|
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I'm over in LaCrosse at a sports show waiting for the show to open on this frigid morning. WOOW it's cold out there..
During the last few seminars I did at the shows, I asked the crowd to raise their hand if they had a legal muskie to their credit. Most everyone did.
Then, I asked them not to lower their hands until I hit a number larger than their personal best. No hands were still up when I hit 50" except ONE.
I got to thinking about that. Most anglers don't have much opportunity to travel to the Muskie hot spots across the country, and are fishing muskies locally for the most part. Those who live in the meccas of the sport....well, they are pretty lucky. Point is, if you want to catch really big muskies, you need to fish where there are really big muskies.
But what about waters where the fish cannot reach that somewhat sky pie-ish mark of 50" or more?
Dr. Casselman said it best in his Symposium presentation. In a nutshell, he stated that on lakes where the fish reach 45" max, that fish is a true, unquestionable trophy. I'll take it a step further, and propose that if an angler fishing those waters catches fish in that category with regularity, that angler is extremely accomplished and should be as proud of those 44 to 45" fish on his/her waters as a Guide on Mille Lacs is with a year of several over 50.
What REALLY is a true trophy? From Spider lake in Oneida County, it's this fish...and deserves as much WOW factor as a 56 off of Eagle.
Perspective, I guess...do you fish where 50" fish are very very rare? If so, what's a big fish from your local waters?
Attachments
----------------
 IMAG0033.JPG (107KB - 249 downloads)
IMAG0035.JPG (104KB - 211 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1764
Location: Ogden, Ut | I totally agree with you Steve, designation of a fish as a trophy is an extremely variable benchmark. It is also a very personal issue. I believe there's a whole suite of variables involved in getting a fish to reach it's maximum size; not the least of which is location, location, location. For me, living in one of the more non-traditional muskie areas imaginable, a true trophy may just be getting one here. That does seem to be the goal of many of the people that I get to fish with. But having caught a few, I do see myself longing for fish that hit the mid to upper 40" mark (40" is minimum length limit here; and they're all tigers). Trophys? who know, but they are for me.
S. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 90
Location: ne53 | I agree that each body of water will produce its own class of "trophy" fish. I probably look at our (Nebraska) mid 40" muskies the way the northern muskie states would look at their 50" and over fish. Nebraska state record Muskie from 1992 was 41 pounds caught on a Shad Rap, state record Tiger from 1991 was 33 pounds caught on a Rat-L-Trap. The Nebraska Game and Parks Commission considers any Muskie/Tiger 40" or longer and released back to the water to be eligible for a "Master Angler Award". I'm not saying we do not have any 50" skis in our state, but they are going to very rare and particularly very special. Looking at Master Angler records reported to the game and parks from 2003 to 2005, (they are a little slow at record keeping) there were only 21 reported awards with the largest being a 48" tiger. I doubt that is enough incentive to merit a visit from Sorno. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1764
Location: Ogden, Ut | jpine - 2/10/2008 9:21 AM
Looking at Master Angler records reported to the game and parks from 2003 to 2005, (they are a little slow at record keeping) there were only 21 reported awards with the largest being a 48" tiger. I doubt that is enough incentive to merit a visit from Sorno.
Don't count on it... 
S. |
|
| |
|
|
Everyone's answer here will be very different, and the definition of "trophy" is so personal.
For some, it's just hitting a bench-mark size or length.
For others, it's about the where and how of the catch that make it a trophy.
In my "home" area, a 50" fish is very reachable, and most angler's I know have done it, some multiple times.
For me, a true trophy status comes at 48" in a natural, non-stocked lake.
That doesn't mean I scoff at stocked lakes, or you shouldn't be proud of catching stocked fish.
But at the end of the day, I'll take a natural over a stocked fish. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 97
| Very interesting topic, and its something I have thought about quite often. Most of my fishing is done in Vilas/Onieda, in addition to a week in Cananda each year. Its no secret what Canada can spit out, so I won't go there, but in Wisco I don't believe I have ever seen a 50" fish (about 15 years experience). My biggest caught is a 47 1/2", and I can really think of maybe 4 or 5 that I would say were in the 48" class. Me personally I would say 44-46" fish to be a very repectable fish for the waters I fish, and 48" to be the "trophy" for up there. obviousely there are bigger, but from what I have seen with my own eyes (4-5 48's in 15 years.....I'm setting that as the bar).
It's funny because I bowhunt for deer alot, and am lucky enough to have access to some prime land. I set my personal minimum at 150", so in a way its almost like my deer situatution is like musky fishing a Vermillion, Mille lac, LOTW or whatever. So I think I have perspectives from both side, in the fact that if I run across someone from Wisco who is regularly boating fish in the upper 40's I will tip my hat. Whereas, someone down here who is consistantly dropping 1 1/2 year old deer, that's like bragging about 36" ers from LOTW.
My 2 cents
|
|
| |
|
| This is a great topic...I recall when I guided I took two guys out on Kinkaid...In a day and half they boated 7 muskies...They were actually disappointed because none where over 45inches. It kinda baffled me at the time, but people have some pretty interesting expectations these days. Having spent a decent amount of time fishing all over the country and Canada, that if you want a giant sometimes you are going to need to travel to get it done... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 354
| I might be different from most but I just always seem to think every fish over the 40" mark is special. It just seems once they reach that size there is a whole different level of fight to them.
Edited by greenduck 2/10/2008 11:18 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 232
Location: Sun Prairie, WI | To me, and up until now my limited time to fish ( I retire March 28th) any Muskie I catch is a tropy and I get a complete thrill out of it. To me it is the experence, not just the size. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 476
Location: WI | For Wisconsin, I'll consider any fish caught over 45" a good fish, and a fish of 48" or better a trophy. I'm still trying to get a 48" out of Wiscosnin, my largest is at 46.5".
For Minnesota, to me, any fish over 50" is a trophy, but another one isn't going to be a replica until it reaches 54" or so.
I'll take a fish anyday, and after a day of casting and getting nothing to bite, a 38"er can become a trophy that day!
GotOne |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1184
Location: Iowa Great Lakes | Since my muskie experience is so far limited to Iowa, seeing whats avalible to us in our waters I would have to say 50". |
|
| |
|
Posts: 3480
Location: Elk River, Minnesota | On my home waters, a mid 40's fish is quite rare...so...a 45 on those waters is considered a trophy to me. There are bigger fish in the lakes, but with very limited pressure, and with one person having fished waters for over 50 years, and he is right at, or just under 10 fish at 50" or larger. I have managed 2 at 44" with my wife nabbing a 44" as well. I have seen a couple of giants in my 28 years on the water, but have yet to put hooks into either of them.
I have been expanding my home waters to an extent and now have a 46" from a different lake, but is part of the same system of lakes.
My day is coming...but I do think Steve Worrall hit the nail on the head squarely...sometimes you just need to put yourself on the waters that contain bigger fish to get to that magic 50" or higher mark. On my lakes, a fish of that size is a True and treasured trophy...and...a fish of that size maybe come every 5 - 6 years or so...to one lucky angler on the water...
Steve |
|
| |
|
| I took an eight year old kid out with me about two years ago and he succesfully boated a 35 incher. And that was a trophy to him.  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1936
Location: Eau Claire, WI | Steve,
This is a good topic and quite valid, many good replies and thoughts. This is something I've talked about with friends and colleagues over the years based on the all the variables...
Trophy, I suppose, is in the eye of the beholder in the most realistic sense.
Your first, your personal best, a best for body of water potential, etc.
When I was guiding on a regular basis I had people with 34 inchers that smiled just as much as the guy with the 493/4, which was my personal best for putting soemone on a large fish in my home waters. They were all trophies to those individual people at that time.
It's most about memories, you know...like catching a nice one with your buddy just to have him have to cut a hook out of your finger while you're attached to the bait that's attached to the fish... Memories are what makes it speacial or a trophy.
Way too much emphasis on the big Five-0 these days. But if I lived or fished regularly on water that produced numbers of that class of fish, then I guess that might be the benchmark... But here at home, I've told people for years, you get one in the net over 44-45 and you've done something most have only wished to do on these waters.
Travel safe Steve... Brutal here in Eau Claire right now. Glad I stayed back from the Milwaukee show with this weather system.
Best,
Curly |
|
| |
|
Posts: 315
| i think a "trophy" is a personal thing more than anything. if you are able to fish waters a lot that hold trophy fish and are seeing and sometimes catching fish in that class then your "standards" for a trophy class might be different than the guy/gal that doesnt have the time on the water or the waters to fish that hold those fish at all
-b-
btw my personal best is a 45" so i guess a trophy to me is anything above that |
|
| |
|
Posts: 40
Location: United States | Just as in real estate, it's about location, location, location. I grew up muskie fishing in northern Illinois, lived in Tomahawk Wisconsin and then lived Maple Grove Minnesota. Today, I'm back in northen Illinois (sucks to be me).
In Illinois, to me 45 to 47 inch fish should be considered the "trophies". Very few 48 to 50 and over 50 are very rare. In Wisconsin, 48 to 52 inch fish to me were the "trophies". In Minnesota, over 50 inch fish to me were the "trophies". This is based upon my experiences.
Interesting enough, my average length fish from both Illinois and Wisconsin are right at 36" and 40" from Minnesota.
I think my younger brother said it best - "You've ******* ruined me!!" He had only ever fished in Illinois and his personal best was a 44". This past summer we took a trip to northern Minnesota and he almost beat his personal best by 10"!! A 53 1/2", 38 1/2 lb slob. In Illinois, that fish would have been a new state record. Gets right back to location, location, location!!!!!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 376
Location: Lake Vermilion Tower, MN | The word trophy is a
word I get sick of hearing these days.
There was a time when just getting out and catching a Muskie of any size was enough for most anglers.
Now all of a sudden everyone seems to rate the experience by how many fish are at or over that 50" mark. It's as if the trip was a complete failure without that "Fish of a lifetime"
Trophys may be great for your ego, but they won't change your life, or change the way people think about you. Fishing should be it's own reward and "trophys"
are just a little gravy to pour over the total experience.
"Ace"
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 7
Location: Pittsburgh, Pa | your first |
|
| |
|
Posts: 906
Location: Warroad, Mn | On the LOTWs I always think anything 48" or better is a true thophy. There are many caught every year that are this big or bigger, but a 48"er from the LOTWs is a true trophy. Lots of people who have fished LOTWs for years are still looking for their first one.
Doug Johnson |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1529
| onb my waters a 50 turned heads a decade ago. on st clair we are blessed. but as you stated doug. catching a 45 in waters that only holds that size IS a true trophy. we are driven to believe its all about the fish. as one gets older, and wiser it becomes apparent. its the hunt, the fun with friends and just plain enjoying the outdoors. seems many forgot that part. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1185
Location: Iowa | It is held in the eye of the beholder...
Big Perc |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I'm not really talking about what is a PERSONAL trophy to most, although that does enter into this.
I believe a 41" fish out of water that doesn't support fish larger is just as much an accomplishment as a 54 out of Mille Lacs. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1185
Location: Iowa | very true...just like a 45" plus fish out of most iowa waters would be considered a trophy to many...it all depends on a lot of variables that no one is ever going to agree 100% on...that's just the way us muskie fisherman are wired...
Big Perc |
|
| |
|
Posts: 720
| Hi Steve,
I'm answering this in all seriousness. My answer to your question would be last one I boated. I have always loved the chase. I know that catching a 50" fish is very special and something I finally got the oppurtunity to do this past season. I've fish many years for that fish and I truly feel like that was a trophy fish for me. I also remember catching a 43.5" fish after a week of struggle and that fish felt every bit as much a trophy as my 50" did.
We are so blessed to chase this fish on so many different bodies of water. I always thought that the 50" mark would be a pinnacle for me. Sadly, it wasn't and maybe sadly is not a word I would use (perhaps my wife would) but rather it was another story or adventure in this second life of mine. At any rate a Trophy is in the eye of the man or woman on the other end of the line.
Great question Steve,
Dave |
|
| |
|
Location: Athens, Ohio | Here's a shot of a trophy fish caught by a trophy angler. Thanks to Lazer for forwarding it to me, m
Attachments
----------------
mattklyhold.jpg (62KB - 185 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
| a trophy in Madison waters to me is 48" and above...they are rare and not many get caught per season with noone yet to have a verified 50" plus... yet...
In Northern WI where I fish quite a bit I still use the same 48" as a the trophy mark...in MN to me a 50 is a great fish, it's the mark I shoot for every trip but with how many 50s are getting caught over there a 50 might not be the trophy number it once was...52 now?...it all depends like you and others have said it's where you are fishing....
you can't catch what isn't there...
|
|
| |
|
Location: 31 | I see where you're going with this Steve but I tend to disagree with the different waters and 41-54" comparison. Maybe the gap is too great for me to get my mind around it?
Starting at the top, a 54" is a true trophy anywhere and every angler reading this would consider the day a huge success after watching one paddle off. Not so with a 41"... even if it was from a farm pond. Why? Because we are aware that muskies can get considerably larger.
Granted, not all waters contain 54" and we must lower our trophy expectations on these waters, however, therein lies the difference... lowered expectations. Also, of equal importance to me, a true trophy muskie should be able to test tackle and skill to qualify and although low 40's can be scrappers, they are not worthy adversaries for today's typical muskie rod and reel.
I would have to say that an anglers overall experience plays more of a role than the body of water in determining what a trophy is - though it's a very subjective subjet- it is more along the lines of one's own personal thoughts than the body of water IMHO.
With that said, I still think it's a bit of a stretch compare a 41" and 54" as having equal trophy qualities.... by that reasoning the 41" is equal to a 60" St. Lawrence. Good debate... I'm in... as long as you don't call me a muskie snob because I truly appreciate em' all! |
|
| |
|
| How can this topic be discussed without anybody mentioning pressure or keeping fish.
I fish quite a bit in Indiana. On a normal day on Webster, you need to get there early to get a spot in the lot. Delayed mortality and people keeping fish also goes into the lack of 50s.
It is not uncommon to see 30 boats on Webster lake that has 500 acres on the main lake. Now look at what that pressure ratio would be on LOTW. You would be talking about 1 million acres (approx), you are now looking at 60,000 boats on a given day. With delayed mortality and people keeping fish, obvioulsy the number of trophies caught immediatley at the numbers will be huge, but after time and harvesting, the yield of 50s will be less and less over time.
What does Eagle have, 50,000 acres. For how long do you think Eagle would be giving up giants over time with 3,000 boats pounding the water day in and day out.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 3147
| here in Minn I think its 52' |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8780
| How about:
"large enough to be considered extremely rare on the body of water on which you caught it"
Edited by esoxaddict 2/11/2008 1:09 PM
|
|
| |
