#120287 - 08/29/01 04:30 PM
New World Record, or not
|
Fry
Registered: 08/12/01
Posts: 26
Loc: Pendleton
|
I just got a report of a new world record chinook caught and released on the skeena river I will let you read about it yourself at www.northwestfishingguides.com/report WOW WHAT A FISH!!!!!!
_________________________
Jon levy
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#120288 - 08/29/01 11:52 PM
Re: New World Record, or not
|
Fry
Registered: 08/12/01
Posts: 26
Loc: Pendleton
|
Sorry about that the link to the story was down, but here are the dimensions of the possible world record chinook , Length 53.5 inches girth 38.5 inches using a formula it would make this fish out to be 99.125 lb A new world record if she would of have kept it. The photos and story of the fish are at www.northwestfishingguides.com/reports if you can get the page
_________________________
Jon levy
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#120289 - 08/30/01 12:03 AM
Re: New World Record, or not
|
Parr
Registered: 11/25/00
Posts: 54
Loc: Seattle,WA,USA
|
August 19th report, that's a big one.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#120290 - 08/30/01 12:10 AM
Re: New World Record, or not
|
Fry
Registered: 08/12/01
Posts: 26
Loc: Pendleton
|
That is the biggest chinook I have ever seen but I was a little disapointed with the quality of photos.
_________________________
Jon levy
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#120291 - 08/30/01 02:13 AM
Re: New World Record, or not
|
Juvenille at Sea
Registered: 03/05/01
Posts: 121
Loc: Rockport Wa
|
that sure as hell doesnt look 99 pounds to me!
_________________________
team cracker mary jane pro staff
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#120292 - 08/30/01 02:22 AM
Re: New World Record, or not
|
Repeat Spawner
Registered: 11/04/99
Posts: 983
Loc: Everett, Wa
|
Let me see...
Clients decide to release fish with as little handling as possible so they leave the fish in the water (the proper thing to do) and take quick measurements and a quick picture. They sacrifice fame so that fish survives.
Now if they manhandled the fish and took a bunch of hero/get on the cover of STS pictures the fish would probally not survive.
More credit it to them for the crappy pictures I say!!!
_________________________
Ryan S. Petzold aka 'Sparkey' and/or 'Special'
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#120293 - 08/30/01 09:59 AM
Re: New World Record, or not
|
Fry
Registered: 08/12/01
Posts: 26
Loc: Pendleton
|
That is what I was trying to say earlier the quality of photos doesnt show just how big the fish really is, but the skeena river is known for big chinook Thats where the 92.2 lb world record chinook was caught a while back but it was broken buy the kenai king.
_________________________
Jon levy
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#120294 - 08/30/01 12:10 PM
Re: New World Record, or not
|
Spawner
Registered: 04/18/01
Posts: 846
Loc: Milwaukie, OR
|
I dunno, it looks all of 19' to me.
_________________________
Get Bent Tackle whōre. Just added spinner section, where you can special order to your hearts content!
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#120295 - 08/30/01 03:26 PM
Re: New World Record, or not
|
Three Time Spawner
Registered: 03/13/00
Posts: 1830
Loc: Kelso Wa.
|
Okieboy, checkout the girth of that tail in relation to the guys hand, makes a believer out of me.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#120296 - 08/30/01 03:43 PM
Re: New World Record, or not
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
After Ingrid finally managed to get the fish alongside the boat, I was able to net it. John and I lifted the salmon into the boat. Ingrid, meanwhile completely exhausted could not believe her luck. We drove back at full speed, since we did not want to set the fish back in the torrential current. I explained to Ingrid that we usually release all "the really big ones" to preserve the gene pool. She and her husband agreed to it without hesitation. Does anyone else out there think this is OUTRAGEOUS ??? Landing a fish in what was most likely a nylon net and thus removing protective slime where fungus forms, slamming the fish into the bottom of the boat and then transporting to softer/slower water and in his words "I put the giant back into the river approximately 10 minutes later", is in my minds eye a criminal act and should be punished with fine and perhaps jail time. I doubt seriously if this fish is alive and well today. I have studied the pictures and compared them with pictures of my trips to the Kenai. I'd guess this to be in the neighborhood of 65 to 70lbs no bigger, (fish I've landed). I've witnessed Less Johnson's current recorded record at 97+ lbs and the comparison is no where the same. This is just some Canadian trying to drum up more business for himself.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#120297 - 08/30/01 04:32 PM
Re: New World Record, or not
|
Three Time Spawner
Registered: 03/13/00
Posts: 1830
Loc: Kelso Wa.
|
That picture really means nothing, I can show you a picture of a poorly taken shot of a 53lb. king and you would probably guess it weighs 25-30lbs. I've got numerous other photo's that similarly do not do proper justice to the fish. I do agree though that there handling of the fish was not very good
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#120298 - 08/30/01 05:06 PM
Re: New World Record, or not
|
Poodle Smolt
Registered: 05/03/01
Posts: 10878
Loc: McCleary, WA
|
I agree on the handling issue, but the 30-40 minute fight also took a toll on the fish. It would be lucky to survive the battle anyway, regardless of the net issue. They did do their best to revive the fish once caught.
I read a lot of arm chair qb/fishermen here, so instead of complaining about the handling of this fish, what would you have done to make sure that this hog survived? Do you ALWAYS carry a cotton net? Do you ALWAYS carry a dowel de-hooker? I have yet to find a cotton net for sale, but I do have two of those dowel de-hookers on my boat.
Just a few questions for the arm chair qb/fishermen. Andy
_________________________
"Give me the anger, fish! Give me the anger!"
They call me POODLE SMOLT!
The Discover Pass is brought to you by your friends at the CCA.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#120300 - 08/30/01 06:24 PM
Re: New World Record, or not
|
Fry
Registered: 08/12/01
Posts: 26
Loc: Pendleton
|
I agree poor handling of the fish but if you look back at the last 6 reports those are all trophy chinook including the 70 lb. That fish is gigantic and anyone who doesnt think that fish is big needs to see a doctor. The skeena is a big fish river, No doubt
_________________________
Jon levy
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#120301 - 08/30/01 06:32 PM
Re: New World Record, or not
|
Fry
Registered: 08/12/01
Posts: 26
Loc: Pendleton
|
Holy Cow!!!! They released it ten minutes later I missed that part. That canadien should take a lesson on catch and release
_________________________
Jon levy
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#120302 - 08/30/01 06:52 PM
Re: New World Record, or not
|
Juvenile at Sea
Registered: 03/28/00
Posts: 222
Loc: Renton,WA
|
I've been fishing on the Kenai for a lot of years and have seen a lot slabs in the 70's, 80's and one 91# in a net, this fish a 99#er I think not!! It's big alright'but I don't think it's that big. Justin you saw the mount of the record, that fish could wrap his jaws around your waist and the tail was as wide as my a$$ (thats fairly good size) This fish is not quite that big. Look at the mouth and tail size compared to its fine handlers. I'm not biting
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#120303 - 08/30/01 09:47 PM
Re: New World Record, or not
|
Juvenille at Sea
Registered: 01/13/01
Posts: 133
Loc: Saxon,wa.
|
And the winner is? Dakingfisher----------I knew somebody would post the part about the 10min. suffication session. Big fish but a dead fish as well.
_________________________
always practice C.P.R. on native iron
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#120304 - 08/30/01 10:56 PM
Re: New World Record, or not
|
The Chosen One
Registered: 02/09/00
Posts: 13942
Loc: Tuleville
|
I dunno what to think. The mount in Soldotna doesn't look that big. The fish is just massive across the shoulders. I've seen much longer chinook, but not nearly as buff across the back. I've seen mounts that were just huge, but were only in the 80's.
I'm not even going to play hypocrite here. If that were me, I probably would have had it mounted and took the fame (and crap) that goes with a World Record chinook. Hey, at least I'm honest!
As for genes? Have a specialist extract a sample of the gametes. Freeze those little wrigglers. Pull out of the freezer in 100 years and rebuild/enhance the Skeena kings. No problem! They do it with humans, so I don't see why it can't be done with world record fish. I'm sure it's just a cost issue as of now.
Parker
_________________________
Tule King Paker
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#120305 - 08/31/01 02:40 AM
Re: New World Record, or not
|
BUCK NASTY!!
Registered: 01/26/00
Posts: 6312
Loc: Vancouver, WA
|
Indeed, that's a monster. But I don't know if I can buy the fact that it's well according to my calculations in which I received from Bill Herzog's article years ago is length x girth squared divided by 775 that comes out to 102 lbs. which is huge.. I wish there was a better picture out of the water. Keith
_________________________
It's time to put the red rubber nose away, clown seasons over.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
0 registered (),
951
Guests and
0
Spiders online. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
11499 Members
17 Forums
72912 Topics
824749 Posts
Max Online: 3937 @ 07/19/24 03:28 AM
|
|
|