|
|
Posts: 113
| I guess since someone just asked whether or not someone may keep a WR I want to raise the question as to how many of you have seen a fish that you felt was in a class by itself. For instance, I have a 55" and a 53" under my belt, both of which are great fish. However, when I think of certain fish I have seen, I cringe. On a particular spot on LOTW my Fiance` was jigging for walleyes while I was casting a reef. She brought up a walleye and sure enough a GIANT came up behind and this fish absolutley dwarfed the 55". Interesting though that this fish was not more than 50 yards from where I caught the 55" a year before. There has been two other fish that stick out in my mind, one that pulled the cotter pin out right out of my suick and stole the middle treble, and the other that followed four times. 60"? maybe, either way they were considerably bigger in mass and length than the 2 50" fish I released. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32930
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Yes, on the Goon a couple times. Much bigger than anything I have caught. 60#? Maybe. 65#? I don't know. Big, though. |
|
| |
|
| I have been lucky to see many monster fish, but three in my life stand out from being much bigger than the other monsters that I have caught so far.
All three were 60 inches plus most likely if not just shy of that |
|
| |
|
Posts: 724
Location: Southern W.Va. | Being from southern W.Va., I'm not in what I'd call a trophy area. We have a few areas that have a few mid to upper 40" class fish but there are far and few inbetween. I'm not sure if I have EVER seen a true 50" fish swimming. I've seen several fish in the upper 40" range and have caught a few, but never have I seen a fish that I can truely say was better than 50", I can't even vision what a 60"fish would look like.
Mauser  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 5874
| 2, both on LOTW.
First time I was with Brian Major near Sab Bay. He stopped at a little bay where he raised a good fish the previous fall. I had what was the biggest fish I have ever seen, follow a Ghost Tail around the boat twice! I had never seen a true 50" incher at the time, but he said this fish was all of 56-57"! He also said had he known this fish was that big, he wouldn't have stopped there with me!!!
Second time was in Muskie Alley, and I had a fish eat a Reef Hawg. Never saw the fish that left 4 big teeth in the bait, and also opened up the rear hook eye! That one gives me night terrors!
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1636
| I dont want to sound like a smart ass or anything, but can you really tell the difference between a 55" and a 60" fish in the water unless you have caught, measured, and release both on multiple occasions? These arent low to mid 40 inch fish that we see often and have caught before, and enough times to really judge. Maybe you have caught multiple 50-55 inch fish and even a 58 to be able to judge if a muskie is 60 inches or more... maybe. I'm not pointing the finger at anyone, for if I saw a fish that I thought was 60 inches and told someone, I wouldnt want them to call me a liar. I'm just saying if I did see a MONSTER fish and thought it was 60 inches I really don't have enough experience measuring every fish I see in the water that looks 50 inches or better. Make sense?
Edited by Reelwise 10/11/2006 2:34 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 85
| Totally makes sense.
I saw one on the first cast of the day a couple years ago, so I was still getting settled in, and there she was. Clearly and far bigger than anything I have ever seen before, eyeball looked like the size of a half dollar as she was there boatside on a lazy follow. How long? No clue at a length, because like you said I have nothing to compare to! Honestly, it was the thickness that amazed me. Let's just say I do not swim in that lake anymore! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 34
| I landed a 56.5"er last year and I can honestly say that I have never and probibly never will see another one that big in my lifetime. But who knows stranger things have happened.......... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1188
Location: Iowa | I saw 2 super tankers at Eagle this year and one my dad lost...60 pounds...prolly not but pushing 50 for sure and in the 52"-56" range...Saw one on Mille Lacs once too that was in the 58"-60" range just cursing...I had to sit down it was so big and we never saw it again...truly a DC-10...I think its hard to tell at times but there definetly are fish that I have seen that are hands down bigger than my biggest at 49.5" with a 21" girth...
Big Perc |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1636
| There are plenty of things that can make fish seem bigger than they are. Jumping, thrashing, gills flared, etc. Clear water can act as a magnifying glass as well. So if the water is clear enough for you to see a cruising muskie, there you go. Ever see a big bass swimming in clear water? They can look as if they are 12-14 pounds and when you catch them they end up being about 6-8 pounds. The same can happen with a Muskie, ESPECIALLY IF IT IS FAT. Not to mention the mind can play tricks on you no matter what you think. Ever get caught up in the moment? I have. So much that I dont know what to believe. Just keeping it real. I'm sure there are 60" fish out there and if you have seen one thats great, but you are one of the very few. Fact or Fiction?
Edited by Reelwise 10/11/2006 3:37 PM
|
|
| |
|
| I'd kind of have to agree with Reelwise...I mean not to say you haven't seen fish that are 60" Muskyboy..but how many over 55" have you caught?
Not picking on you..i'm just saying in general, in my book when they get over about 54" you throw out all guesses....I've seen a few right at about 54-55" but nothing bigger...if I did, I don't even think I'd try to guess for the fear of one as coming off sounding silly.
Until you catch and measure that fish you think is 60" I will just wonder if it was just a big 56" or something...a little "buck fever" can make you see screwy things!!
Most guys that catch lots of fish, say 30 or more per year consistently can pretty well judge a 35, 40, 45, even 50" in the water with some accuracy....we migth be an inch or 2 at the most off in most cases when we get a follow or fighting a fish I even say how big just for fun to see if I'm right at my fish or the guy with me....
but come on, 60". How many have ever been caught and verified that long? not many...
Once you get into super huge you throw out the measuring stick and guesses and just say, bigger than I've ever caught or seen before!
Would love to see one like that someday...in my net!
bn
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1636
| bnelson - 10/11/2006 3:41 PM
Most guys that catch lots of fish, say 30 or more per year consistently can pretty well judge a 35, 40, 45, even 50" in the water with some accuracy....we migth be an inch or 2 at the most off in most cases when we get a follow or fighting a fish I even say how big just for fun to see if I'm right at my fish or the guy with me....
An example of an EDUCATED GUESS 
bnelson - 10/11/2006 3:41 PM
but come on, 60". How many have ever been caught and verified that long? not many...
Exactly. They are guesses and guesses only. They may be that big, maybe not. Too many people are guaranteeing seeing a fish that was 58-60+ inches long when all it is is a guess.
I just dont think there are that many "super fish" out there. If there was as many as people claim to see, you would think a few would be caught. They have to eat and I'm tired of hearing the excuse stating they are just too smart to be caught. Humans are probably the smartest "animals" on the planet and we make the same mistakes over and over again.
Edited by Reelwise 10/11/2006 3:50 PM
|
|
| |
|
| it all boils down to seeing lots and lots and lots of fish a certain size then catching those same fish...most if not all of us don't have ANY experience seeing AND catching fish of the 56"+ in length..that is why IMO the numbers thrown around like 60" are a bit off as the people doing this haven't caught enough and seen enough fish in the 55" range to even know what a 60"er will look like in the water, much less out of the water for a pic....
would be nice if there were more 60"s though wouldnt it.... 
Good luck to everyone this fall . Lets to find some 60"s! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 15
Location: Litchfield MN | And of coure when you go to fish over 50inc it dosen't take much to make a fish look a hell of a lot bigger then a fish just a few inches(1-2) smaller. So what I mean is that 53inc musky can easily look terrifying much bigger than a 51inc.
Niklas |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1636
| Good point. A 48 can look a lot bigger than a 46 and a 50 can look a lot bigger than a 48. Its not just length, its thickness and girth too. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8831
| When you see a lot of fish in the same size range, and then you see one that just dwarfs what you're used to seeing, there's no mistaking it.
Is it 60"??
Depends. If someone like Herbie or Donnie Hunt looks at it in the water and says something like "OH MY GOD that thing had to be 60" I have to figure they've seen enough fish over 50" to know.
Would I trust myself to make that call? No way. I don't know that I've ever seen a 50 in real life. Seen a couple that might be really close, but not enough to judge what a 54 lokks like, much less a 60.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2024
| Well, I pretty much had exactly the same thing to say as Nelson did.
Think about it, we can accurately guestimate 30-40" fish because most of us have caught enough to do so. I have about 25 fish between 30 and 39" right now. I can guess fish in that range to within an inch. Most people that have caught even just 10 or so in that size range can probably guestimate to the same degree.
Now, how many 50s does a person catch in a year, in a lifetime? How many 55+" does a person catch in a year, lifetime? How many 60"s, etc etc? You get my drift. Even if you HAVE caught one (55-60 or w/e) that's just ONE fish. You have ONE previous experience with a fish of that calibre, to say with near 100% certainty that that fish is 60" or however big is, in my opinion, ludicrous. Not to mention factoring in things that Brandyn mentioned like clarity, wave action, time of day, etc.
I saw a BIG fish this summer. How big? I dunno, BIG. I have caught one 50+", MAY have had another 50"er hooked. 10 minutes prior to the sighting of that monster fish I released a 49". None of my 30-39", 40-49", and 51" catches give me enough basis for me to feel comfortable guessing the length of that fish. I could throw out a size range, but anyone can and it's usually different for each person. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 921
Location: Apollo, PA | I for one have never seen a Superfish. A couple of my best friends have, in Canada. My buddy told me he saw this monster follow his jerkbait and his knees suddenly started to shake uncontrolably. After the fish left, he immediately had to sit down and smoke a couple cigarettes to regain his composure. I have a lot of respect for this gentleman. Bet its cool as hell to see one. PS |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2037
Location: lansing, il | i have fished my whole life on a lake that has or had "world record potential"..with some top guys in the business...i have fished eagle lake with the best in the business for the last 7 years and seen many monsters and super tankers! i fish big fish water as much as possible, i have personally caught 3 50's myself and boated 4 and many 4 footers...i spend 40-75 days on the water every year. i am 42 years old..i have NEVER seen a 60" fish! i have seen one fish that i could not judge the size on about 20 years ago, but it was not 60 inches.
Edited by muskihntr 10/11/2006 7:48 PM
|
|
| |
|
| Very refreshing to hear some honest talk. Thank you to Reelwise and others who chimed in.
It's pretty interesting how many "super fish" are being seen by some guys, and how some fish are seen that "dwarf" mid-50" fish. How many 60"+ fish have been caught in the history of muskie fishing? Couple dozen? Yet somehow they don't seem like such a rare beast to some guys. The way some guys talk, it's almost like everyone has seen fish of this caliber. Funny stuff.
Seriously, think about how different a girthy 50" looks from an average 45". Way, way different. The proportional difference between a 55" and a 60" wouldn't be any different, and I highly, highly doubt that even the most experienced and accomplished angler can accurately guess fish length once they get much above 54". Especially when girth becomes a factor. An extra girthy 50" would likely be called a 52" or better by lots and lots of experienced anglers. How many guys have caught and measured dozens of extra-girthy 54"+ fish in their lifetime? |
|
| |
|
| One. Lost her in Canada last season after a good pulling. We had been seeing her for a few days, and knew she was other worldly. Some people say they are just happy to have danced with them. It felt like a piece of me fell of when she escaped, and really wish, even after two years, I could forget. Sometimes wish it wouldn't even have happened now. That said, I lost a fish on LOTW this summer that was in the legal range, a shovelhead. Made the big one landed the next morning look quite diminutive. I wasn't ready for it, and it was my fault I lost it. Hurt. However, the pain from last year overrides the pain from the LOTW fish. Wife laughs at me. I don't put a size number on it as I have never seen another one like it, let alone caught or hooked one like it. I just know I am not likely to see one like it again. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1430
Location: Eastern Ontario | I had one on once that was easilly 58 inches and fat would of busted the 55 pound rang easily. And I have boated dozens on 54+ muskies but only 3 went 55, 55.5 and 56. So those over 54 are rare as hell or 1 in 50+ fifty inchers even here in muskie heaven.
Now there are a lot of those high 50's fish reported that are not even close, even some at 60++. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 69
| In fishing Sabaskong off and on since early 60's,have seen some big fish,but only one that locked me up.I trully have no idea how long it was,but it wasn't 3' from the boat,and swam from the front of the boat to the back real slow after following my son's Buck.I saw all of it with a good look on girth.Trully amazing.Of course we fish that saddle every time we go,and caught a nice 47 there last year,but never saw the beast again. |
|
| |
|
| ReelWise,Dude you are correct in your thinking
To this day I cant estimate em till I tape em
Never seen one that scared me or awed me
Seen some long b......d thats as far as I call em till me reads the what me frabill protec craddles tells me
Measuring and girthing in the water gives a true measurement in its natural state and enviroment
They all look huge when they put on the big growl |
|
| |
|
| Superfish are far and few between...I can't honestly say I've ever had a truly HUGE, superfish in my sights, except one! I had one fish, on August 29th, 1992, that hit an Eagletail in the figure 8, and was beakhooked. I lost her after a 45 second battle, (that seemed like 2 hours....everything went in slow motion)....but she was HUGE. My first instincts were 62-64"s....but after some time to reflect, I came to the realization she must have been in the 60" range. She could have eaten a basketball...she was off of a famous reef down the west arm of Eagle. As I looked down on her, going into the figure 8, I saw a brown back, with the white sides of her belly sticking out. The centrifugal force of each turn, pulled her WIDE, and out of my LARGE nively executed figure 8...she'd rush back in....on the 8th turn, BANG!! She hit....just nipped it though...boy did that suck!!
She tail-walked away from the boat for about 20 feet....there was realistically 47-49" out of the water, with just her tail in the water propelling her away from my boat! The friend that was with me, later that trip, released a 53.5", VERY fat fish...we both realized how truly big the fish was I lost.
Since that day, I can say I've seen two HUGE fish, pushing 58-59"....but not sure if they truly reached 60". It is easy to get excited and think "OH MY GOD....60"er." But they just aren't out there. Ther biggest fish in my boat was a 56.5" spotted fish off of Sunset Island in Vermilion Bay. This fish was very long, and made most of the fish I've had in my boat look small. But relfecting on this fish, 6 years after I'd lost the BIG ONE, I realized how truly big the fish I lost was!!
Sorry for rambling...I agree with Reelwise and BNelson...they are very wise fisherman, and have some of the correct stuff to say. How come BNelson isn't BNelsonWise??
Donnie |
|
| |
|
| ha ha Donnie!
When someone that has seen as many 52+ers as you says a fish was 58-59" I do believe it...I just think 60" is such a crazy length to hit...I'm sure there are a few out there that might tape out ove 60"...I just think a little "buck fever" can make fish look alot bigger than they might be in reality... heck it's happened to all of us at one time or another...we hook a fish and think oh my god, it's huge, it's a monster, then maybe get it in the net and realize we may have been a bit off ...
|
|
| |
|
| I went through all the posts on this and thought everyone had some interesting comments. I can say I have caught 11 fish over 50" and two of them over 53, one being 54 and the other 55.75" . I saw one fish last year and the year before that Dwarfed them, yes DWARFED. I don't care what anybody says, I know what I saw , seeing as to how it was litererally an hour after I releaesed the my biggest, I would have something fresh in my mind to compare it to. In all honesty it bothered me because in my mind it took away the appreciation of my biggie I find it pathetic that those have claimed to see giants get instantly ripped indirectly, that's not fair. For those of you who say it is unlikley they are that big, how many of you have had a chance to put a fish in the boat over 50, none the less 54" or 55"? I am not by any means puting myself above anyone, but when one encounters fish like this it something not only memorable , but somewhat rare. There is a big difference between a 55 and 60 and anyone who says differently is kidding themselves. that is around 10% bigger. That is a big difference. How many musky fisherman do you suppose there are? I bet the percentage that claim to have seen superfish not over 50%. The truth is that these fish out there. I would guess the majority of the time they are suspended over deep water and eat at will, with no need to head for the shallows. When they are shallow ( when some of us have seen them) they are not feeding? Curious maybe? All kinds of factors that play into this. I am not saying that everyone that has claimed to see a superfish is telling the truth or as reealwise stated, maybe they get caught up in the moment, or maybe some of them have little experience in seeing fish and way over estimate them. Just my opinoin that's all. Afterall this is why we do it, to chase that fish that is bigger than everyone else's. |
|
| |
|
| Junky,the intent of my reply was not to question truths or not
Its my personal observations from seeings lots of em
Big wide ones look immense because they are broad and distort their true lengths,long ones sometimes dont look so big but some do
Muskies come in all shapes and sizes,I think I have come to conclusion that I really cant call a fish any size without measuring it
At times I can,but sometimes the humiliation does not allow me to say a word in case I am wrong.generally I am
Maybe some have seen super fish,the more I age and experience,the more confused my observation of their sizes becomes evident
Lets just say over 15 years I've seen a few Louis fish
Fish gain weight throughout a season and not all seasons are equal or have the proper elements for superior growth,In other words some years are bad growth period
I doubt there's a world record in every pond,thus far only Georgian Bay has proved without a shadow of a doubt 60 pounders exist up and only up to 65 pounds
Muskies are a game of numbers,you catch enough of em,you cross some weird things,you quickly realize its proportional to reality,once in awhile ya look at one and say she might do it,thats 1 and its not there yet and it may never be there
the myths and lore still exist today,its good and some truths may exist but lets not distort
Not so long ago the quest was 50 inches,then came 55 inches,40 pounders,now 50 pounders
The fish never got bigger in the last 20 years,they's the same size they always were since the dawn of muskie fishing.
30 and 40 poundrrs are common to some extent today in natural reproducing fisheries and becoming more common in introduced fisheries,these are the great big fish of yeterday and today and the futur
50 pounders are still a rare fish which may appear at their maximum potential weight from October on,Its a biological weight gain thing with cold blooded animals
Those that have seen em,its their experience
I have never experienced anything of the sort
Marc Thorpe |
|
| |
|
| From this post alone apparently there are lots of 60" (or within a couple inches) fish being seen out there. Some people have seen more than one in a decade. If what you are seeing is what you think you are seeing, then how come almost no one has ever caught a verified 60"er? I'm not talking about 70lbs. or even 60lbs. I'm talking about fish that measure 60 inches. Really how many verified 60" fish are there in the history of muskie records? My point is this: If people are seeing them, then someone must also be catching them. Unfortunately I know of no one who's done that in the modern muskie world. I've asked guys like Doug Johnson, Dick Pearson, and Pete Mania to name a few, how many 60"ers they've seen in a lifetime of muskie fishing and the combined answer is 0. I don't give a crap if you've caught 50 fish between 55"-58" if you've never measured a 60" muskie, than you can't honestly say you've seen one in the water! 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
|
|
| |
|
| Of course there are people out there who have seen UFO's, Bigfoot, Lock Nessie, and little green men with anal probes, but some how no one's ever captured proof of them. So I guess since that is the case it is understandable why all those fishermen out there can't seem to take photos of the 60"ers.
|
|
| |
