Posted 8/14/2016 10:57 AM (#827222) Subject: Record fish
Posts: 720
I have this discussion with my clients all the time. Say you catch an obvious world record musky. Do you call in the musky clubber guy to dispatch the fish so you can get real measurements and prevent the doubting but have to be called every name under the sun forever on every forum... OR hopefully get a good pic and let it go and be called liar forever on every forum. I'd like to know what guys would do. Maybe we need a poll.
Posted 8/14/2016 11:39 AM (#827225 - in reply to #827222) Subject: Re: Record fish
Posts: 1638
Location: Minnesota
Thats would be a tuff decision. on one hand say you cought a 65" musky knowing its a old fish and is not going to live much longer. I would rather see a musky guy claim the record then a walleye or a bass guy that catches it buy accident
Posted 8/14/2016 12:07 PM (#827227 - in reply to #827222) Subject: Re: Record fish
Posts: 2026
Bonk it, grow a less sensitive set, then create a new user name so you can troll everyone on the forums ridiculing your decision. Just for fun... The CPR fanatics may not see it will create a little space for a new one to fill. Say it's a 60... At that size, it likely won't be caught again, hadn't been caught at 59 most likely either. Probably hadn't at 58 either. And has spread her genes many times before.
Posted 8/14/2016 12:31 PM (#827229 - in reply to #827227) Subject: Re: Record fish
Posts: 32954
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin
There is actually a protocol in place to remove all doubt for a released World Record now.
Bump board the fish, your bump board will be checked for accuracy.
Carefully girth the fish.
Good clear images a must, including the release
A video of the capture and release in part or whole helps the process.
Even if one chooses not to submit the fish for record status, this process removes all doubt.
We will have a new forum covering this again here soon. Remember the fish from Mille Lacs last Fall? No questions, it was carefully documented and released and awarded at the Minnesota Muskie Expo.
Posted 8/14/2016 3:37 PM (#827240 - in reply to #827233) Subject: Re: Record fish
Posts: 3163
No tough decision here,,I'd hit that thing so hard they would hear it from Kentucky to kenora,,if here in Minnesota it would be a nice testament to the DNR and the fisheries they created . And end the whole Hayward debate,,your not killing a mountain gorilla or California condor, that thing has had over 10-who knows how many years to spread it's genes spawning.
Posted 8/14/2016 6:38 PM (#827244 - in reply to #827222) Subject: Re: Record fish
Posts: 63
Measure it,photo it and release it.I've seen 54" and 58" fish on Lake Of The Woods get handled like this and caught more than once by different anglers.Yes,they do survive to be caught again in the same area they were initially caught.
Don't over think the process too much.Just be prepared,quick and methodical when confronted with the situation.
If the fish swims away with vigour you have successfully executed the release process.
However,there are times when no matter how hard you try to do the correct things for a successful release,...something just goes wrong,...and when it does,just remember,...it's not one of your children.
Posted 8/15/2016 9:13 AM (#827276 - in reply to #827222) Subject: Re: Record fish
Posts: 517
Location: Ludington, MI
If you look at the Michigan bass fishermen, who caught their fish in late fall, they didn't have a choice. The fish died as a result of a prolonged fight on light tackle and an improvised landing effort with life jackets for a cradle. Would that fish have lived if they had 80-pound braid and a big net? Would a solo angler have been able to land it, unhook it and release it?
I guess I hope that if I ever have to face that decision that it's taken out of my hands..
Posted 8/22/2016 8:28 AM (#828110 - in reply to #827222) Subject: Re: Record fish
Posts: 8863
If I was convinced it was a legitimate record, I'd probably stuff it in the livewell and get on the phone with the MNR/DNR and see what I could do to get it verified and still be able to release it. A lot of guys will disagree with me on this, but part of my enjoyment of musky fishing is knowing there's a fish like that out there and that the next cast might just be the cast. Killing the biggest fish I'd ever seen for my face in a magazine just doesn't seem appealing to me.
Posted 8/22/2016 10:47 AM (#828131 - in reply to #827222) Subject: Re: Record fish
Posts: 101
Location: Tulsa, OK
Personally I would never kill a fish for trophy reasons. I would get some great pics/video and let her swim. As for the haters, nothing you do will ever satisfy them, so I would probably just troll them knowing how mad they are somebody else caught the fish they wanted to.
Posted 8/22/2016 11:08 AM (#828136 - in reply to #827222) Subject: Re: Record fish
Posts: 167
Location: Tomahawk, WI
I know its not what most people want to hear, but I would keep it. If its a true World Record fish, I dont want any controversy about it. Call the DNR immediately and get it to the nearest certified scale. Thats what I'm going to do. That way , our sport can say "this is our world record" and nobody can dispute it. Or, i might just take a few grainy photos and then eat the fish. Lol!!!
Posted 8/22/2016 1:04 PM (#828151 - in reply to #827276) Subject: Re: Record fish
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
tundrawalker00 - 8/15/2016 10:13 AM If you look at the Michigan bass fishermen, who caught their fish in late fall, they didn't have a choice. The fish died as a result of a prolonged fight on light tackle and an improvised landing effort with life jackets for a cradle. Would that fish have lived if they had 80-pound braid and a big net? Would a solo angler have been able to land it, unhook it and release it? I guess I hope that if I ever have to face that decision that it's taken out of my hands..
He had a choice, he chose to keep it i'm not saying that was a bad choice just that it was completely up to him. Even with the prolonged fight she had a good chance to survive. Heck, she was still trying to breathe at least an hour later at the scale.
Posted 8/22/2016 3:22 PM (#828172 - in reply to #827222) Subject: Re: Record fish
Posts: 437
I built an app that will show me all the "certified scales" nearest my current location. I have a home-made 7 foot cooler that doubles as a rear casting deck to hold the fish once I get it in the boat. I have the DNR phone numbers along with all of the newspapers and TV stations stored in my phone to call immediately and meet me at the landing and follow me to the certified scale that's how sure I am that I will catch it. #sarc.
Personally, I would most likely never keep a record fish. I wouldn't look down my nose (too much) to someone who chose too, but for me, I have no reason to keep it. There are enough good replica companies out there to make a mount that if I really wanted something on the wall I am sure they could do it for me.
Jump to page : 1 Now viewing page 1 [30 messages per page]
