|
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | Bravo |
|
| |
|
Location: On the O | Not an Ottawa River fish....I wish
Congrats to you again sir.
Edited by BigC 11/20/2013 1:23 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1060
Location: Palm Coast, FL | Great post Chad and congrats to the angler! We will anxiously anticipate the Muskies Canada Release Journal! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 225
Location: Ontario, Canada | Larry Ramsell - 11/20/2013 12:38 PM
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!
Larry, I don't care about the O'Brien fish, or any other... My dislike of the MDWRMA or whatever it is has nothing to do with any of the fish you've discredited. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | pigeontroller - 11/20/2013 2:19 PM
Larry Ramsell - 11/20/2013 12:38 PM
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!
Larry, I don't care about the O'Brien fish, or any other... My dislike of the MDWRMA or whatever it is has nothing to do with any of the fish you've discredited.
Cool story. Did you come here just to brag you don't like the MDWRMA? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1301
Location: Hayward, Wisconsin | Dax/troller: Whatever. With an MDMWRP Committee consisting of many, many highly respected anglers, scientists and writers in the Muskie community both in the US and Canada, the problem is entirely yours I guess.
Esox65: If you only knew how wrong you were! As for "this fish", now that a few more details are out but no names or photos made public (yes, I know "who"), I don't really care. It is easy on the Internet for anyone to claim anything, but usually the claims are backed up much better than this one. If they wish to remain ANON, then they should keep the info to themselves period. That they have supposedly exposed it at a muskie club meeting shows that they don't wish to, hence conjecture will abound at the mere claim once it has gone viral as it has. Just the way it is in the real world today.
Again, if true as stated, congratulations to the angler on catching one of histories largest unverified muskies ever. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 225
Location: Ontario, Canada | Larry, it seems I am not the only one! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32958
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | MuskieFIRST supports the Modern Day World Record program. I am actually the PR person for the organization. I'm happy to speak personally to anyone who has any objections. If it's me who you have issues with...that's easy. Use your mouse and move elsewhere to discuss your muskie addiction or give me a call, 7156809265, anytime after I get out of the woods next week Friday.
Speaking strictly from the position of OutdoorsFIRST:
It's easy to sit behind your monitor and attack any organization without any justification or argument, but 'easy' isn't going to fly here. If you choose to be a reasonable human being, and engage us in conversation about your objections, we welcome the opportunity to talk about it. If not, and you choose instead to violate our permissions here, expect your rude, childish, or just plain untoward behavior to be addressed accordingly.
Thanks in advance.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 559
| why don't you all go and troll or cast some more
to get one bigger,( than said fish) congrats to the fisherman on the catch
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 483
Location: NE PA | My life will go on unchanged whether this is true or not. Fact is that the fish is undoubtedly a monster that was released to fight another day. Same as the fish from Green Bay that was recently CPR'd. I say good on him. Congrats to the angler. I can only hope to someday see a fish that could come anywhere close to that. In the mean time I'll keep dreaming and casting.
Edited by lennyg3 11/20/2013 7:55 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 84
| Congrats to whomever caught the fish and high fives for releasing it. The muskie fishery will be better for the genetic contribution that fish may make. (Is it true that the theory concerning such large and-or-old fish being past the point of effectively breeding is now being questioned?) If so, kudos for acting on the side of caution.
Edited by Old Guy 11/20/2013 9:03 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 519
Location: Bloomington, IL | 59 x 34 would put it at 70.24 lbs. by formula weight, not 85 lbs.
(59 x 34)/(25-10) = 70.24 lbs.
Of course, we'll see what the actual weight is if 59 x 34 is the real deal.
I hope it's legit for a new WR and hopefully a legit 70 lb'er. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1901
Location: MN | The formula is actually: (59 x 34)/25 - 10 |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1828
| Propster - 11/20/2013 11:14 PM
The formula is actually: (59 x 34)/25 - 10
Thanks for the correction. I was trying to picture a 134 pound muskie... |
|
| |
|
| first if you want something that sound more professional put the same amounts of members from both side of the borders.this way it will prevail future injustice.there is not a single serious reason that can justify a committee like this one.i think it's something like 80% us vs 20% can.i don't think a wr is more a wr if it's caught on the us side,or maybe the us pounds is just HEAVIER.one thing is sure lots of canadians me included have no interest into the mdmwrp and a committee like this one is not very unifying |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1530
| c,mon guys. we re-live this every year...
congrats to whomever on a big fish period... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 566
Location: Elgin, IL | Yep...Nice Work. ^ |
|
| |
|
Posts: 256
Location: plant earth | A musky that's close to those numbers give or take a bit is a great accomplishment. Bravo to the angler who landed the fish. Congrats. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 123
| Congrats to a great guy for putting in the time to get a awesome fish. I can't wait to see the pic of a true trophy for all musky anglers.
I don't understand why so many get upset over huge fish being caught I thought that is what we are all after.
Kudos also for letting it swim another day |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1301
Location: Hayward, Wisconsin | Jano wrote: "first if you want something that sound more professional put the same amounts of members from both side of the borders.this way it will prevail future injustice.there is not a single serious reason that can justify a committee like this one.i think it's something like 80% us vs 20% can.i don't think a wr is more a wr if it's caught on the us side,or maybe the us pounds is just HEAVIER.one thing is sure lots of canadians me included have no interest into the mdmwrp and a committee like this one is not very unifying"
LR: Jano, I can't possibly imagine that you believe that there would be any "injustice' from this esteemed Committee, regardless of what the ratio of Canadians vs. those in the US is. But if it would make you happy, please submit the names, bio's and contact information of any Canadian you would like to see added to the Committee and I'll work on getting them added to improve the ratio that has you concerned. Perhaps then you will feel it is more "unifying".
Where a fish is caught is of no matter to the consideration of our Committee, I can't imagine what it is that you are thinking in this regard. Our only goal is to maintain a carefully verified Modern Day World Record, regardless of where caught, that everyone can believe in.
Dax: Anything you care to have clarified?
Larry Ramsell,
Committee Chairman |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1202
Location: Money, PA | Record Release = Oximoron!
I personally do not believe in "released" records....records are what they are; RECORDED record fish...released fish IMHO are NOT recorded or officially verified, bottom line. Do you think they would acknowledge a new world speed record in the 100 yrd. dash if some guy came to them and said "I just beat the 100 yrd dash world record yesterday, and have a picture & video of me running it."??? They'd look at the guy and laugh at him!
So if one plans on releasing a potential "world record" fish, one should plan on not looking for "world record" notoriety. That simple and to be respected either way.
My .02
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 4080
Location: Elko - Lake Vermilion | It's pretty simple guys,....A released State/world record muskie is just another big fish ! Congrats to the guy that had that once in a lifetime experience......
Its' ONLY a Record if it has been verified by the people who count.......AND it must be killed, in order to be certified and verified.
Common Sense must be dying at a faster rate, than first expected....
Jerome |
|
| |
|
Posts: 386
| Hey "shutup," I don't see this guy looking for any notoriety nor is he trying to establish this as a record . . . in fact, just the opposite.
I look forward to seeing this fish and congratulating and honoring the dude who had the heart to let it live another day. Bravo!
Edited by gopackgo 11/22/2013 11:56 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1202
Location: Money, PA | gopackgo - 11/22/2013 11:54 AM
Hey "shutup," I don't see this guy looking for any notoriety nor is he trying to establish this as a record . . . in fact, just the opposite.
I look forward to seeing this fish and congratulating and honoring the dude who had the heart to let it live another day. Bravo!
Did you see me directing the statement to "that guy"? If so, I wasn't....just sayin' in general.  peace bro
Edited by ShutUpNFish 11/22/2013 12:09 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 994
Location: Minnesota: where it's tough to be a sportsfan! | I am smiling, I sat at a table in the 70's in a Northern WI. cabin lit by a Coleman lantern drinking loudmouth soup debating the World Record Muskie. I was in another cabin in late fall, MN, in '85 where the debate flowed on the same subject. In the 90's I was at a gathering of great anglers and an actual high level conversation on the subject "erupted" (for lack of a better term) a few years ago I left the start of the same discussion. We all have dreams of the Big Girl, we all have Passion for our sport, and we all have beliefs of how it all goes into history. The fact that this all doesn't always blend smoothly in my mind seems natural. Doesn't matter if I agree with you or not. If you have the passion and truly believe what you are saying you are OK in my book. A great fish is a great fish, a memory for life and kudos to the lucky angler. Beyond that...the passion continues! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 415
| Man, I came on here hoping to see some bickering about the validity of this fish. Instead I see bickering about whether a "release record" is any type of "record" or not. Let's get back to griping about the subject at hand boys. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8866
| Ja Rule - 11/22/2013 1:15 PM
Man, I came on here hoping to see some bickering about the validity of this fish. Instead I see bickering about whether a "release record" is any type of "record" or not. Let's get back to griping about the subject at hand boys.
Well, without a picture, how can you possibly question it? The only thing that stands out for me as questionable is the 33" girth, and that's only because I had a 33" girth myself at one time, and I'm having a difficult time picturing that girth on a musky. We've all seen enough pictures of the biggest fish to go public in the last several years. Let's see the picture, and then we can have at it. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 556
| Can't wait to see the pics of what sounds like 1 of the largest muskys ever caught. congrats to the Angler for a spectacular fish and want to hear the full story. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 456
Location: Kansas City BBQ Capitol of the world | Congratulations to the angler ( I think) who caught that behemoth!
I am just glad I have never been put in that situation. You fish your whole life and lucky enough, one time you get "the one". The one to end all arguments, the one to begin a new chapter and in that moment of certainty or uncertainty you make your choice. I wonder if the choice made will be haunting for years of sleepless nights and what if's?
I understand not everyone thinks like that and some guys would be ok with it, but I also know many wouldn't and it would eat them up for trying to do what they thought was the right thing at that time.
In Muskies the fight dosn't come on the water, but after the fight is over.
To know it you have to show it.
Ron
Edited by rjhyland 11/22/2013 9:25 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1901
Location: MN | I disagree. There is no right or wrong. I certainly wouldn't kill it just to satisfy others' curiosity about how big these fish can get or whether it's some sort of record to be had. |
|
| |
