|
|
Posts: 366
| Ok, so it is a regular occurrence that a fish pic is posted and a measurement is stated and the criticism begins, and then the criticism is criticized and eventually the thread is either locked or rambles on for a while until only a couple people continue to carry the torch in order to cover for bigger personal issues. So that being said, it is possible to have a discussion about measurement accuracy that doesn’t involve specific fish and/or anglers? Not sure it will fly, or remain civil, but we’ll have to see. Maybe no one gives a care to discuss hypothetical criticism, but I just find it fascinating how it seems to be such a strong part of muskie fishing, maybe more than any other species that I’ve ever witnessed. Is the mythology, rumor, exaggeration, secrecy, speculation, and/or scrutiny a good part of muskie fishing? Will it ever change?
Does it bother you when someone posts a measurement that you find hard to believe or inaccurate? What about a claim that you don’t agree with bothers you? Do you choose to reply and comment on said inaccuracy? Do you comment because you think that it is your duty to put “liars” in their respective place, or to teach the rookies that measurement “accuracy” matters in the muskie world? Do you think that if you question someone else’s measurement that you should preface your beliefs with your own fishing resume so that the offender knows how you know better? Do you think that claimed measurements as a whole are more accurate than they used to be, or less, or will always be about the same?
If a measurement doesn’t appear to be accurate and it doesn’t bother you, why doesn’t it? Should a measurement ever be called into question? Does it annoy you when someone discounts someone else’s measurement claim? Is it about how the criticism is delivered, or that it is done at all? Have you ever wanted to say something about a claim, but just didn’t because it wasn’t your place? Have you ever been criticized for a claim, whether it was accurate, or not?
Well, that covers enough starting points for a healthy discussion about the current state of muskie fishing measurement claims, so what do you think? I know it is a bit excessive, or overly comprehensive, but I’d like to hear both sides of this common controversial conversation point. Why does it happen so often and get so heated? Is it about ego, or accuracy to a fault?
Ryan
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 720
| Good Morning Ryan,
For me personally its not really about the numbers. Yes I want my measurements to be as accurate as possible without undo stress on the fish. As for the measurements of others. I honestly could care a less. A huge fish is a huge fish. Whether its call 50" 54" or 57" their all big fish. I just like looking at the fish and hearing about where they were caught. For those that feel the need to question those measurments its fine as long as they keep it to themselves. I always get a kick out of post from people registared or not that call out the angler that caught these huge fish. To me it speaks volumes about their character or lack of. Its a fish for crying out loud. I wish people would remember that. Measurement accuracy matters only when your dealing with a fish of World Record proportion. I have yet to see a fish on this or any other site even come close that size.
If it were up to me I would keep the folks with the small penis affliction at bay. But everyone is entitled to his or her opinion. I just wish they could look at a picture of a fish and appreciate the time on the water, the planning and the huge amount of luck that went into catching a fine creature. Relax and have fun with it. To critize a persons account of a huge fish makes you look petty and jealous. Not the qualities of a good and or a self-confident musky fisherman.
Edited by Hunter4 8/11/2010 5:22 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32884
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | As with many subjects here, it isn't necessarily what is said, it's how it's said.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | on subject, last night while watching the History Channel i saw Jim Lindner and Lee Tauchen safely on top of the ice while they searched the depths of mille lacs for the giant fish that are now attacking people in the northern midwestern U.S.. they were unable to film the elusive giant that lurks below even with some pretty expensive equipment and at least a couple machines that looked like they would go "BING" ... dangerous and very, very scarey. |
|
| |
|
| For the most part, I've stopped measuring most fish I catch. Heck, I've even stopped with the pictures. I don't really care anymore if that fish is a 38" or a 43" or a 45" or....... I may try to get a measurement if that fish is pushing 50" or a pb if it's safe for the fish at that point. I may get a quick pic if that fish is somehow more meaningful/stands out to me. Other than that, I don't really care if that fish you caught is 40" or 60". It was your fish and thus it's your story to tell. If "those people" feel the need to embellish and can still feel good about it then so be it. |
|
| |
|
| Interesting topic. Just one of the many little things that bothers me about us musky fisherman. I compare it to the gross score obsessed tropy deer hunters. who will lie, cheat, and steal to get that magic number of 170 bc. If a guy catches a 49.5 and is upset and calls it a fifty, whatever. If some guy mesures his first muskie from the top of the fish and gets another inch, big deal. I am just happy when one gets in my net! Besides trophy fish are judged by weight not leangth  lol, thats a whole nother can o worms! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 157
| I have photo's from every musky I have ever caught with the exception of one. If anyone knows Jon Stelflue(sp) or if he uses this forum have him give me a PM. I fished with him 2 years ago and the camera we had took a crap. He had one and I'd really like to track down that photo so I have the complete collection.
Back to the topic. I've been fishing for 7 years or so and I think it's very neat to look back at how I've changed as well as how the rigs we've fished out of and the people I've fished with have changed. All of the photos have unique characteristics that make them special and memorable whether it be the time of day the were taken or the type of weather we were fishing it. It doesn't matter to me it the musky we caught was 14'' or 50'', every photo has alot more than just the fish to it. Accuracy is important, but not to a scientific level for me. I lay them down on the board, pinch the tail and round to the nearest half inch downward. Just my personal technique. Now with a PB I take very careful measurements just because it's my largest. I like to know EXACTLY what it was because it's not going to get beat every day.
When it comes to critizing other people's fish I'd just as soon stay out of it.
Every fisherman knows whether or not the fish they caught was as big as they claimed. My conscious would eat at me if I claimed I got a 50'' that was 49 1/2". |
|
| |
|
Posts: 829
Location: Maple Grove, MN | I usually measure fish over 40 inches, but I have learned that I'm not very good at it. I actually have had several people explain to me how I've been undermeasuring them.
I even had very knowledgable people explain why my best fish was probably 1.5 to 2 inches longer than what I thought it was. I measured it to be about 52 3/4 so I was just calling it a 52. (I don't really care about fractions so much.) But, the tail wasn't straight, (bending up some because the fish was green as could be), and I may have not even measured the longer part of the tail fin. From what people said, the top part of the tail fin is most often the longest and I measured off the bottom part. So, after a bit of discussion and some convincing of myself, I came to believe my fish, (near my login) was probably somewhere around 54 to 54.5 inches long. So, I'm calling it 54 to be safe. (And because I don't like fractions very much).
Inaccurate measurements go both ways. It seems there are some of us who under-measure them too. Maybe we are just measuring impaired?
Edited by Herb_b 8/11/2010 9:25 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1185
Location: Wishin I Was Fishin' | I use a wet bump board....I value every fish I catch.....I measure all that are low 30" +......it is good practice for you too (how to handle a fish, measure, picture), it realy does take some practice.
The bump board is the only accuate way to get a length measurement. It is also the fastest. Years ago I strugled with laying a fish on a board, but it goes so fast, that I think if a measurement is to be taken, it is the best method. Get a good gill grab on the fish and hang on tight so if she doesn't cooperate you can keep her from flopping around.
Edited by Jomusky 8/11/2010 9:48 AM
Attachments
----------------
 100_2230 [640x480].JPG (44KB - 164 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 4080
Location: Elko - Lake Vermilion | Bump boards don't lie,.. everyone needs one... 5-8 seconds on the board and it's a done deal, You can't get any more accurate
Now girthing a fish is harder, alot of people screw this up for some reason
people who are around Big muskies alot know the difference between a 24" girth and a 29" girth. Ok.....
Jerome |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | imo if you measure a fish do it right...lengths, girths etc..if you aren't going to do it right..then don't do it... if you don't want to measure a fish and then call it whatever length you want (or think it was), I would hope you aren't posting pics of 45s then saying it was 48.. unless you measure something don't put your pics out there for others to see and call it a certain length (or girth) if you didn't actually measure it... imo.
Also, if you do measure a fish but maybe don't do the best job...how can you then call it anything else later? if you measure it 48 but maybe didn't do the best job so be it...my first big fish I measured faulty w/ the old floating stick job at 49.5...it probably was a 50...but since I didn't measure it right, it's a 49.5 in my book and wasn't my 1st 50...
I guess that's just the way I see it....
it's not hard to measure fish these days..get a bumpboard, butt up the snout, swipe the tail and see which tail is longer and there you have it..how hard can that be? girth, simple..if you want to do it...imo it is easier on the bumpboard..put your tape there on the bumpboard, about where the belly is and then simply snug it up and read it...not hard at all....
I've never had any of my fish lengths or girths questioned..if I did I would laugh...as I'm about as anal as they come in that regard... do it right, and accurately or don't do it at all and just call it a nice fish....
this video from Skie Patrol guides, shows how quickly and easily it can be done..and accurately..
http://muskie.outdoorsfirst.com/videos/08.13.2009/1775/Muskie.Relea...
Edited by BNelson 8/11/2010 10:44 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1106
Location: Muskegon Michigan | Ill Second bump boards. Acurate and yes they dont lie. I saw a real cool improvement to the bump board this July on Captain Craig Millers (Lake st. Clair charter) Heatwave. He has a 60 inch length ruler glued to the inside of his 60 inch Live well. This way you can measure the fish in the water and acurate. He girths them right in the tank as well. Very awesome new tool for the guys using the fish tank live wells. This even removes the 8 seconds of air time measuring.
We still measure every fish over 30 as we are turning them into Muskies inc. and we keep a catch log so we have accurate information to look back on. I have to look at it a little different then most guys because we build lures and that requires more data as far as what size fish tend to eat what lures etc etc etc . I hate flame wars about fish that guys come forward with. No one has ever said our fish were smaller then they were. Im thankful of that. Mike |
|
| |
|
Posts: 294
Location: Bloomer, Wi | Iagree with jerome and bnelson . A bumpboard is sooooo easy, while your taking the hooks out the other person gets the board wet and layed out, camera ready if you want. On the board turn around a quick pause on the way back to the water for a picture and your done.
And it only takes one person to measure a fish on a board, too easy not to have a board.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 829
Location: Maple Grove, MN | I have a bump board, but it is bad luck. I never catch anything when its in the boat. Leave it home the next time and the fish are in the net. Bring it with and nothing. Its like a bad luck hat. Gotta stay away from those bad luck things. I just use my 56 inch plastic stick with a 1x2 board attached so it floats. Then I just measure them in the water. Close enough.
The only problem is I wonder how many of the 49 to 49.5 inch Muskies both I and friends have caught that might have been 50 inchers. Sorry about that Captain. You might have had a 50 after all..... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4343
Location: Smith Creek | Back to the original question, how many people think Barry Bonds is a better baseball player than Henry Aaron? How many people think Louis Spray was a better fisherman than Jonesi or Maina? Inflated numbers diminish the accomplishment for some people. If you're not one of those people and have no issues with inflated measurements, I applaud you. I wish I was OK with it but it bothers me, especially when people use inflated measurements to gain financially.
Btw, I don't post fish pics and I don't comment on those that do. You know you caught a nice fish you don't need me telling you it's big, or if you muffed the measurements I'm not going to change your mind.
Edited by Flambeauski 8/11/2010 11:38 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 433
Location: Cedarburg, Wisconsin | Well, in MY boat we use a 6' dial caliper, accurate to .0001" for those critical length measurements. Like it matters!
I agree with Steve on this one.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 536
| Wich ways work best for measuring big fish! bump board is a given for good measurement but what would be the best way for girth? there is different ways, in the water, out of the water, string around them? I think alot of people don't know actually the best way and the quickest ways to do the job! when someone catches a huge fish and they post measurements and they don't specify how they did it or it sounds like they might not of known how to do it even and there is'nt detailed picture to prove what looks like a innacurate measurement, your going to get critism from people that is just the way it is! maybe they should have been more informed before they posted measurements and pics, maybe everyone argues too much on the best ways to measure and know one knows the best ways! ????
Edited by leech lake strain 8/11/2010 1:03 PM
|
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | Leech Lake Strain, go back and check out the pic I put up in the Vermilion 55" thread...to me that is easiest ...I know some guys do it in the water but a squirrely , slimy fish is hard to measure the girth on in the water esp in waves...
get a girth tape, and have it on the bumpboard pulled out, ready to go, so when you set the fish on the board it is already in place to measure the fattest part of the belly...I have girthed a few out of the water and then girthed them in the water and they were the same...no difference..now these were fish in the 21-23 range, i have seen I think Marc Thorpe say the super fatties in the 27 plus range will be fatter I believe out of the water but again, I find it hard to believe it would be much more than a 1/2 inch difference as my experimenting proved it to be the same....
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 366
| Yeah, I threw a lot of questions out there, but I don't believe one of them was about how to measure a fish. I guess most guys don't actually read an original post before commenting on what the last person has said.
I’m pretty sure the proper measurement techniques discussion has been covered a time or two before, and wasn’t the point of my post, but oh well. As it is said, you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make them drink.
|
|
| |
|
| one could easily gather from quite a few posts in this thread and the 55"er thread there are many guys that could use some proper measurement advice. some even saying they have been musky fishing since the mid 1980s. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 457
Location: Minneconia | What bothers me is what is on the Big Fish Entry on the homepage right now under "caught with crankbait LOTW ONT"....47"????? how bout 40-41 at best. Insults everyone's intelligence and someone should say something to keep illegitimate claims from getting out of control |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1169
Location: New Hope MN | leech lake strain - 8/11/2010 1:00 PM
Wich ways work best for measuring big fish! bump board is a given for good measurement but what would be the best way for girth? there is different ways, in the water, out of the water, string around them? I think alot of people don't know actually the best way and the quickest ways to do the job! when someone catches a huge fish and they post measurements and they don't specify how they did it or it sounds like they might not of known how to do it even and there is'nt detailed picture to prove what looks like a innacurate measurement, your going to get critism from people that is just the way it is! maybe they should have been more informed before they posted measurements and pics, maybe everyone argues too much on the best ways to measure and know one knows the best ways! ????
I only measure girth in the water. It's way easier and of course better for the fish. If she swims away before I throw a tape around... so be it. |
|
| |
|
| let's remember that we're all releasing the fish, so we do share that in common as a goal. measurement or photo is really a personal preference thing; releasing is a need for preservation of the fisheries.
fishing with Doug Johnson the last couple years has been a revelation for me. unless it's a 50"-class fish, he doesn't even net the fish: just fights them to the boat, says hello, and unhooks them to swim away. he's obviously pretty good at estimating fish size and he's not that worried about being precise. and he makes the very good point that "they all look about the same in a picture anyway."
this has been hard for me, as i'm someone who wants to know the size exactly and have a picture of the fish. but after experiencing this with Doug i'm going to try to start doing the same, at least on the smaller fish. so as an alternative i starting pulling the camera out and taking pictures of the fight and release when my partner hooked one...and honestly, i found that the pictures turned out better than another shot of Big Mo holding "just another 40 incher."
Attachments
----------------
mo1.jpg (29KB - 171 downloads)
mo2.jpg (32KB - 167 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Location: The Yahara Chain | jonnysled - 8/11/2010 7:02 AM
on subject, last night while watching the History Channel i saw Jim Lindner and Lee Tauchen safely on top of the ice while they searched the depths of mille lacs for the giant fish that are now attacking people in the northern midwestern U.S.. they were unable to film the elusive giant that lurks below even with some pretty expensive equipment and at least a couple machines that looked like they would go "BING" ... dangerous and very, very scarey.
Do you think they regret being associated with that show???
Dorkiest thing that i have ever scene.
Back on topic...... I fall into the category of not caring about some strangers measurements. If somebody calls a fish a 28 or 29 inch girth that is obviously not the stated girth, I have no desire to publicly call a guy out. Anybody who has caught a lot of fish can tell that it is BS.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 171
Location: indiana | i measure them all. probably don't need to, just gives the fish an i.d. really. both of my fifty inch class fish have been measured by someone else. i unhook and lay on bumpboard and had partner look at measurement. they had nothing invested in fish and had no reason to fudge. i didn't even look at the tail as they measured. |
|
| |
|
| I noticed Jomusky's pic - just remember, biologists insist that vertical holds with no support on the body damage fish in a exponential manner as their size increases. Damage to the spinal column, connective tissue and a whole host of issues occurs.
Just another problem associated with bringing fish into the boat and sticking them on a bump board in the first place...
DC |
|
| |
|
Posts: 543
Location: WI | lambeau - 8/11/2010 2:30 PM
fishing with Doug Johnson the last couple years has been a revelation for me. unless it's a 50"-class fish, he doesn't even net the fish: just fights them to the boat, says hello, and unhooks them to swim away.
Just curious, but why not net the fish? Even if you don't take them out of the water for a meausrement and picture, wouldn't netting them reduce the stress on the fish since you don't have to play them out so much to safely get at the hooks? |
|
| |
|
| Doug said that he believes that nets just add to the stress the fish experiences. we didn't really play them out any longer, either. just brought them to the side of the boat, grabbed the leader in one hand and popped the hooks out with a needlenose in the other hand.
i know my bumpboards float...and most fish will cooperate boatside for a bit...could avoid the extra handling for a pic and still get an accurate measurement... 
|
|
| |
|
| Hiya -
I guess this will be another one of those occasions where I re-earn my status as an elitist, extremist, radical whatever, but...I'm past caring...
I freaking hate bump boards. I hate what they stand for. I hate what they can do to fish. I hate the part of the muskie culture of the last few years that makes guys feel the need to squeeze every last fraction of an inch out of a fish, then take a girth measurement besides...
If I could snap my fingers and dis-invent bump boards, I'd do it. There...just tried it.
They're still here aren't they? Dang it...
I watched a fairly well-known muskie fishermen absolutely maul a 41-incher that he HAD to measure on a bump board. This is a guy who's caught plenty of big fish, so it wasn't like a 16-pounder was a novelty or a memorable fish. Anyhow.. Fish got loose and was all over the boat. Hooks in the fish, hooks in the carpet, hooks in the fisherman. All to find out of it was 40 or 41. It was 41, but after that fiasco it had about a 2% chance of surviving to see 42. While he stood there and bled with a 5/0 sticking out of his hand I asked him if he really cared that much how big it was. And was it worth it to know - to him or the fish?
It just seems to me we're going backwards.
We went from bopping every fish we caught to finally having water releases and fish-friendly nets (finally - for a long time guys didn't use nets because knotted bags shredded fish), a floating stick measurement and quick over the side photos being SOP, then, it seems to be, began to slide backwards to girth measurements (suddenly 50 inches isn't enough...it has to be 50 with a big girth) and bringing fish into the boat to flop them on a bump board to measure to the fraction of a freaking inch. (Someone the other day told me they caught a 44-7/8" and I though..."Oh please...call it 44. Call it 45. Who cares? 8ths of an inch?? Really??")
To me it's all just unnecessary handling of the fish. Measure it with a stick, get reasonably close, and call it good if you must. If it's 44 or 44-1/2 (or 5/8 or 3/4) who cares? Nobody but YOU. If someone says "it doesn't look that big in the picture" so what. I can show you two pictures of guys holding a 50 and a 53-incher, respectively, and taken by the same person with the same camera. The 53 looks like a nice fish. The 50 looks like a mile-long whale.
I shouldn't be this judgmental I suppose, and to be fair using a bump board in the water is probably not bad at all, although I haven't seen it in action. But so much bad and so little good can come from bringing a fish into the boat I just can't see it justified by an "accurate measurement" that really doesn't matter to anyone. Just let the thing go.
Bottom line...I've seen bump boards used, and I've seen how Doug Johnson and guys like him handle fish. I can tell you pretty definitely which method's better for the fish.
So maybe I'm an elitist, radical, pedantic zealot. I can live with that. Fire away... I've been called worse. But to me, the fish matter more than their size.
Did I mention that I don't much care for bump boards?
Cheers,
Rob Kimm
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 619
| i agree w/ rob kimm. also agre w/ doug johnson. i just do water release most of the time. why do you need to put it on a bump board? who really cares unless its a true monster. less handling better chance the fish gets dumped on the floor or mishandled. less chance the angler gets cut too. why do you even need to net it if its not that a monster, just pop it off unless its hooked really bad. whats another pic of a 45 in fish? |
|
| |
