|
|
| I saw on Facebook that there was a 70lber caught and certified out East anyone have any pictures or more details? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 143
Location: La Crosse, WI | Saw on Spencer Berman's facebook as well, but he said it was just a rumor at this point. Hope its true and hope they got some good pics |
|
| |
|
Posts: 109
Location: Ottawa Lake, MI | Here we go! lol |
|
| |
|
| I heard 59 by 34. Puts it at 85 lbs. only time will tell |
|
| |
|
Posts: 373
| I look forward to seeing pictures!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1301
Location: Hayward, Wisconsin | My information so far is 65.5 pounds, not yet confirmed...stay tuned! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1301
Location: Hayward, Wisconsin | Ok, well here we go again..."supposedly" the fish was 59 x 34. The fish was NOT weighed The first report I had on it had it a 60.5 pounds and I don't know where the 65.5 came from (this has been circulating for several days now). As I have long stated, "If you don't weigh it, you shouldn't say it". As of yet, there have been no photo's of this fish released.
Based on info to date, you'll have to make up your own mind... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 383
Location: SE Wisc and Vilas County | cant wait to see some pics. saw Spencers post earlier and have been thinking about it ever since. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 310
Location: Lake St.Clair | Would love to see some photos of this supposed fish!!!!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 222
| There is a new fish on the other musky website board 57" x 28" |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1901
Location: MN | Larry Ramsell - 11/19/2013 10:13 PM
The first report I had on it had it a 60.5 pounds and I don't know where the 65.5 came from
I love rumors. Love it when rumors are verified and we get to see the fish. But Larry you have to recognize the irony of your statement above do you not? You previously speculated/reported/were told (and told us) that 65.5 was the information you had. Then you wonder where the 65.5 came from? Well at least one source, to many of us, was you! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Propster - 11/20/2013 6:40 AM
Larry Ramsell - 11/19/2013 10:13 PM
The first report I had on it had it a 60.5 pounds and I don't know where the 65.5 came from
I love rumors. Love it when rumors are verified and we get to see the fish. But Larry you have to recognize the irony of your statement above do you not? You previously speculated/reported/were told (and told us ) that 65.5 was the information you had. Then you wonder where the 65.5 came from? Well at least one source, to many of us, was you!
Perhaps I missed an earlier post but 60.5 < 65.5 |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32958
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Larry said in his first report that the information he had was the fish weighed 65.5, but wasn't confirmed, and he said 'stand by'.
In case you are in such a hurry to insult him you pretend not to know what that means...it was clear he was still trying to confirm.
The last information he had was 65.5 and was unconfirmed. That had 'been in circulation for several days now' as stated. That's what I had found out as well, and I also had heard earlier that the fish was 60.5. Note no one from the Modern Day World Record organization broke the story.
So far it appears the fish was not weighed as of the last investigation Larry did last night. That, Propster, is called an 'update'. If it had been weighed, Larry would have been on his way over to confirm the report.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 20281
Location: oswego, il | So in short stay tuned means wait for the facts? Whew, I just called off an air strike on this thread! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 225
Location: Ontario, Canada | The MDWRA or whatever its calling itself has no credibility with the angler. Thats why they didn't break the story. The angler that caught the fish is trying to avoid the 'circus side-show' that usually ensues after a fish of this calibre is caught, and released... |
|
| |
|
Location: Hayward WI | Winternet is arriving early this year, must be global warming............ |
|
| |
|
Posts: 81
Location: Toronto, Ontario | pigeontroller - 11/20/2013 10:34 AM The MDWRA or whatever its calling itself has no credibility with the angler. Thats why they didn't break the story. The angler that caught the fish is trying to avoid the 'circus side-show' that usually ensues after a fish of this calibre is caught, and released... Amen....none whatsoever. |
|
| |
|
Location: Eastern Ontario | A the risk of upsetting lots of folks a CATCH & RELEASE RECORD means nothing.
This said congratulations to the angler hell of a catch.
In my opinion a fish approaching or exceeding record size is past its best spawning years and will soon go into decline. It should be harvested, its vent duct taped and a towel stuck in its throat and documented by as many professionals as possible.
Personally I would submit for a Ontario or Canadian record (providing the fish is caught in Canadian water ) and let the other organisations be #*^@ed.
Edit Don't know how you could submit your leader to more than one organisation.
Edited by horsehunter 11/20/2013 10:09 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 676
Location: Wisconsin | Ahhh, the favorite off season sport of Muskie anglers for the long winter months.....World Record Muskie Rumors. The current champion is the Green Bay Dude, game on!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1301
Location: Hayward, Wisconsin | The MDMWRP does not recognized released muskies, so there is no way our organization would have been involved in any manner any way, even if the "anglers" loved us!
Claim what you wish, but to my knowledge, the recognized release record is 61 1/4 inches long...this one falls a bit short and since it wasn't weighed, "estimating" the weight via formula is merely that, an estimate.
Again, "If you don't weigh it, you shouldn't say it."
Undoubtedly a great fish was caught, Congrats to the angler...but so far no pics to view/enjoy and no pics/video of the measuring process. For now it is just rumor.
Edited by Larry Ramsell 11/20/2013 10:50 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1901
Location: MN | Steve,
I think you missed my point entirely, and Larry no offense intended. As I stated, I love these rumors and I meant it. I was not insulting you in any way, merely pointing out that the first I and many others had ever heard of the weight of a possible fish being 65.5 lbs was from you. I was merely commenting that it was ironic that you would say "you didn't know where that came from". I of course knew what you meant (you didn't know the original source), but all I was saying is that for many of us on here, you were the first source of the 65.5. All good, carry on. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 58
| Out east? Any one know where bouts? I'm in PA would like to no if it came from close by!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | wound up just bein' a 60lb. rat eh? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1301
Location: Hayward, Wisconsin | Susky; yes, out east...Ottawa River. Latest I heard it was caught back in September.
Propster, no prob, I thought that was what you meant. I just didn't word my post properly.
Sled: How many "rats" would you like to catch? Based on what most believe now, you could have one hand missing some fingers and still be able to count the legitimate muskies ever caught over 60 pounds and not much over 60 at that!
Dax and Peter: I understand you are upset about the O'brien fish not being what it was claimed to be, but the truth is just that, the truth...sorry, but I wasn't the person(s) that brought that all about. Even one of your past MCI Presidents, who was originally adamant that it was legit, now no longer believes that to be the case and has went to great lengths to get the necessary proof to prove it.
All: If any of you wish to believe in the Lawton, Spray, Johnson and/or O'brien records, all which have been scientifically proven to be false, that is your complete right to do so. Good luck catching one that will beat any of them!
Edited by Larry Ramsell 11/20/2013 11:39 AM
|
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | I'm sure I could google it but which musky do you believe to be THE official record Larry? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 7123
Location: Northwest Chicago Burbs | I am so not moderating this thread. |
|
| |
|
Location: Grand Rapids, MI | BNelson - 11/20/2013 1:01 PM I'm sure I could google it but which musky do you believe to be THE official record Larry? http://muskie.outdoorsfirst.com/articles/02.02.2013/5493/Modern.Day.Muskellunge.World.Record.Established/index.htm |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1301
Location: Hayward, Wisconsin | BNelson: It isn't what I "believe" that matters. It is what YOU believe. The NFWFHF record and the IGFA record have both been proven to be somewhat less than claimed, as has the Canadian record. I used to believe in all of them (the good 'ol days of ignorant bliss!), and now I don't. Have there been muskies caught over 60-pounds? Probably, but historical documentation is scant or non-existant.
I do however, believe in the MDMWRP record caught last year and that is the one I'm shooting for with any possibility of accomplishing same.
Having caught some giants yourself, I'm sure you can appreciate what it really takes to break 60-pounds...
Edited by Larry Ramsell 11/20/2013 12:14 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8866
| I can't see how, with the advancements in technology, the increased popularity of musky angling, improvement of management strategies, and the predominance of catch and release that anyone could NOT believe that the largest muskies we are seeing in the last several years are a big as they get. Combined with all the research that has proven that the previous known "records" were falsified in one way or another, it just doesn't add up. Do you mean to tell me that the quality of muskies was actually better when every one that was caught wound up on the table?
Edited by esoxaddict 11/20/2013 12:26 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 676
Location: Wisconsin | This was posted on facebook......
A World Record Musky Story
Hi Y'all,
The Ottawa Chapter of Muskies Canada is a special place for many reasons. The club is a driver of cutting edge research, large scale environmental projects that make a real difference to the waters in our region, is a bastion of learning and data on muskellunge, and the home to three members or former members who have been in the boat with the largest musky in the world from a given year. No club anywhere can say that. Now there will probably be a fourth name to add to this list.
A friend of mine and fellow Muskies Canada member told a story publicly for the first time at our Ottawa chapter monthly meeting last night.
Earlier this fall he and another club member caught and released a 59 x 34 inch muskellunge. Pictures were shared in the room and that is as far as they will go for now. The story will be told in the next issue of the Muskies Canada Release Journal.
When I sent out my Facebook post yesterday I thought that this story was going to go public in a much bigger way as of last night. It is not, at least not for now.
This fish was released. Many would have kept it as the dimensions of it make it the biggest musky ever captured on a line. The largest fish in history. I have great respect for anyone who would be selfless enough to put this fish back.
The last time a 'live release world record' was caught was a few years back. It became a very controversial fish and created a great deal of animosity and internet aggression. Declaring such a fish opens an angler up to intense scrutiny and the musky world is a strange and wonderful place with both strange and wonderful people.
Some people fish for the pure joy of fishing. They are the lucky ones. To want to put this fish back and to care only for the well being of the fish is the highest tribute that can be paid to a muskellunge, to a river, and to nature. It is model behaviour. It is role model behaviour.
To my friend who caught this fish I say to you 'it couldn't have happened to a nicer guy'. Congratulations and we are all so happy for you.
JA
PS I wish you tight lines, and warm clothes, see you on the water. — at The Ottawa River Musky Factory. |
|
| |
