Misinformation

[Paul Roberts]

OK...I'm a little ticked again. I was going to title this post "BS", but since it's a family friendly site I toned it down.

Colorado has in it's C&R record book, a 28" LM from a water that is managed and known to hold some of the largest bass in the state. I also heard it weighed 13lbs. This would stretch what's possible in my neck of the woods. Turns out it's BS. > I talked with a Denver Bassmasters member who said one of the members saw the fish and it was "no more than 22" ". I hate that.

Back in my old home state of NY, there is a lake from which came a report that the state shocked LMs of 8 and 10lbs (state record is 11-4). The source was very good. BUT it turns out this source was mistaken. I contacted the fisheries staff there and they checked the records and said the largest bass were 18" to 20", with one 22incher.

The Colorado state record, also 11-4, was "only" 22.5" long! An obese trout gorged freak. A 28" frame would expand the possibilities for northern LM tremendously, but it just ain't so.

I hate the BS. I guess the real world is just too small for some people's egos.

[Bass_Akwards]

Colorado has in it's C&R record book, a 27" LM from a water that is managed and known to hold some of the largest bass in the state. I also heard it weighed 13lbs. This would stretch what's possible in my neck of the woods. Turns out it's BS. > I talked with a Denver Bassmasters member who said one of the members saw the fish and it was "no more than 22" ". I hate that.

Back in my old home state of NY, there is a lake from which came a report that the state shocked LMs of 8 and 10lbs (state record is 11-4). The source was very good. BUT it turns out this source was mistaken. I contacted the fisheries staff there and they checked the records and said the largest bass were 18" to 20", with one 22incher. .

Don't ever trust any sources except those that actually matter. If you hear something insane like that, take it with a grain of salt and call the next person who'd know like you did in the case of the Denver Bassmasters member or the  fisheries staff in NY.  Otherwise you'll drive youself crazy.  Never believe this garbage until it's honestly confirmed.  If it's not absolutely 100% truely confirmed by the people who really are in the know, I consider it BS.

That's lame that our C&R record is bogus.  Can't we get that taken off the books?  Can anyone just BS and say they have the C&R record?  Don't you at least have to have a picture or a witness or something? 

[Paul Roberts]

I'm not easily fooled. But I got suckered on those.

I don't know how the CO records work. But apparently no photo is required (not that that would help), but according to the Bassmasters member, there is no photo of that fish.

[Dan:]

So the state keeps two record categories. One for fish that were released that only require a length. The other is for fish that were weighed on a certified scale.

That's stupid. I'd just disregard the "release" records because they are unverified. Jarrett Edwards has the record as far as I'm concerned.

[RoLo]

I hate the BS. I guess the real world is just too small for some people's egos.

Well put

Roger

[Glenn]

So you're taking the word of somebody who talked to somebody who said he saw the fish...and you're banking on that?  Sounds like idle gossip to me. Remember, we fishermen..."embellish" every now and then too.  So it makes for a juicy story if the fish is too short to be that heavy.

Just presenting another side of the story.

[Paul Roberts]

So you're taking the word of somebody who talked to somebody who said he saw the fish...and you're banking on that? Sounds like idle gossip to me. Remember, we fishermen..."embellish" every now and then too. So it makes for a juicy story if the fish is too short to be that heavy.

Just presenting another side of the story.

Thanks Glenn. I am aware that this is ALL dock talk. I found the topic on another site and in it was the discussion about this bass. It was "supposedly" caught by a Denver Bassmasters member. So, I got in on the conversation since a member with a special interest in large bass was involved. He claims it's BS.

So, I dunno. I originally took the source (state records list) as legit, but that's in question now. Guess I should check with the state people and see if it's possibly true -they manage and oversee this particular fishery.

[J Francho]

Everytime i see another angler at B-Ponds, or NPP, they tell me about the ten pounders that have come out of there.

:

[Paul Roberts]

Well, I shot off a couple emails. We'll see what comes.

I also noticed that there is a C&R tiger musky listed at 58" . That would be a HUGE musky, much less a tiger. Do tiger's (hybrids) get that big?? The weight record was 53 inches and fully 40lbs. That's a huge tiger -and verified.

Everytime i see another angler at B-Ponds, or NPP, they tell me about the ten pounders that have come out of there.

I fish with a young guy occastionally -a good angler. When I first met him he told me he caught a 10lber out of a pond we both fish. I didn't comment. A few years ago, he caught a big one with me and blurted out, "6!!??, 7lbs!!!??". I said, "Let's weigh it." It was 4-1/2lbs. He had a hard time with that. I had to ask, "Should I have not weighed it?" It WAS a big CO bass, but the number just didn't jive with what he'd believed. He now owns a scale and appears happy now with his fish, regardless of the number attached.

[Paul Roberts]

Well...this might turn out to be a Texas-sized lie, right here in Colorado ;D . Then again, it might turn out to be true. Wouldn't that beat all logic.

[bilgerat]

You could have a certified scale in your boat along with a notary public, a priest and a rabbi and it still wouldn't satisfy some people.

Throw the  scales and rulers into the water and just go fishing for the fun of it.

[WRB]

Estimating a fishes length and actual measure is one reason information gets into question. Another is how the fish is measured; fish biologist for example tend to measure a fish with it's mouth closed, laying on a flat surface from the tip of the lower jaw to the base of the tail. This eliminates the tail irregularities.

Most casual anglers measure fish hanging by it's jaw and measure the fish from the opened mouth, tip of the lower jaw to the longest part of the end of the tail.

A bass for example measured both ways could easily be 4" different in "length".

The IGFA uses closed mouth, laying on a flat surface, down the center of the fish from lower jaw tip to end of tail. Just what is the end of a basses tail, it is slightly V shaped? Tips of the V or base of the V? can be about a 1/2" or so.

Sketch of the fish to be measured helps to resolve all these differences and it would be good to have a standardized length measurement when records are established for catch and release.

I have always measured LMB "length" from the tip of lower jaw with closed mouth, laying on a flat surface to the base of the tail V.

Just pointing out there is room for error .

[Tuckman]

Paul,

The 10lbrs swimming around in the Waneta Lamoka Canal have reached legendary status up here.

Lamoka has been putting multiple seven pound(summer) bass on the Red Cross Reeling for Relief tournament board for the last 2 years though...and that same 7lb fish with eggs in the spring is getting up there

I have found that the Sanders Fishing Guide to be made up primarily of tackleshop banter that has been circling NY tackle shops for the last 3 decades and embellished accordingly.

That being said in one of the recent BASSMASTER magzines a NY angler is proudly hoisting his "11.7Lbs" "state record" NY bass in the lunker pages.

  8-)

[BassThumb]

I hate the BS. I guess the real world is just too small for some people's egos.

Well put

Roger

Who would want a fake record?  I don't get it personally.  How much is really to gain, other than a few congrats, from being the owner of a state record bass?

[Daniel My Brother]

At least the official Colorado record is a Colorado fish. The Illinois record, caught February 15th, 1976 by Ed Walbel, was more than likely caught in Florida.

Ed had just returned from a Winter fishing trip to Florida the day before. While February is winter in Chicago, it's prime time for egg laden Florida fatties.

Still, Ed claims he caught the fish from a private strip pit near the Wisconsin border. Nevermind that Largemouth just don't get that big that far North...

:

[Osprey39]

At least the official Colorado record is a Colorado fish. The Illinois record, caught February 15th, 1976 by Ed Walbel, was more than likely caught in Florida.

Ed had just returned from a Winter fishing trip to Florida the day before. While February is winter in Chicago, it's prime time for egg laden Florida fatties.

Still, Ed claims he caught the fish from a private strip pit near the Wisconsin border. Nevermind that Largemouth just don't get that big that far North...

:

Personally, I don't think fish caught from some private pond should be eligible for records.  They aren't really 'wild'.

[Dan:]

At least the official Colorado record is a Colorado fish. The Illinois record, caught February 15th, 1976 by Ed Walbel, was more than likely caught in Florida.

Ed had just returned from a Winter fishing trip to Florida the day before. While February is winter in Chicago, it's prime time for egg laden Florida fatties.

Still, Ed claims he caught the fish from a private strip pit near the Wisconsin border. Nevermind that Largemouth just don't get that big that far North...

:

Personally, I don't think fish caught from some private pond should be eligible for records. They aren't really 'wild'.

I agree

[RoLo]

Personally, I don't think fish caught from some private pond should be eligible for records. They aren't really 'wild'.

That's a pretty tough call. First of all, there's no hard line that distinguishes a lake from a pond.

Furthermore, it's not likely that bass know or care whether they're living in a lake or pond.

The difference between 'public water' and 'private water' is essentially a political boundary.

The natural wildness of fish will not necessarily hinge on any political boundary.

In some southeastern states, there are private waters that stock and fertilize on a regular basis.

However, unless it's a "pay-lake", not many landowners will be motivated

to foot the recurrent cost of chemicals and restocking (I once owned a small pond).

Ironically, there are many public waters that receive excellent stewardship,

and many private ponds that are merely neglected mud holes, and some of them are pay ponds.

Roger

[Paul Roberts]

Paul,

The 10lbrs swimming around in the Waneta Lamoka Canal have reached legendary status up here.

Lamoka has been putting multiple seven pound(summer) bass on the Red Cross Reeling for Relief tournament board for the last 2 years though...and that same 7lb fish with eggs in the spring is getting up there

I have found that the Sanders Fishing Guide to be made up primarily of tackleshop banter that has been circling NY tackle shops for the last 3 decades and embellished accordingly.

That being said in one of the recent BASSMASTER magzines a NY angler is proudly hoisting his "11.7Lbs" "state record" NY bass in the lunker pages.

8-)

Hey Tuck. Hope you're having a good year. I know you know the myths of NYS, as we all did. In my mind, 7lbs is believable -I once held one. But beyond that through most of the north (but not all -S coastal NE) requires a notary, priest, and rabbi, etc...LOL.

There's a new record? Another quarter pound more, eh. Chipping away at what a 24" frame can carry I see. Call me a curmugeon LOL -but a good natured one.

[Paul Roberts]

Personally, I don't think fish caught from some private pond should be eligible for records. They aren't really 'wild'.

That's a pretty tough call. First of all, there's no hard line that distinguishes a lake from a pond.

Furthermore, it's not likely that bass know or care whether they're living in a lake or pond.

The difference between a 'public water' and 'private water' is essentially a political boundary.

The wildness of fish don't necessarily hinge on any political boundary.

In some states like Georgia, there are private waters that stock and fertilize the pond or lake

on a regular basis. However, unless it's a "pay pond" few pond owner would be motivated

to foot the recurrent cost of stock and chemicals (I once owned a small pond).

Ironically, there are many public waters that receive excellent stewardship,

and many private ponds that are merely neglected mud holes including some pay ponds.

Roger

Yeah, I would disagree too. To grow such fish requires special circumstances, the least of which is age structure. This is less apt to be seen on hard fished public waters. But the right conditions do come and go in many waters, and those in the know follow this sort of thing. Where I would draw the line (if I had any say) would be intensively managed waters. Not all managed waters by any means, but those in which fish are artificially fed, and where genetic manipulations are involved. The Texas ShareLunker is pressing the envelope in my mind, but still within reasonable limits. I am not concerned about what's "fair". In my mind I care little about records except to know what's ecologically possible, and how that works. I DO want to know the circumstances such fish grew in. Some of the records many anglers would be upset about if they knew the real stories. Such fish are freaks, in many senses of the word.

I guess what this begins to touch on is the meaning of "nature", and holy moly that can get people riled. We live in a world where biological manipulations are common and becoming a norm. It's not grandpa's "wild" anymore.

[Paul Roberts]

At least the official Colorado record is a Colorado fish. The Illinois record, caught February 15th, 1976 by Ed Walbel, was more than likely caught in Florida.

Ed had just returned from a Winter fishing trip to Florida the day before. While February is winter in Chicago, it's prime time for egg laden Florida fatties.

Still, Ed claims he caught the fish from a private strip pit near the Wisconsin border. Nevermind that Largemouth just don't get that big that far North...

:

DMB, how big was that fish? Was it mounted? That would be an easy one to prove/dis-prove.

[RoLo]

At least the official Colorado record is a Colorado fish. The Illinois record, caught February 15th, 1976 by Ed Walbel, was more than likely caught in Florida.

Ed had just returned from a Winter fishing trip to Florida the day before. While February is winter in Chicago, it's prime time for egg laden Florida fatties.

Still, Ed claims he caught the fish from a private strip pit near the Wisconsin border. Nevermind that Largemouth just don't get that big that far North...

:

DMB, how big was that fish? Was it mounted? That would be an easy one to prove/dis-prove.

I was wondering the same thing.

I'd like to think that the DNR was conscientious enough to take a scale-count,

which would identify the fish as a Florida-strain, northern-strain or intergrade.

Roger

[Daniel My Brother]

At least the official Colorado record is a Colorado fish. The Illinois record, caught February 15th, 1976 by Ed Walbel, was more than likely caught in Florida.

Ed had just returned from a Winter fishing trip to Florida the day before. While February is winter in Chicago, it's prime time for egg laden Florida fatties.

Still, Ed claims he caught the fish from a private strip pit near the Wisconsin border. Nevermind that Largemouth just don't get that big that far North...

:

DMB, how big was that fish? Was it mounted? That would be an easy one to prove/dis-prove.

I was wondering the same thing.

I'd like to think that the DNR was conscientious enough to take a scale-count,

which would identify the fish as a Florida-strain, northern-strain or intergrade.

Roger

Here's a link to a picture of Ed holding the mount:

http://www.prairiestateoutdoors.com/index.php?/fishing/article/ed_walbels_state-record_largemouth_bass/

Does the IDNR care enough to track down the 36 year old mount and verify it? I doubt it. Jeff Lampe of the Peoria Journal Star wrote an article on this fish a few years back, which basically brought up the same questions I repeated. That's the last I've heard of it.

[Paul Roberts]

28"??? Hmmmmm..... :

Again, it would be easy to verify. If the guy caught it fair and square he would not object. But if it came from FL -he would probably decline.

[WRB]

Without knowing how the bass was measured, the numbers can be misleading. The one thing a good formula does is validate the numbers within some reason.

It's been my experience that a NLMB can grow to nearly 28" length ( mouth closed to V in the tail, etc.).

My PB NLMB weighed 12 lbs 4 oz., was 27" long and 20 inch girth. If someone wants a picture, email me.

The facts are the facts and fact is NLMB rarely have a girth that exceeds 80% of the length. The Walbel bass in the photo looks to be close to 75% girth, it's not a heavy bodied bass.

Under ideal conditions, if the pit lake was deep enough, had year around running springs and a lot of forage and pre spawn, it's possible for a NLMB to grow to 28" length and weigh 13+lbs. However...there would be several NLMB close to this size caught in the same area, not necessarily the same pit lake.

The mount appears to be your average FLMB caught in Florida. This would be a skin mount and easy to verify via a lateral line scale count, as noted earlier.

WRB