Is it Possible. 2024
Gillroid 9000 reply :
So most of ya know George Perry. Hes the lucky guy who caught the record Largemouth in 1932 and since nobody was able to Beat it. But they were some close ones but still 84 years later His record is still strong as new. The real question is Is It Possible to Beat George Perrys Record?
1234567 reply :
Manabu Kurita
Gillroid 9000 reply :
Manabu Kurita caught his Big one at Lake Biwaa. But sadly his record is tied to Perrys according to Official sources and still it seems Perrys bass is going to be on the throne for a Really long time.
roadwarrior reply :
25lbs-1oz
http://www.fishingloft.com/record-largemouth-bass.html
tholmes reply :
Sure, it's possible. There could be another bass with the right genetics, food source, growing conditions, etc. grow to record-breaking size. Given the number of people fishing for bass today, it's bound to happen someday.
Tom
deaknh03 reply :
On 12/2/2016 at 4:41 AM, roadwarrior said:25lbs-1oz
http://www.fishingloft.com/record-largemouth-bass.html
I was just about to say..see dottie.
Logan S reply :
Kurita's bass was actually bigger than Perry's and was scrutinized a heck of a lot more. IMO it's the real world record...But according to IGFA rules it counts as a tie since it wasn't more than 2oz heavier.
I'm sure a new WR will be caught eventually. I'd put my money on CA or Japan for the location.
Gillroid 9000 reply :
On 12/2/2016 at 4:41 AM, roadwarrior said:25lbs-1oz
http://www.fishingloft.com/record-largemouth-bass.html
Its interesting and also sad:( Looks like the answer is a descieve Yes
Mosster47 reply :
On 12/2/2016 at 4:41 AM, roadwarrior said:25lbs-1oz
http://www.fishingloft.com/record-largemouth-bass.html
It will be a long time before Dottie gets toppled.
wdp reply :
On 12/2/2016 at 4:43 AM, Logan S said:Kurita's bass was actually bigger than Perry's and was scrutinized a heck of a lot more. IMO it's the real world record...But according to IGFA rules it counts as a tie since it wasn't more than 2oz heavier.
I'm sure a new WR will be caught eventually. I'd put my money on CA or Japan for the location.
100% agreement!
breban1 reply :
On 12/2/2016 at 4:43 AM, Logan S said:I'm sure a new WR will be caught eventually. I'd put my money on CA or Japan for the location.
Every record is meant to be broken right? And I agree it will probably be a CA lake.
The sport has grown a lot in the past 10 years, and with the latest electronics out there, someone may even see the world record before they catch it.
It'll be another story for the sport, which can only help it grow.
Jaderose reply :
My money is on Cuba
Fisher-O-men reply :
It will be in California, in San Diego, on a Yum Dinger, at the end of my line!
Hurricane reply :
Absolutely possible....
Gilgamesh reply :
Kurita has claimed to have hooked a bass he estimates to be 25+ on a mother a couple years ago. He says that he still knows where she lives, just cant get her to bite again.
Yeajray231 reply :
On 12/3/2016 at 2:35 AM, Gilgamesh said:Kurita has claimed to have hooked a bass he estimates to be 25+ on a mother a couple years ago. He says that he still knows where she lives, just cant get her to bite again.
Well he used a live bluegill to get the one he showed everyone. Have you ever used bluegill for bait ? If you know where the bass is , it's very easy.
The hard part is finding it ! Not catching it (when you're talking about the technique he uses.)
BrackishBassin reply :
Question - are there rules governing where the fish is caught, meaning the body of water? I'm relatively new to freshwater, so I'm just curious. I mean, it would be theoretically possible for me to build a pond on my property, stock it with fish, and feed the hell out of them until they were world record size. Then 'catch one' and bam, I have the record.
The reason I ask is because when I was growing up, I used to fish my grandfather's pond in upstate NY. He stocked his pond with stuff he caught from Cayuga Lake. At one point he had a bass in the pond that was easily 7+ pounds. His name was Leroy. He was hand fed white bread at least once a week and you had to release him immediately if you ever managed to catch him (grandpa's rules). Could that have counted if he kept growing and someone caught him when he was large enough?
Raul reply :
On 12/2/2016 at 4:29 AM, Gillroid 9000 said:So most of ya know George Perry. Hes the lucky guy who caught the record Largemouth in 1932 and since nobody was able to Beat it. But they were some close ones but still 84 years later His record is still strong as new. The real question is Is It Possible to Beat George Perrys Record?
Officially weighted Kurita's bass is 1 oz heavier so, 1 oz or 1 mg more ---> the record is broken ( by "rules" it's a tie )
On 12/2/2016 at 11:26 PM, Jaderose said:My money is on Cuba
Doubtful, warm weather and people there are catch and keep.
scaleface reply :
Theres nothing you can do that cant be done .
Yeajray231 reply :
On 12/3/2016 at 6:57 AM, BrackishBassin said:Question - are there rules governing where the fish is caught, meaning the body of water? I'm relatively new to freshwater, so I'm just curious. I mean, it would be theoretically possible for me to build a pond on my property, stock it with fish, and feed the hell out of them until they were world record size. Then 'catch one' and bam, I have the record.
The reason I ask is because when I was growing up, I used to fish my grandfather's pond in upstate NY. He stocked his pond with stuff he caught from Cayuga Lake. At one point he had a bass in the pond that was easily 7+ pounds. His name was Leroy. He was hand fed white bread at least once a week and you had to release him immediately if you ever managed to catch him (grandpa's rules). Could that have counted if he kept growing and someone caught him when he was large enough?
No offense but if it was 7lbs it was most likely female. like overwhelming odds. And yes.. the ohio state record of 13lbs was taken from a pond.
Good luck growing a 20+lber. Genetics also play a roll. A 6 foot man and 5 foot woman don't typically have a 6'8" son if you catch my drift
BrackishBassin reply :
On 12/3/2016 at 7:20 AM, Yeajray231 said:No offense but if it was 7lbs it was most likely female. like overwhelming odds. And yes.. the ohio state record of 13lbs was taken from a pond.
Good luck growing a 20+lber. Genetics also play a roll. A 6 foot man and 5 foot woman don't typically have a 6'8" son if you catch my drift
Oh, I may not be able to do it in a farm pond. However, I could easily do it in 10 or 15 generations in tanks. That's why I was asking if there were provisions for it only being a natural born fish, taken from natural waters, etc.
You're probably right about it being a female, but 'his' name was Leroy, so I stuck with the male monicker.
Yeajray231 reply :
Easily ? I don't know what the exact criteria is.. I wouldn't be that proud of a record like that anyway.. Like playing poker seeing your cards.
I guess it would be neat though. Go ahead and start doin that. I'll buy a couple ten pounders off ya and put em in my local fishin holes.
WRB reply :
The Kurita world record LMB was caught in July 2009 and the last giant bass reported from Japan. I doubt if Lake Biwa will produce another 20 lb class LMB.
There is always the possibly that California could produce another 22+ lb LMB.
Tom
Alan Reed reply :
I will say it will be beat. There is no reason to think it can't.
BassObsessed reply :
There are a few private well managed lakes in Texas with the intention of growing world records. If I read correctly they have reported a few males that were pushing DD or slightly above it. Some bass up to 16lbs have been caught and its still early in the management stage. We know everything has to fall into place like genetics etc.
BrackishBassin reply :
On 12/3/2016 at 7:55 AM, Yeajray231 said:Easily ? I don't know what the exact criteria is.. I wouldn't be that proud of a record like that anyway.. Like playing poker seeing your cards.
I guess it would be neat though. Go ahead and start doin that. I'll buy a couple ten pounders off ya and put em in my local fishin holes.
Maybe easily isn't how I should have described it, but it could be done. You need to have the time and resources to do it, neither of which I have.
I spent a year working for Maryland growing oysters as part of the Bay restoration program. We selectively bred for size, growth rate, and disease resistance. We didn't use any chemicals and/or attempt any sort of genetic modification because all the oysters were seeded in the Bay. I'm willing to bet that we could have grown some massive oysters if we had.
But all that aside, I was really just curious if there were restrictions on the world records or not.
Yeajray231 reply :
On 12/3/2016 at 10:13 AM, BrackishBassin said:Maybe easily isn't how I should have described it, but it could be done. You need to have the time and resources to do it, neither of which I have.
I spent a year working for Maryland growing oysters as part of the Bay restoration program. We selectively bred for size, growth rate, and disease resistance. We didn't use any chemicals and/or attempt any sort of genetic modification because all the oysters were seeded in the Bay. I'm willing to bet that we could have grown some massive oysters if we had.
But all that aside, I was really just curious if there were restrictions on the world records or not.
That's interesting.. I'm not sure though. Maybe someone who is sure will chime in
WRB reply :
On 12/3/2016 at 10:31 AM, Yeajray231 said:That's interesting.. I'm not sure though. Maybe someone who is sure will chime in
There are a few trophy private bass fisheries in Texas that are currently trying to raise a world record bass. The only restriction I know if is the bass must be caught legally using IGFA approved tackle.
Tom
everythingthatswims reply :
On 12/3/2016 at 8:17 AM, WRB said:The Kurita world record LMB was caught in July 2009 and the last giant bass reported from Japan. I doubt if Lake Biwa will produce another 20 lb class LMB.
There is always the possibly that California could produce another 22+ lb LMB.
Tom
Why do you doubt it?
BassObsessed reply :
I know they consider bass an invasive species there but still has potential to put out a monster.
"hamma" reply :
I believe that the world record "can" be broken. But, its going to take the moon, stars, and planets to line up. lol,.... No really, I do think there is a bass out there swimming around even bigger than the current record. And maybe someday a trophy hunter with the right IGFA gear will haul it in. But,... its going to take some due diligence, perfect timing, and a whole lot of luck.
What stinks is that you "have to" adhere to the IGFA requirements to do so. Some day a good ole' boy is going to hook one on his favorite rod, and get ripped of the record because his favorite rod doesnt qualify. And that right there makes it even harder to "break" records in fishing.
I have a question for you guys.,.... do you have IGFA qualifying gear? Do you know what gear qualifies?
I know that a quick check on google would answer my questions, but my point is.,... do you, would you? Within bass fishing many lures will hook a pig, and to own all IGFA gear to throw those lures may actually hinder the lures effectiveness. Therefore, producing a situation that may negate the hit to begin with.
The truly big girls are smarter than the average bass, they've been around the block so to speak, and seem to possess exceptional awareness. I know many of you may disagree, and Im ok with that. but I believe this as Ive seen some huge bass in my time and they all have one thing in common, they demand the due respect the top predator would,. You really have to put a effort forth to fool them
..I offer them some techniques that possess alot of stealth, using lures that mimic the waters primary, or predominate forage, smothered in that forages scent, with proper boat position, lure presentation,.and above all tons of patience. And Im still no pro at it by any means, just a angler that puts forth these efforts, to put "any" fish in the boat. Ive caught some pigs, even some exceptionally impressive fish for this area in my time. BUT,... I have had the fortunate opportunity to live near what I believe the best waters for big bass around here. Add in that most of my bass fishing was at first from a canoe, then a small basshunter, providing the "stealth" aspect quite well. So, my options all kinda added up to my sucesses.
Many of you reading this, live down south of me, and in areas that have produced some bass close to or threatening the world record. Have you considered a IGFA rod/reel/line to chase down a record fish? And if you even would consider it, would you fish it exclusively? Get my point now?
A fish may be out there to topple the current record, but will it qualify is the question. I imagine many waters are capable to produce a new record, it will take the right stuff to do so, and in the right "cycle" of said lakes life. But will it happen? im not sure. I am sure however that when im done in a few minutes here today, Im going to google the IGFA requirements for such a records demise
Is it possible? sure its possible, but will it happen is the tougher question
Yeajray231 reply :
You're telling me you're allowed to use live bait but there are certain rod restrictions? Lol makes no sense.. @"hamma"
deaknh03 reply :
On 12/3/2016 at 11:20 PM, Yeajray231 said:You're telling me you're allowed to use live bait but there are certain rod restrictions? Lol makes no sense.. @"hamma"
go on the igfa site..it's such a scam.
"hamma" reply :
Ok I just got off the igfa site, and it seems that they have changed their rules since the last I checked, (probably 35 years ago) Back then you needed a igfa certified rod, reel, line, blah, blah, blah etc,......
Nowadays, no wire lines, 20lb test is the line class on largemouth, and rods with a shorter than 27 inch butt (from reel seats center to rods butt), and tips longer than 44 inches, meaning its length from center of reels seat to tip. And, no electric or powered reels.
So I guess most of us are compliant as is, I dont use more than 20 lb test, I tried a 25 lb test power pro for frogging but gave up on it, and reverted right back to 14 lb test mono. The 27 inch butt section thing I will have to measure some of my rods but I think they arent that long., and there are some requirements about assistance during the fight, but I catch my fish myself and usually lip them myself ,...so im good to go,... how about you? does your line even braid exceed 20 lb test?
I know some like the thicker braids to help with braid burying itself in the spool, and backlashes
So,...keep under 20 lb test, catch it yourself, and fish with rods that have a butt section no longer than 27 inches, and you too can qualify!
There ya go yeajray! good luck buddy
WRB reply :
On 12/3/2016 at 2:11 PM, everythingthatswims said:Why do you doubt it?
My name is Thomas!
I doubt the Perry bass, no objective proof. The only witness vanished, no photos*, the weight was reported to be a 100 lb postal scale of unkonwn accuracy in 1/4 lb increments and the bass was never examined, it was eaten during the depression era.
I doubt the actual weight of Bob Crupi 22.01 lb bass, the bass was never examined for added weights, 1 photo** without measurements and no witness of the catch.
Dottie was the only 22+lb LMB caught in California, not officially weighed or examined, lots of witnesses that said th bass was snagged. I have no doubt she weighed well over 22 lbs., more than likely 25 lbs reported. If Dottie was caught in Texas or Florida where they don't have a snagging law, she would be the World Record Bass.
4 LMB caught that exceed 22 lbs in the history of bass fishing, 2 of those very questionable.
It's possible and hope it is caught in California.
Tom
* 1 photo showed up a few years ago of a big bass held by an unknown man and a boy on a sunny day somewhere with palm trees. Perry stated it was a rainy day, to wet to work the farm and night when he got home to weigh the bass.
** 1 photo of Crupi taking the bass out of his livewell, no measurement ever offered creates doubt. The reason I was given that my 19.3 lb LMB can't be validated is no photo of the bass with measurements. I had a witness, accurate weight, a photo holding the bass before it was released, so I gave up. It's difficult, if not impossible to authenticate any record size bass that is released due to so many false attempts to break records.
everythingthatswims reply :
On 12/4/2016 at 1:36 AM, WRB said:My name is Thomas!
I doubt the Perry bass, no objective proof. The only witness vanished, no photos*, the weight was reported to be a 100 lb postal scale of unkonwn accuracy in 1/4 lb increments and the bass was never examined, it was eaten during the depression era.
I doubt the actual weight of Bob Crupi 22.01 lb bass, the bass was never examined for added weights, 1 photo** without measurements and no witness of the catch.
Dottie was the only 22+lb LMB caught in California, not officially weighed or examined, lots of witnesses that said th bass was snagged. I have no doubt she weighed well over 22 lbs., more than likely 25 lbs reported. If Dottie was caught in Texas or Florida where they don't have a snagging law, she would be the World Record Bass.
4 LMB caught that exceed 22 lbs in the history of bass fishing, 2 of those very questionable.
It's possible and hope it is caught in California.
Tom
* 1 photo showed up a few years ago of a big bass held by an unknown man and a boy on a sunny day somewhere with palm trees. Perry stated it was a rainy day, to wet to work the farm and night when he got home to weigh the bass.
** 1 photo of Crupi taking the bass out of his livewell, no measurement ever offered creates doubt. The reason I was given that my 19.3 lb LMB can't be validated is no photo of the bass with measurements. I had a witness, accurate weight, a photo holding the bass before it was released, so I gave up. It's difficult, if not impossible to authenticate any record size bass that is released due to so many false attempts to break records.
I meant why do you doubt that another 20+ will come from Japan, I know nothing about it, I'm just curious. That is interesting about how big of a grey area fish that size fall into when it comes to making things official.
The Bassman reply :
Does anyone remember the Junior Samples scandel in the 60's when he tried to pass off a salt water grouper as a new record LM?
MBB Nate reply :
It will happen, all records are broken eventually. There are probably a lot more 20 lb bass than we think there are. It wouldn't really surprise me if there is a 30 lber out there somewhere.
WRB reply :
It's been over 7 years since Biwa produced the world record bass and no Giants have been caught since that time in Japan. It could be because it's against Japanise fishing regulations to release any live bass back into their lakes, they are considered a invasive species.
LMB don't grow long enough ( over 30") to exceed 25 lbs and only 1 in modern history was that heavy.
Tom
Fisher-O-men reply :
On 12/3/2016 at 6:57 AM, BrackishBassin said:Question - are there rules governing where the fish is caught, meaning the body of water? I'm relatively new to freshwater, so I'm just curious. I mean, it would be theoretically possible for me to build a pond on my property, stock it with fish, and feed the hell out of them until they were world record size. Then 'catch one' and bam, I have the record.
Takes more that ample food to grow a fish that big. Genetics plays a huge role.
OCdockskipper reply :
On 12/4/2016 at 4:34 AM, WRB said:LMB don't grow long enough ( over 30") to exceed 25 lbs and only 1 in modern history was that heavy.
Tom
That is a point that is often overlooked. I happened to look at a list of the heaviest bass caught in Texas and all of these over 15lb fish were in the 24" - 27" length range. Having caught a couple of 8 lb fish that were also 24" long (and were not skinny), it really drives home the point on genetics where the really large fish grow wider & taller once they pass that 2 ft. length mark.
WRB reply :
Search "Building the world record bass" article in 2014 Bassmaster mag.
All you need to know about growing your own record bass, it hasn't happened so far.
Tom
"hamma" reply :
Ok ,..Ok,...put the miracle grow and steroids away now, and Frankenfish aren't going to qualify either,...lol
I urge you to check out the igfa site and read up on it, there's some photo, and measurement requirements that may benefit some, as you guys actually fish these lakes that "may" have the next record in it. Im pretty sure the next "world" record isnt up here in New England, I can hunt to beat my states record, or any other NE lakes I fish,(doubtful but ya never know) and as my meds are quite strong I will need to check into regs here and ensure I follow the requirements, whether they mirror igfa or not. But I digress,...
You, yes you.,.... Not to pressure you but,...only you can prevent forest fires, shoot thats Smokey's deal,...lemmie try that again.
You actually may have a shot at it, Do you fish Cali?,...Texas?, Fla? Georgia? Alabama?.. any other major lake that produces double digits? Catt? Tom? and all you other fortunate anglers that fish these waters
Do you potentially have what it takes?, Fish with 20 lb test or lighter lines?, I know many of you have "what it takes" and fish these "potential" lakes. for the love of god guys!,..check out the regulations/requirements,... I did, and they seem to be alot more lenient as they used to be, you may already be compliant, or just have to adjust a slight bit. Wouldn't it be at least worth it to check it out? segway to rob schnieder in "the water boy",..... "you can do it!",.... lol
How would you feel if you landed the monster bass of all time and got screwed out of the record due to a "requirement",... I know I'd feel bad for ya, I'm sure previously potential record breakers that fell short are re-thinking their actions, and wishing that they didnt fall short.
Technology being what it is these days, do you bring a smartphone with you on the boat? go pro? tape measure, have a livewell? a certified weight station closeby? see where im going with this?
Not only ,...lol "you can do it",...you just might,,.... and trust me,..I'd be right there congratulating you for it.
Id much rather want to shake your hand,...then to give ya a (nelson from The Simpsons) "Hehh heeahhh!",....LOL,... like I stated above, "only you can prevent forest fires"
Raul reply :
On 12/4/2016 at 5:02 AM, Fisher-O-men said:Takes more that ample food to grow a fish that big. Genetics plays a huge role.
And environment.
There will be no WR record bass coming out Florida, why ? Cuz there are gators, there will be no WR bass coming out of Cuba, why ? Cuz in Cuba is all CATCH & KEEP, the only way you could find a WR bass in Mexico is if it came out of a brand, spankin almost unknown new lake along the coast thas was stocked eight or ten years before with Florida strain bass, because once known EVERYBODY is going to fish it and 90% of the anglers are "Cuban" ( catch and keep even the fingerlings ), Mexico's record is a little over 19 lbs out of Bacurato and that was ages ago, yes, there are a lot of big bass in Mex but a WR, nope.
But there are other countries, South Africa for example.
Yeajray231 reply :
Sickening to think about all the DD's crunched by gators.
TnRiver46 reply :
On 12/4/2016 at 11:55 PM, Yeajray231 said:Sickening to think about all the DD's crunched by gators.
I don't know, alligators taste pretty declicous. I support them eating anything with the exception of pets or people so I can, in turn, eat them hahahah
WRB reply :
Knowing IGFA rules for record fish is the easy part. Today almost everyone has a camera with them as part of their phone, easy to record the fish. My certified scale also has a measurement scale which is helpful. The potential world record LMB, not a line class, will need to be examined by a official biologist or fishery person, you need to have the phone number handy.
What you need to except is the bass will die as a result of being validated.
Back in the 90's when Castiac was at it's highest potential to produce a world record bass, Bassin mag also had a million dollar prize offered. It's hard to imagine the chaos this hype caused with boats from all over the country descending on this small lake. It's also hard to fathom that Castaic lake marina didn't have a certified scale or a camera available to validate a catch. It was during this time period that I caught my PB.
Tom
Wayne P. reply :
What about the lake in Honduras that had bass in the 30# class that were captured spear fishing and there was an underwater video of some of them? Glen Lau may have been the one that did the video. I think the lake is Yojoa
WRB reply :
On 12/5/2016 at 7:57 AM, Wayne P. said:What about the lake in Honduras that had bass in the 30# class that were captured spear fishing and there was an underwater video of some of them? Glen Lau may have been the one that did the video. I think the lake is Yojoa
Monte Burks book Sow Belly I believe has a chapter on Cuba and Honduras, need to dig it out and read it again.
Tom
Big Bait Fishing reply :
On 12/3/2016 at 11:23 AM, WRB said:There are a few trophy private bass fisheries in Texas that are currently trying to raise a world record bass. The only restriction I know if is the bass must be caught legally using IGFA approved tackle.
Tom
why not the '' all tackle record '' ?? seems you could use whatever line , Manu used 25 lb. Toray Super Hard Strong flouro
RAMBLER reply :
Wasn't there a bass, in California, that had been caught a couple of times, but not hooked correctly, that was heavier than the present record? I might not be remembering it right but I thought the locals called her Daisy. I think she was found floating, dead and would have still been the new record had she been caught within the rules. I just reread WRB's post. I guess "Daisy" might have been "Dottie".
If you ever read what Doug Hannon wrote about big fish, he figured that the nominal temperature, growing period, food available and other factors I can't remember made north central Florida the prime area for a new world's record to come from. But, he probably never figured in hand feeding bass with rainbow trout in California.
Catt reply :
On 12/5/2016 at 9:52 PM, RAMBLER said:Wasn't there a bass, in California, that had been caught a couple of times, but not hooked correctly, that was heavier than the present record? I might not be remembering it right but I thought the locals called her Daisy. I think she was found floating, dead and would have still been the new record had she been caught within the rules.
Dottie!
Was snagged outside the mouth, was once caught & weighed on uncertified scales, & a number of other problems every time she was caught.
California has had bass in the teens found floating on the water near death & entered as a state record. They have had bass entered for purposes of records with lead weights stuffed down their throats.
And they worry about Perry's bass 
Wayne P. reply :
Perry's bass was a dink compare to this one:
Mainebass1984 reply :
I think that Japan and South Africa have the best chance at a new world record. It is sad to think that it wont happen in this country, in the Largemouths native range. Without a significant amount of trout being stocked in California lakes I do not think it will happen there. I may be misinformed but, it was my understanding that the state of California isn't stocking Rainbows as it once did because they few it as an invasive species where it doesn't naturally occur ?
J Francho reply :
On 12/5/2016 at 10:36 PM, Mainebass1984 said:I may be misinformed but, it was my understanding that the state of California isn't stocking Rainbows as it once did because they few it as an invasive species where it doesn't naturally occur ?
Rainbow trout naturally occur in California...bass are the alien species.
WRB reply :
Trout hatcheries in California can plant tripoloid (sterile) rainbow trout in waters that have native rainbow trout or steelhead trout populations since the late 60's. A law suit in 2006 stopped planting hactuary rainbow trout anywhere that historically had a steelhead trout population. The local DFW had to survey all the waters with trout populations for environmental impact if they resumed planting sterile tripoloid rainbow trout. The study period lasted until this year and some water are now being planted agian with hatchery trout. The bass population is a non native species in Califotnia and under attack by purist environmentalists to remove them in the Delta area, a world class bass fishery.
The reason a world record bass must be examined is to prevent cheating, a problem that dates back to the beginning of record keeping and bass fishing derbies. The Smallmouth bass (Hays) record was removed because of a claim the fish was stuffed with nuts and bolts. The Hays record was reinstated in 2006 based on measurements validate the weight.
Regarding line class records vs all tackle records, the all tackle LMB record is the holy grail of bass records and under intense scrutiny, line class records and other bass species tend to get less scrutiny.
Tom
Mainebass1984 reply :
On 12/5/2016 at 10:51 PM, J Francho said:Rainbow trout naturally occur in California...bass are the alien species.
I am aware of this. Largemouth Bass are invasive species in a vast majority of the waterbodies they are currently found.
On 12/6/2016 at 12:21 AM, WRB said:Trout hatcheries in California can plant tripoloid (sterile) rainbow trout in waters that have native rainbow trout or steelhead trout populations since the late 60's. A law suit in 2006 stopped planting hactuary rainbow trout anywhere that historically had a steelhead trout population. The local DFW had to survey all the waters with trout populations for environmental impact if they resumed planting sterile tripoloid rainbow trout. The study period lasted until this year and some water are now being planted agian with hatchery trout. The bass population is a non native species in Califotnia and under attack by purist environmentalists to remove them in the Delta area, a world class bass fishery.
Are the post-survey stocking numbers comparable to the pre-survey stocking numbers ? I was under the impression that stocking allocations were far fewer then they historically had been.
Aside from protecting native steelhead populations hasn't stocking been ceased to protect the clear lake hitch ?
It seems a stretch to me for California to produce a world record given the current conditions. Extreme drought certainly has strained a large number of waterbodies. The presence of Landlocked Striped Bass. The number and occurrence of trout stockings is way down from 90s or even 00s levels when it seemed all but certain California was going to produce a anew world record. It is always a possibility that a new world record could come from California but I think that there was a far greater chance of that happening in the 90s and 00s.
I think Japan will produce the next record or perhaps South Africa.
J Francho reply :
On 12/6/2016 at 12:52 AM, Mainebass1984 said:I am aware of this. Largemouth Bass are an introduced
invasivespecies in a vast majority of the waterbodies west of the Mississippithey are currently found.
Fixed it for you. I wouldn't call them invasive, either. Most were intentionally and legally stocked.
Derek Petter reply :
I think it will be beat in my lifetime (hopefully I do it lol).
Mainebass1984 reply :
On 12/6/2016 at 2:28 AM, J Francho said:Fixed it for you. I wouldn't call them invasive, either. Most were intentionally and legally stocked.
I shall disagree with your corrections, as would the vast majority of the scientific community. You are entitled to your opinion.
Raul reply :
On 12/5/2016 at 10:14 PM, Wayne P. said:Perry's bass was a dink compare to this one:
I catch fry like that all the time, such a nuisance.
On 12/5/2016 at 10:36 PM, Mainebass1984 said:I think that Japan and South Africa have the best chance at a new world record. It is sad to think that it wont happen in this country, in the Largemouths native range. Without a significant amount of trout being stocked in California lakes I do not think it will happen there. I may be misinformed but, it was my understanding that the state of California isn't stocking Rainbows as it once did because they few it as an invasive species where it doesn't naturally occur ?
Rainbows are native to Cali, actually Cali is home to a subspecies of rainbow more rare, Golden Rainbow Trout.
contium reply :
On 12/6/2016 at 6:42 AM, Mainebass1984 said:I shall disagree with your corrections, as would the vast majority of the scientific community. You are entitled to your opinion.
How can you have an invasive species that was intentionally (legally) stocked in a man made reservoir? Nothing was there before. There are no native species. Even if it was a stream that was damned up that had native trout, they would have died in the warm water lakes. By law, they have to stock warm water fish to maintain the biology of the lake. I don't think there were any native warm water fish in SoCal.
OCdockskipper reply :
This^ brings up an interesting point.
I remember when Diamond Valley Lake (DVL) was impounded, there was quite a program run by Dave Guisti . As the dams were being built (yes, dams - this lake has dams on the front & rear of the lake...Only in California), Gliebe built a small pond in a low lying area. Fry of bass, bluegill & other species were introduced into this pond. A year or so later, the impoundment was filled and this population of warm water fish were already available to roam the new reservoir.
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-diamond-valley-lake-bass-anglers-delight-2003sep29-story.html
So although the fish were not native to the tributary that created the impoundment, they were there before the impoundment. Therefore, largemouth bass are indeed native to DVL. Right?
WRB reply :
Largemouth bass were introduced to California by Dr Henshaw who transported bass from Minnisota to California via railroad in the 1880's. Spotted bass from Alabama were introduced in 1930's to Friant dam lake Millerton. Not sure when or where Smallmouth bass were introduced,
Stripe bass where introduced into the San Fransico bay for the east coast. Florida largemouth bass introduced to San Diego city lakes in 1959, Upper Otay lake by Orvil Ball.
No Fresh water bass evolved west of the Rocky Mountains, they were introduced by profession biologist working for the State of California. Bass are not invasive specie, they are non- native.
Tom
J Francho reply :
On 12/6/2016 at 6:42 AM, Mainebass1984 said:I shall disagree with your corrections, as would the vast majority of the scientific community. You are entitled to your opinion.
See Tom's quote above. It's not opinion....
Mainebass1984 reply :
As defined by the American Fisheries Society:
Invasive species: non native species disrupting and replacing native species
As defined by NOAA:
Invasive species: An invasive species is an organism that causes ecological or economic harm in a new environment where it is non native.
J Francho reply :
Bass aren't causing harm.
Mainebass1984 reply :
On 12/6/2016 at 9:47 PM, J Francho said:Bass aren't causing harm.
Ask your local biologist. Any species effects the food chain and eco system they are introduced into.
J Francho reply :
Yep. And anyone that says bass are HARMING the system has an agenda. They simply aren't. Those species have been in trouble for a long time coming. Has nothing to do with bass.
Djf3864 reply :
I think that it is very likely that the record will be broken in my lifetime. You have a lot of people out there right now building high output, private fish factories. They are honing the craft of creating big fish on private ponds/lakes and will likely get to the point that they can grow them in the 20's with ease and the right genetics line.
Mainebass1984 reply :
On 12/6/2016 at 10:45 PM, J Francho said:Yep. And anyone that says bass are HARMING the system has an agenda. They simply aren't. Those species have been in trouble for a long time coming. Has nothing to do with bass.
Its all a conspiracy ?
All fisheries biologists, state and federal, they are all wrong ?
Any species, plant, insect, fish, mammal effects the ecosystem it is introduced into. They compete for the same resources.
J Francho reply :
I'm against anything that puts limits on fishing. There's no way to eradicate bass from non endemic locales, and there's no proof that even doing so would help, so it is moot. No one can win that debate. I'm just not sure how you can call a fish invasive if it was included in the stocking plan, intentionally introduced, and managed. It has a negative connotation that I will always question why the word is used. Are you a bass fisherman or a trout lover? Here in NY, trout get more support from local enviro agencies, even though brown, rainbow/steelhead, coho, and kings are all introduced. Go figure. No one refers to those species as invasive.
WRB reply :
Out west we have 2 groups of anglers with opposed agendas. The cold fresh water group, trout, steelhead and salmon verses the warm water group, bass. The cold water group opposes dams and any change to free flowing rivers and streams. The warm water group promotes dams and reserviors. Cold water group opposes any non-native fish and considers them invasive including brown trout. Warm water group accepts nearly all fish except carp, we don't have snakeheads.
The cold water group is well organized with stated goals and unlimited funding. The warm water group has no organization, no stated goals, no funding. Warm water group gets support from self serving tournament anglers and recreational business support.
Bass in California are stocked initially from existing lakes into new reserviors by the DFW to provide warm water recreational fishing, no bass hatchery exist, the bass are on thier own! Giant bass in California must fend for themselves.
Tom
contium reply :
On 12/7/2016 at 1:55 AM, Mainebass1984 said:Its all a conspiracy ?
All fisheries biologists, state and federal, they are all wrong ?
Any species, plant, insect, fish, mammal effects the ecosystem it is introduced into. They compete for the same resources.
Do you realize that the vast majority of lakes with bass in CA are man-made reservoirs? And that state fisheries biologist are the ones that stocked warm water fish into the reservoirs because cold water fish cannot survive? What fish should they have put in the reservoirs? About the only legitimate arguments regarding non-native bass is with the Delta and Clear Lake.
j bab reply :
On 12/3/2016 at 2:35 AM, Gilgamesh said:Kurita has claimed to have hooked a bass he estimates to be 25+ on a mother a couple years ago. He says that he still knows where she lives, just cant get her to bite again.
Yea I lost a 25+ once too
WRB reply :
On 12/5/2016 at 9:52 PM, RAMBLER said:Wasn't there a bass, in California, that had been caught a couple of times, but not hooked correctly, that was heavier than the present record? I might not be remembering it right but I thought the locals called her Daisy. I think she was found floating, dead and would have still been the new record had she been caught within the rules. I just reread WRB's post. I guess "Daisy" might have been "Dottie".
If you ever read what Doug Hannon wrote about big fish, he figured that the nominal temperature, growing period, food available and other factors I can't remember made north central Florida the prime area for a new world's record to come from. But, he probably never figured in hand feeding bass with rainbow trout in California.
There is some fact to support hatchery raised rainbow trout help giant bass to grow over 20 lbs, however lake Hodges in San Diego county produced 20.4 lb FLMB without trout for a prey source. The Hodges bass exceeds the Florida state bass record. I don't where hand feeding bass trout comes from could be a tongue in cheek comment. It's illegal to use any game fish as bait in California including bluegill.
Tom
Mainebass1984 reply :
On 12/7/2016 at 2:02 AM, J Francho said:I'm against anything that puts limits on fishing. There's no way to eradicate bass from non endemic locales, and there's no proof that even doing so would help, so it is moot. No one can win that debate. I'm just not sure how you can call a fish invasive if it was included in the stocking plan, intentionally introduced, and managed. It has a negative connotation that I will always question why the word is used. Are you a bass fisherman or a trout lover? Here in NY, trout get more support from local enviro agencies, even though brown, rainbow/steelhead, coho, and kings are all introduced. Go figure. No one refers to those species as invasive.
On 12/7/2016 at 2:20 AM, contium said:Do you realize that the vast majority of lakes with bass in CA are man-made reservoirs? And that state fisheries biologist are the ones that stocked warm water fish into the reservoirs because cold water fish cannot survive? What fish should they have put in the reservoirs? About the only legitimate arguments regarding non-native bass is with the Delta and Clear Lake.
An invasive fish/plant/mammal species is a species that is not native. Yes for sure the term invasive is does have a lot of negativity surrounding. There aren't any native trout in New York or New England for that matter. "Brook Trout" and "Lake Trout" are both Char. All of the trout species you mentioned are all invasive. When electroshocking here in VT with federal fisheries biologist anything that isn't native falls under the invasive category, including rainbow and brown trout. If it isn't native it is invasive. It doesn't matter if that fish was introduced intentionally or not.
All I fish for is bass.
Sam reply :
Yes. It is possible.
One day the record will be broken.
Probably by a nuclear power plant lake.
J Francho reply :
On 12/7/2016 at 3:46 AM, Mainebass1984 said:
An invasive fish/plant/mammal species is a species that is not native. Yes for sure the term invasive is does have a lot of negativity surrounding. There aren't any native trout in New York or New England for that matter. "Brook Trout" and "Lake Trout" are both Char. All of the trout species you mentioned are all invasive. When electroshocking here in VT with federal fisheries biologist anything that isn't native falls under the invasive category, including rainbow and brown trout. If it isn't native it is invasive. It doesn't matter if that fish was introduced intentionally or not.
All I fish for is bass.
You're making up definitions. Try the US Dept. Agriculture:
https://www.invasivespeciesinfo.gov/whatis.shtml
Salmon and trout are intentionally raised, and stocked for the purposes of controlling an invasive species, alewife. Striped bass were under consideration, but Salmonoids won that battle. They are a managed, introduced, non endemic species put there to improve the ecosystem, and drive revenue through sport fishing.
Here is a list of "invasive' aquatic species.
https://www.invasivespeciesinfo.gov/aquatics/main.shtml
Please note there is no listing for any Centrarchids or Salmonoids.
When you label something as "invasive," it falls under certain legal guidelines. There are other labels, such as "gamefish." Recently bass have been declassified as gamefish in NY in order for fish mongers to be able to sell farm raised bass for food.
Last tidbit - You are forgetting whitefish and Atlantic salmon, both Salmonoids under current and accepted scientific nomenclature, as are all the char species. Technically, browns, rainbows, cuttthroats, are considered more closely related to the salmon, whereas the brook and lake trout are "trout." At least that's how I learned in college. Perhaps that's changed in 20 years or so.
Mainebass1984 reply :
On 12/7/2016 at 4:42 AM, J Francho said:You're making up definitions. Try the US Dept. Agriculture:
https://www.invasivespeciesinfo.gov/whatis.shtml
Salmon and trout are intentionally raised, and stocked for the purposes of controlling an invasive species, alewife. Striped bass were under consideration, but Salmonoids won that battle. They are a managed, introduced, non endemic species put there to improve the ecosystem, and drive revenue through sport fishing.
Here is a list of "invasive' aquatic species.
https://www.invasivespeciesinfo.gov/aquatics/main.shtml
Please note there is no listing for any Centrarchids or Salmonoids.
When you label something as "invasive," it falls under certain legal guidelines. There are other labels, such as "gamefish." Recently bass have been declassified as gamefish in NY in order for fish mongers to be able to sell farm raised bass for food.
Last tidbit - You are forgetting whitefish and Atlantic salmon, both Salmonoids under current and accepted scientific nomenclature, as are all the char species. Technically, browns, rainbows, cuttthroats, are considered more closely related to the salmon, whereas the brook and lake trout are "trout." At least that's how I learned in college. Perhaps that's changed in 20 years or so.
I am not making up any definitions. I posted several definitions earlier from credible sources. Scroll back and look. It seems you sir no matter what I post or say will find a way to disagree and attempt to prove me wrong. Plain and simple.
I'm not sure what you learned in college 20 years ago. I can tell you that I have a bachelors degree in fisheries biology and have worked all over the country Alaska, Maine, Vermont, Illinois, Missouri and Florida. I currently work with fisheries biologists all across this country. I myself am a fisheries biologists. It is sad to see misinformation being presented and overly opinionated anglers feeling they know more then fisheries biologist who have been entrusted with managing the resource.
I am not making up definitions or stating anything that isn't indeed factual.
Salmonoid refers to all trout and salmon species. Brook trout and lake trout as I said before are not actually trout they belong to Salvelinus genus which are commonly referred to as Charr. Trout and salmon found in the Atlantic belong to the Salmo genus, brown trout and Atlantic salmon amongst others. Trout and salmon occurring in the pacific such as rainbows, cutthroats, pacific salmon, etc belong to the genus Oncorhynchus.
contium reply :
The definition by CADFW, the only definition I care about since I'm in CA, is:
" Invasive species are organisms (plants, animals, or microbes) that are not native to an environment, and once introduced, they establish, quickly reproduce and spread, and cause harm to the environment, economy, or human health"
"Causing harm" is a critical distinction between invasive and non-native.
https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Invasives/About
Here is a list of what CADFW considers invasive:
https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Invasives/Species
Of course what is considered invasive can change.
Yeajray231 reply :
You guys need a drink
Gilgamesh reply :
On 12/7/2016 at 2:23 AM, j bab said:Yea I lost a 25+ once too
You don't currently hold the world record haha
Big Bait Fishing reply :
On 12/7/2016 at 3:46 AM, Mainebass1984 said:
An invasive fish/plant/mammal species is a species that is not native. Yes for sure the term invasive is does have a lot of negativity surrounding. There aren't any native trout in New York or New England for that matter. "Brook Trout" and "Lake Trout" are both Char. All of the trout species you mentioned are all invasive. When electroshocking here in VT with federal fisheries biologist anything that isn't native falls under the invasive category, including rainbow and brown trout. If it isn't native it is invasive. It doesn't matter if that fish was introduced intentionally or not.
All I fish for is bass.
about your last sentence - i would have never known that..........
Turtle135 reply :
Does anyone know if there were any other 19 to 20 pound bass pulled from Lake Dixon? The genetics were there assuming Dottie had spawned a time or two. The forage must have been there since Dottie grew to such a large size.
BASS302 reply :
On 12/2/2016 at 4:29 AM, Gillroid 9000 said:The real question is Is It Possible to Beat George Perrys Record?
Back to the original question, there's an article in the Fall 2016 Bass Angler Magazine regarding the possibility of "manufacturing" a world record Bass using eggs treated to be "triploid". They give as an example that the current world record rainbow trout (48 lbs) was triploid. They also state the last wild freshwater rainbow trout was 37 lbs. They also speculate that bass could be genetically modified to grow to record size. I hope neither of these possibilities happen.
BassObsessed reply :
On 12/7/2016 at 9:23 AM, Turtle135 said:Does anyone know if there were any other 19 to 20 pound bass pulled from Lake Dixon? The genetics were there assuming Dottie had spawned a time or two. The forage must have been there since Dottie grew to such a large size.
Not sure but I was there on vaca fishing in October trying to find some of here relatives. All I caught was a dink. There were bigger bass caught that day and the ranger I talked to mentioned a 14lber caught there in the spring that had a similar dot. Who knows . It's hard to believe when you see how small that lake is that the famous monster came from there.
WRB reply :
On 12/7/2016 at 9:23 AM, Turtle135 said:Does anyone know if there were any other 19 to 20 pound bass pulled from Lake Dixon? The genetics were there assuming Dottie had spawned a time or two. The forage must have been there since Dottie grew to such a large size.
Only Dottie, she was caught 4 times between the weight of 19 to 21 lbs, the 5 th time was 25.1 lbs., the poster child for C & R.
Tom
Catt reply :
On 12/7/2016 at 11:37 AM, WRB said:Only Dottie, she was caught 4 times between the weight of 19 to 21 lbs, the 5 th time was 25.1 lbs., the poster child for C & R.
Tom
Poster child for how smart big bass are
Bluebasser86 reply :
Well this has pretty much run it's course.
LOCKDOWN!!
related General Bass Fishing Forum topic
most viewed General Bass Fishing Forum topic
© 2024 - fishing.qciss.net. All Rights Reserved.