List of the biggest documented bass ever caught

[Randall]

Heres one that I know of that didn't make the list and I am 99% sure it was weighed on certified scales way back in the seventies or early eighties. Alatoona lake record here in GA caught by Greg Rhymer.

[Mattlures]

Read the whole article and you will see what it takes to make that list. It was written in 2004.  That would explain a lot of fish that would be on there. Like I said it would even be more Mike Long lopsided if it were current.

Someone asked if were on steriods? thats funny because a couple years ago he was thicker than he is now and I swear he could easyly be mistaken for Mark Mcguire. Even now that he has lost some wieght he looks like him.

I will try and contact Terry and see if I can get an update.

[Catt]

Correct me if I'm wrong but the bass being caught are Florida strain?

These fish were introduced into California in the late 50's or early 60's?

[Mattlures]

Catt You are correct. Northern strain dont get tha big. Florida or southern strain were introduced I believ in the late 60's into 1 lake. from there they were stocked into a lot of Ca. lakes throughout the early 70's. They havent stocked them since. Many of our lakes will go through cycles and peak and kick out some monsters but Stippers and Spotted bass will destroy a lakes chances at huge fish in a matter of a few years.

another huge reason for all these giant fish that is often over looked is they are just about all released. those 16-25lbers were probably all caught when they were 13+ but released to get bigger. I honestly believe this is why Texas has so few very top end fish. I think if the SAL program stopped or at least just gave credit and a replica when a fish was documented and quickly released you would see a higher top end coming from Texas.

[RoLo]

California lies outside the natural range of the largemouth bass, which were first transplanted into California in 1891.

However, the first "Florida-strain bass" were not introduced into California until 1959...the rest is history.

Roger

[Lane]

Matt,

You are right that a good number of our BIG fish here in Texas are retained, usually

for skin mounts or the frying pan! But if it were not for the SAL program, you would see

even more big girls ending up on the wall. The females are taken to Athens, where they

recieve the best care on the planet, spawned, then released back to their home waters

no worst for the wear! Some do die, but usually this occurs early on, and is due to poor

care by the angler. To much show and tell out of the water! The SAL program is working,

and Texas is registering numbers of large bass, just not in the 20lb plus range.

Also, most of the lakes in California are kept CLEAN due to the fact that they are reserviors

for municipal drinking water. I call it the X factor, which is missing here in Texas and Mexico.

I saw one of those HUGH Cali bass in person when I was up there in the spring of 90. That

is a story in itself! I will never forget it, either!

[bassmasta7]

I have also heard of bass up to 18lbs caught in GA that aren't registered.(not the same as Randall's)Hopefully, I will get invited by my neighbor to go to the lake that holds this bass in spring.

I couldnt help but notice one of these bass was caught in Japan. I didnt think they got that big and it was less than 4 years ago. Does anyone know the story on this one?

18 19.40 Ikehara Dam Japan Kazuya Shimada 4/22/03

[KenDammit28]

Bass fishing is huge in Japan, and now the country has a monster record bass to call its own. On April 22, Kazuya Shimada caught a 19.2-pound largemouth bass at Ikehara Dam in Nara Prefecture, Japan. He drop-shotted a 4-inch blue-black and chartreuse Optimum Swim Bait on 25-pound fluorocarbon line.

Thats all I could find on it..that came from a San Diego, California e-news site.

[earthworm77]

Not to high jack mattlures topic but I think Perry's record was God's way of telling us we don't know anything about his creations.

That or more likely it is a scam, but we had a huge debate over that last year.

In truth, I wonder how many other huge fish were caught without being registered. No doubt Cali is THE home of giants but with only 3 or 4 fish in the top 102, where is Florida? Florida is no slouch. I know of 3 or 4 17+ lb fish caught in my home river system in the past year alone, one was in last years or the year before BPS Master Cat......and that is not the whole state. I'm sure many anglers are clueless as to this lists existance but then again, if you didn't catch the #1 fish, what does it matter? Only a record hunter would register this right? Mike Long is sick! I mean that in a good way.

Also is there a reason for so many unknown anglers? I'm hoping there is a list with those unknown anglers names, if not, should they be allowed to be on this list? One interesting name not on the list unless my eyes played tricks on me.....Cali guys?????? Bill Seimantel.

[cart7t]

I hashed through the numbers and came up with the totals by year.  I threw out anything other than CA.

List is by year and numbers on the list

1970-72 - 0

1973 - 2

1974-75 - 0

1976 - 1

1977-78 - 0

1979 - 5

1980 - 5

1981 - 4

1982 - 2

1983 - 0

1984 - 2

1985 - 5

1986 - 1

1987 - 1

1988 - 3

1989 - 2

1990 - 3

1991 - 3

1992 - 1

1993-97 - 0

1998 - 3

1999 - 8

2000 - 7

2001 - 10

2002 - 7

2003 - 6

2004 - 2

Interesting that the period of 1993 - 1997 saw no fish over 16 pounds brought in.  Any ideas?

There also appear to be peaks. 1985, 1988-1992, and finally 1999-2003.  

[Gatorbassman]

one name that sticks out?

California

Try Mike Long

[Guest avid]

This is an interesting post.  Thanks Mattlures.

But there is one glaring inaccuarcy.  The certified big bass in Florida is the 17lb4oz state record the 20 lber is often mentioned but is NOT certified therefore the state does not recognize it.

From FWC  Uncertified state records...are believed accurate based on reliable witnesses and other evidence but are not certifiable, or they were caught by other than legal sport fishing methods.

I know you said "documented" not certified, but if it is not certified than it doesn't belong on any big bass list.

I think Lane made a good point, about Mike Long and Doug Hannon etc.  That catching a big bass is hard enough but getting it certified is a whole 'nuther project.  I think we see the Cali guys especially Mike Long, because they are very knowlegeable about the process and know exactly how to get a fish certified with mimimum hassle.  I"m not suggesting that they arent' hardcore guys, but there are still lot's of big bass caught by guys who don't have a scale.  They lose the chance at getting the catch certified due to ignorance of the process.

As far as George Perry...... It's simple.  He's got the record.  There are questions surrounding it, but he did what was required at that time to get it listed as the record.  you can't blame him for the recording procedures of the time.

And anyway, doesn't it lead to tremendous excitement.  The Weakley bass (which was "documented" but not certified) and the other huge certified fish, convince me that the record is there to be broken.

Won't that be a day to remember!!!

[Mattlures]

Lane I am not knocking Texas or the SAL program. I think Texas is doing the right thing I also believe it produces more fish over 10 then Cali or Florida. I think the SAL is a great idea and has worked and does work BUT...........I think it is detrimental to the very top end fish. I think it is one of the biggest reasons you dont see 18+ lbers come from texas

Cart the reason you see the big fish kicked out in bunches is because of the cycles our lakes go through. Castaic used to produce a ton of giants but now there are stipers and it is done as far as 20lbers go.  There are a lot of factors that cause lakes to peak and decline. A lot of know which lakes are ripe and we focuss on them. I wish the list was current because a lot of monsters have been caught in the last two years out here including Macs 25.1

[Guest avid]

I wish the list was current because a lot of monsters have been caught in the last two years out here including Macs 25.1

No disrespect intended Matt, but any list that includes the Weakley bass, is a fraudulent document worthy of nothing more "fishy" than wrapping up the guts after a food fish has been cleaned.

[Lane]

Matt,

Anglers mentality here in Texas is the biggest detriment to the 20lb class range. TPW

has to do what the public wants, and so far, Fork is our ONLY designated trophy lake.

We have lakes that I have no doubt contain 20lb class bass, in fact they have been stocked

with SAL offspring, and have the right stuff for sustaining those bass. Like others, that is

as much information as I am willing to share if you know what I mean.

[buzzbaitfool12]

Once again the argument continues.. ;D>>i live in Georgia,  and certainly being  an avid bassfisherman I did some research on ole perry..I dont think that this guys would lie about this...But it is awesome that all these years we have had a number to shoot for..Not trying to open up a can of worms, but once again lets face it, if every warm weather lake shoveled in the trout that is done in these lakes, they should be bigger..I would like to see Lake Varner loaded up with trout..That would be interesting..

[earthworm77]

No disrespect intended Matt, but any list that includes the Weakley bass, is a fraudulent document worthy of nothing more "fishy" than wrapping up the guts after a food fish has been cleaned.

I disagree, at least we know this fish actually exists as opposed to the cloudiness of Perry's bass. That record stands only because of lax reg's. It wouldn't ever have stood in todays time with the controversy that surrounds it.  Weakley's Fish was a 25.1, there is no doubt about it. Florida has 2 unofficial fish over 20lbs that are not recognized because of a lack of photographic evidence. Perry's fish should never have stood. All of the evidence suggests that this fish never swam in GA waters. No documented GA fish comes close and as you saw in the top 102, Perry's is the only one over 16lbs??? Hard to believe. But I know GA has the record. I'm not venting, I'm just a realist who recognizes a crock of turds when I see it.

[KenDammit28]

If George Perry had caught that fish today, there wouldn't be any controversy around it.

I don't know how anyone could say that theres ANY evidence that suggests this fish didn't swim in GA waters. The truth of the whole matter is that no one cared about "world record" fish back then, especially during a depression, and this just so happens to be one of the very few catches that were documented AT ALL. If there weren't some truth to the story, we wouldn't be hearing about it today and it wouldn't have been called a record.

To me, it doesn't matter WHO caught the fish(which most of the debate seems to be about)..the picture of a gigantic largemouth being held by a man that was discovered in the possessions of someone living in GA...thats proof to me. If you're willing to suggest someone may have photoshopped that picture or altered it or whatever, I think you'll have a long row to hoe.

[BASS fisherman]

On occasion in nature, genetic mutations occur.  And under the perfect conditions they can flourish.  I think that Perry's bass was one of those mutations.  

Pa's state record is 11lbs some odd ounces and I know of a bass that was caught that weighed in at 13lbs some odd ounces in Pa.  I beleive the mutations occur more than most relize but they are just as smart as any other lunker bass, and therefore alot harder to catch than their more agressive younger kin.

And alot of the big bass go unreported as well.

[Mattlures]

Avid the reason that fish should be on the list is exactly what Craig said. It does exist . It was weighed photographed and video'd. It is in fact the largest bass ever documented. I am not saying Mac should get the world record. Actualy I agree with him not submitting it and He should not get the record. The record is Perry's until sombody breaks it and certifies it properly. BUT the fish does belong on the list of the biggest bass caught. If for no other reason then the scientific data. Another fish that was not on the list was Paul Duclos's 24lber. had he weighed on on a real scale he might be the record holder. At the very least he would be in the top 5 There is no doubt after looking at his pics that his fish was over 20 and I personaly believ it WAS 24lbs

[fourbizz]

Out of all 3 fish, that 24, in my mind is the record. Doesn't hurt that she was a norcal fish either

[cart7t]

Just checking a list of state record bass and neither the Alabama 16.8 or the Arkansas at 16.4 are on the list.  How many more are missing especially from Texas.

As for the Perry bass?   :

originally posted by earthworm77

I disagree, at least we know this fish actually exists as opposed to the cloudiness of Perry's bass. That record stands only because of lax reg's. It wouldn't ever have stood in todays time with the controversy that surrounds it.  Weakley's Fish was a 25.1, there is no doubt about it. Florida has 2 unofficial fish over 20lbs that are not recognized because of a lack of photographic evidence. Perry's fish should never have stood. All of the evidence suggests that this fish never swam in GA waters. No documented GA fish comes close and as you saw in the top 102, Perry's is the only one over 16lbs??? Hard to believe. But I know GA has the record. I'm not venting, I'm just a realist who recognizes a crock of turds when I see it.

He had a witness.  It was weighed on a certified scale that was available.  There are pictures that clearly indicate it was a giant bass.  Let's get real here,  back in the 30's, there were few sportsmen fishing for LM bass.  Even fewer who probably even knew what the world record was at the time.  All Mr. Perry got out of the deal was a rod n reel, he stood to gain so little from the fish that he found the food value of the fish for his family more valuable than any monetary gain (if any) at the time.  This was during the depression you know.

I thinks it's safe to say that there were possibly bigger fish than Mr. Perry's caught back in the 20's, 30's or 40's in GA, Bama or Florida that were never documented.  Possibly even a list as long as that one of big bass over 16lbs that were never mentioned because no one thought about it during the time.  It was an entirely different time and place back then.  Catching a giant bass meant more food on the table for the family.  Taking the time to drag a fish around to document it meant the possible loss of the fish as a meal since there were no livewells, coolers or even bags of ice.  Even fewer people could afford a camera back in those days.  

The doubters really need to get a grip.  George Perry was out fishing for a little fun and a meal for his family.  He caught a giant bass and decided to enter it in a contest he saw in a magazine.  He probably wasn't even aware that the fish he caught was a world record.  He took the time to have the fish weighed on a certified scale with a law enforcement officer present. Then took it home to eat.

Mr. Weakley OTOH, was specifically targeting a giant bass.  He knew the fish was there and yet seem ill prepared when the time was to catch it.  Considering the ramifications of the financial windfall a bass that size would bring along with the intense scrutiny that would come along with catching it, I'd say Mr. Perry did more to satisfy his end of the deal than did Mr. Weakley.

[KYbass1276]

I'm wondering do you think that with the increase in todays fishing pressure versus that of the time of perrys day has anything to do with why we don't see bigger fish. I know the majority or atleast I'm guessing back in perrys time probally kept the fish for eating.  But I have to think that there were not as many people targeting bass back then as there are now so there would be less pressure on the fish.  I'm just guessing here so I'm not trying to stir up the kettle but wouldn't less fishing pressure equal more of a chance to catch a record class fish throughout certain states like georgia and florida, texas more often.  With alot of C&R anglers out there, There are still alot of people who keep there catch and I wonder how many people keep there catch today as compared to perrys time.  With more people fishing today than in perrys time I would think the keep ratio would be more now then during perrys time.  Would that factor into why we don't see bigger fish more often or am I totally wrong here

[earthworm77]

Cart, Perry's witness was never found. He gave a name of a person said to exist and that person never came forward to substantiate his catch. There is so much fishy about this record that it simply screams scam. Where to start??? There is not a single picture of Perry holding his fish. That photo of the young boy with the giant fish may or may not be Perry's. I do not believe it has the dimensions necessary to ahcieve world record size. At least one other photo of Perry with a bass is clearly not as large as claimed. He claimed he had photos of himself with the fish when he tried to extort more money and products from the people at Heddon. They never surfaced. Did he lose the photos to document his single greatest lifetime achievement? What bait did he catch it on? He seemed to change his mind about that and said it was three different ones. No fish over 16lbs documented in Ga since is a pretty good indication that this fish is an extreme rarity, even then you'd have to guess at least a couple would follow in its footsteps and come close.

The current world record smallmouth was struck down for a period of time because two marina owners claimed the fish was weighed in their marina, not because of anything the catcher did incorrectly. It was a dispute between two outside parties, the fish was documented correctly, phographed, etc. If that factor can disqualify a fish, Perry's fish should be DQ'd or at least have an asterisk next to it stating the discrepincies. Or be the unofficial record.

In a time when there are so many rules to follow regarding certifying a world record, it is strange that this stands considering the cloudiness of it all.

Perry's story is a great tale that we all want to believe in but there really is nothing more to it than a fish story. There is nothing solid to document it. A photo that he claimed he had with himself holding the catch would quell all of the naysayers. Where is it?

Cart I was wondering the same thing regarding state records over 16lbs.

We will never agree as to the validity on this fish. With the magnitude of catching a pending World Record bass, I simply can't believe blindly in the Perry record. There are a ton of people who claim to have caught giant bass and when they can't provide proof their tale becomes just another fish story.

This is a photo of my 24lber.....OK you got me , its only over 10. lol But at least I have a photo of it.

[Catt]

I believe the difference lies in the bodies of water

The lakes in the southern states have more inaccessible areas than the lakes in California, this would account for some trophy bass never being seen by man. Not to say that a world record exists in Toledo Bend but look at its size 65 miles long, 5 miles wide, with over 1,200 miles of shore line. Compare that to Lake Castaic, Lake Miramar, Dixon Reservoir or other California trophy lakes. You are going to tell me it's not possible far a 20 lb plus bass to exist in Toledo Bend and never be seen by man?

I also agree with Lane about the mind set of the California anglers vs. Texas anglers here's a perfect example. Each year the argument rages over which lake produces the most bass over 10 lbs and the contenders are Lake Fork and Allen Henry. Both lakes yearly certify more 10 lb+ bass than any two lakes in the state. But yet Texas Parks & Wildlife and the Louisiana's Department of Wildlife & Fisheries shock studies has proven more bass in the 10 lb+ range exist in Toledo Bend. Why are these bass not being heard about, for two reasons? First the anglers on Toledo who catch these bass do not want to give them to any lunker program wanting rather to keep them in their lake. Second is the size of the lake, Toledo gets very little pressure compared to it size.