extremely skinny, far below average for a 60" fish.
Do you know how they come up with an "average"?  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 458
| Nice fish!
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 3147
| Manute Bol,,,,member him?????
he was 7- 6 3/4,,,,did he even have a 34 inch waist????
fish are different????
Manute Bol could have NEVER been that tall despite what the doctors scales say
or is it just simply the way it is,,,
with all these genetic rules/laws Im surprised theres still freak shows at the state fair  |
|
| |
|
| What we have here is a fish that is not proportionally correct for the measurements it is said to have. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with genetics or anything else.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 21
Location: Erie, PA | According to both Casselman & Crossman's weight formula a 60 inch length by 23 inch girth weighs 45.27 lbs. Crawford"s weight formula for 60" by 23" gives a weight of 45.20 lbs. Maybe it did measure out at 60". |
|
| |
