|
|
Posts: 182
Location: musky waters of SE, WI | With all the big fish caught and released in the past few years do you think any of the records will change? For most people Catch and Release is all this sport has come to (which is good). The McNair fish, the one Jason Hamernicks client caught that would have bet the MN state record, the 59x29 everyones been talking about, and others i can't think of right now. It's like all of them have set a standard that keeping a potential world record isn't needed. So will it change? |
|
| |
|
| I hope not!
Dan Crooms ch 54 |
|
| |
|
Location: Oswego, IL | Is the grass green and the sky blue? Of course, With the hassle that goes on here with posting pictures that people can comment on, or make claims on, one of these guys here will club the s$$t out of a record ski soon enough, you almost have to for guys on here to accept it, oh and then later bash you for killing it so be careful. Isnt the internet just awsome!  I bet we will see a new record of somesort within the next two months, seems to be the year of BIG fish in a lot of species.
Edited by muskiewhored 10/14/2009 5:23 PM
|
|
| |
|
Location: Grand Rapids, MI | http://muskie.outdoorsfirst.com/board/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=53... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 182
Location: musky waters of SE, WI | Yeah thats what im guessing is going to happen for a new record, someones going to try and release one and it won't go just like the one from michigan. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 395
Location: NW WI | I just hope I'm the one that catch's it and whacks it over the head. Unlike some of the "doom and gloom/it's not cool to smile anymore' faces in the pictures of tourney winners, I'd have a perma grin on my face! |
|
| |
|
| Catch Photo Release. What a great philosophy. Done it with every muskie I've ever caught. I can't stand to see people keep, or intentionally or unintentionally harm muskies while being CPR'd. There is one fish for sure that I don't think should be CPR'd and that is the World Record. Whoever catches that fish owes it (IMHO) to the muskie world to have it officially certified as the World Record to knock the current "Record Holders" from their flimsy perch. As far as state records go, that to me is not as big a deal. I know if I caught the state record I'd whack it. Selfish? Maybe a little, but who isn't a little competitive when it comes to muskie fishing. If you want to release a state record then fine, and thank you for thinking of the future of the sport. But, if you release the world record, shame on you. By the way, until I see photos of both the length and girth on a bumpboard, don't even begin to tell me you caught and released a state or world record. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 148
Location: Northwest Wi. | If someone catches a state record or the world record and decides to give it the Louisville, I just hope they have the Nads to say "I decided to keep this fish because it was a possible State/World record". Instead of the " I worked her till my arms were on fire but she wouldnt go" story... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 371
Location: Dixon, IL | Next state record in Illinois is for sure! Several over 40 lbs from IDNR survey at sevreal lakes! I would keep a musky if its over 40 lbs and after that I would release until over 50 lbs! Nothings wrong with that! Release all muskies and keep for big personal best for your wall or break state or even world record! More 50" muskies release than ever before......AMEN! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 829
Location: Maple Grove, MN | I don't know for sure what I'd do if I caught a WR. I had one on last year that may have aproached that size and have seen her again this year. But she would probably go right back just like every other Muskie I have ever caught. For me it is just way to much fun fishing for her and taking her out of the lake would take away all the fun. She scared the heck out me the last time she showed at boatside half way through a figure-8. It took 20 minutes for my heart to stop racing.
I guess it comes right down to why one fishes. If it is simply for fun, then I don't see what good a WR is going to do for someone. If its also partly for fame, glory and maybe a few bucks for speaking and writing fees, then I can see it. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32955
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | What if the 'story' is fact? It's happened to me with fish over 50 twice. Could happen, and if it's what actually occured, I see no reason to alter the information available to satisfy the Muskie Cops. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 148
Location: Northwest Wi. | As long as the truth is told....Its all good. Some may feel that an intentional kill may decrease the value of the feat and therefore tell the story. Were talking a record with all the celebrity that comes with that. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 462
Location: Antioch, IL | To answer the original question: Oh yeah, I think many state records and the world record will fall soon. I've seen some fish recently that are just monsters and I think that the "good" things about forums like this (sharing of tactics and info) have and will continue to advance the skills of all involved in the sport.
To answer the way this post is going: If I made my living Muskie fishing my answer might be different, but I fish for personal reasons. I don't need my name in a book or my face in a magazine. I fish because I enjoy being on the water, when it becomes a chest thumping, celebrity seeking thing I just lose interest. If I were lucky enough to ever break a state or world record none of you would ever know. There are quite a few guys on here that I truly respect. I know they love seeing and hearing about fish on a pure entertainment level, as I do, but the constant grade school level bashing and "guest" slams keep me from posting fish any more. I had a once in a lifetime trip last month, but haven't shared a word or photo because of the lack of respect I've been reading lately. I would not hold anything against the angler who does catch and keep a record. It's their right.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8863
| State records probably will fall several times over the next decade. The world record? I don't doubt that there are one or two freaks of nature out there somehwere. As for where? maybe Georgian Bay, maybe Lac Seul, the St. Lawrence, maybe even Vermilion or Green Bay... Now, will those fish be caught?? That's not very likely, as I believe fish of that size just aren't spending their time where we fish for them, and they're not eating anything that resembles what we're trowing at them or trolling past them. IF the world record ever is broken, it will be a troller that does it, fishing deep over even deeper water, and trolling a bait that is too big to cast.
Then there's the matter of whether that fish will actually get thumped, verified and publicized, or will it just be slipped back into the water. A lot of guys would whack that fish. I'm not sure I would. I don't need the publicity, I don't need the scrutiny, and catching a world record fish might just take the fun out of muskie fishing... Think about it -- if you pretty much know you caught the biggest muskie you or anyone else will ever see? Yeah, that's cool, but I like the idea that there's always a bigger one out there. |
|
| |
|
Location: Twin Cities | esoxaddict - 10/15/2009 2:20 PM
Now, will those fish be caught?? That's not very likely, as I believe fish of that size just aren't spending their time where we fish for them, and they're not eating anything that resembles what we're trowing at them or trolling past them.
You really believe that with fish like McNair's from last year lurking? It's not like a 10in jake is a really deep diving bait...not to mention the one caught on a bulldawg in georgian bay this year that was 56.5 or something and just THIIIIIIIIIIIICK. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8863
| JRedig,
You have to look at the odds here. Every season we see what, maybe a total of 5 -10 fish over 55" from anywhere? The true monsters that are being caught fall short of the world record by enough where you have to figure that fish like McNair's are reaching the plateau of "just about as big and heavy as muskies can ever get"... There may be a freak out there swimming around, but let's be realistic. 55 pounds is pretty much a needle in a haystack even on the best trophy waters. Most of us will fish our whole lives and never break 50 pounds. I'm not saying it won't ever happen, or that it can't happen, but actually getting a world record class fish in the net? I am not holding my breath. |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | huh? 5-10 over 55 total ? I think there are A LOT more than that caught each season....will there be a new world record? well the current WR is a joke.... still it will take a freak to top out over that ....I highly doubt we ever see one caught and certified that beats it |
|
| |
|
Posts: 619
| uh,huh, there is 1 in minnetonka that gets caught 6xs/yr. does that count for 6? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 182
Location: musky waters of SE, WI | I also forgot the one Ryan Dempsey caught in GB. 56X33.5. I hope there is more than one of those swimming out there. Theres a chance one of them might get snagged in the circus out there. |
|
| |
|
| Gee why do you think these fish exist? CPR that's why. Now what if guy's like here in MN keep releaseing these super fish, easy, they'll keep getting bigger. 55 is the new 50, maybe 58 will be the new 55. I posted my 55 on a few other sites and the only person that doubted me said it looked more like a 57.
Dan Crooms 54 |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8863
| dcmusky - 10/15/2009 10:16 PM
[...]
55 is the new 50, maybe 58 will be the new 55. [...]
uhhhh...
Houston?
Edited by esoxaddict 10/15/2009 10:30 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 457
Location: Minneconia | Donk! |
|
| |
|
Location: Twin Cities | esoxaddict, there are way more fish than that caught between 55 an 60 every year out east and on georgian bay. Just because you don't read about them on the internet or this forum, doesn't mean it doesn't happen or they don't exist. Just google 1000 islands muskie fishing....just bouncing around the net I can find plenty of big fish caught every year that don't make it to this site or any of the other mainstream muskie sites, let alone the one's that don't get put on the net anywhere or even get photographed.
Please show me substantiating evidence of just how big muskies "can" get. Where is there any proof that they quit growing or that there is a limit to how big they can get? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1106
Location: Muskegon Michigan | To answer the question? yes on both. Its just a matter of time people. Obriens fish was 65 pounds add another 5 pounds of whitefish and its 70. Its timing and catching them when they are at thier peak weight. A 62 pound musky can weigh 70 pounds if she eats 2 - 4 pound whitefish. The new Michigan fish was weighed 12 hours after the catch. 50 pounds. She was only 15 years old. McNairs fish was freaking huge. The green bay fish from a couple years ago was freaking huge. Bristows georgian bay fish from a few years ago was freaking huge. Obriens fish documented 65 pounds. W e are talking about 5 pounds not 20. Forget the older records and look at the documented weighed fish that can be verified and we are talking 5 pounds. It will take a true 65 pounder that just swallowed a 6 pound pike or Lake trout, Whitefish or other combination of forage. To get one to weigh in at 70 pounds empty is where we all get that immpossible goal syndrome. Records include stomach contents. Its just a matter of time. My guess is that a new world record can only be caught in late fall or early spring when the females have reached thier full egg mass and fat content. Add a couple nice big baitfish and she tops 70 pounds. She can come from anywhere connected to the great lakes and few other large inland lakes but I would put my money on Georgian bay or the St Lawrence. Green bay could be the dark horse that does it as well. Kingfisher |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32955
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | JRedig,
Upper confidence limits published by Casselman/Crossman et al, and many other muskie fisheries management sources. Dr. Casselman called the next WR to come from the St Lawrence when onstage at the last Muskie Symposium. Kingfisher has it right, but it's been....how long since a confirmed 70# fish has been registered? My opinion....it hasn't happened yet. I hope it happens, and sooner rather than later.
http://www.afsbooks.org/x51011xm
Interesting video about St Lawrence Muskie management
http://upload.outdoorsfirst.com/watch.asp?id=481 |
|
| |
|
Location: Twin Cities | Thanks for the post Steve, i've read some of those studies and seen the video's, I was trying to get at a point that other's probably had not done so. Either way, that is still not definitive proof that they can't get bigger and there is no concrete evidence that bigger fish DON'T exist. I'm gonna keep an open mind that they certainly do.
Technology and techniques are still improving by leaps and bounds to aid this. Combine that with more anglers than ever who are FANATICAL and operate under a precision methodology, it's only a matter of time. This is all my opinion obviously, but I'd bet some of those east coast fish are approaching the weight to break it, but with CPR they won't get registered.
Sure would be fun to have the bonk heard across the country or an individual state... 
Edited by JRedig 10/16/2009 11:43 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8863
| Yes, there are a lot of big fish caught, but how many are over 55 pounds? How many break 60 pounds? Granted, a lot of them are kept quiet, but we're talking about a 70 pound muskie here. O'Brien's fish was 65 pounds. How many fish over 65 pounds do you know of since that fish? And that was over 20 years ago. 5 pounds isn't much in terms of what a 65 pound muskie would have to eat. Kingfisher has that right. But how many 65 pound muskies are caught every year? And is a 65 pound muskie that just ate a couple 4 pound whitefish going to eat a 10" jake? or anything else for that matter?
I'm not saying it won't ever happen, I'm not saying that there aren't a couple muskies out there pushing 70#. But the odds of that fish actually being caught, and verified? Like I said I am not holding my breath.
Edited by esoxaddict 10/16/2009 12:10 PM
|
|
| |
|
Location: Des Moines IA | Will a 70+ pound fish be caught, most likely. Will it be kept, and if so will it be correctly verified, most likely not. That's my 2 cents. If I caught it, you can bet it would get thumped, because I am a ego maniac! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 311
Location: Ontario | Redig come N next season, we'll give you a look at some water. |
|
| |
|
Location: Twin Cities |
Kinda funny to find some old threads: http://muskie.outdoorsfirst.com/board/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=30...
Edited by JRedig 10/16/2009 4:18 PM
|
|
| |
