61" Muskie caught on Mille Lacs?

[Shawn Kellett]

Awesome fish!!!!!!

Guys, the difference between 55" and 61" is the length of a small Phantom. Not too much and definitely too tough to eye up on a picture on a HSOforum. Look at the last issue if Muskie Mag where Brett showed how the hold can dramatically affect how big the fish looks.

Personally I would believe the fish is correct (or at least in the ball park). I could care less what the actual spec's are and care more that it was a true fish of a lifetime. Not only that but because of MI and C&R that fish has had the chance to get that big and now to get bigger yet!

All I know is that I WISH I had a shot at a fish like that one and I'll bet EVERY person bashing it would to.

[MuskyBrian]

Shawn, I highly disagree with your statement that 6" is not a big deal. I'm not so much talking about Garret's fish, this is more of a general statement. But according to what you just said, we would have trouble seeing the difference between a 42" and a 48"...a 44" and a 50"...I mean, that doesn't really stop as fish get bigger, 6 inches doesn't look like a lot on a ruler but when looking at the dimensions of a fish and what it does to its size 6" is a pretty big deal

[propster]

Actually it does Brian. Six inches on 42 is 14.3% bigger. Six inches on 61 is only 9.8%, so there is a difference in perception. And I agree with Shawn, you can't tell from a picture, especially an incomplete one.

[Shawn Kellett]

Not only that but depending on who was on the "muskie stretcher" you can get another couple inches too. Pinching the tail is legit as far as the DNR is concerned (as well as the CO's). I'd be willing to bet you could get an additional couple out of that whale tail.

[luvin2fish]

six inches...

wish i was six inches longer...haha

nice fish

[urban cowboy]

Guys, the difference between 55" and 61" is the length of a small Phantom.

The difference between 55" and 61" is, no controversy and controversy. That is why this fish is a hot topic. A fish of this size is tough to comprehend. Before anyone had seen the pic, I guarantee there wasn't one person that didn't want it to be 61". I know, it was all I could think about. I had dreams of a monster and that fish is a monster, 61", I take his word for it. But the words sixty inches and musky in the same sentence creates such a large expectation that I don't know if any picture could have done it justice. Except on a board. Its tough, but its the way all fishing is, not just muskie fishing.

You know how large the fish was, that's all that matters. Congratulations.

[Fish&Fowl]

Thanks again for the nice posts guys, really nice to read. Just a couple more things I'd like to mention. First, I was planning on taking a picture of the fish next to the ruler in the water (along with the girth I didn't get), but that is something to think about. With two guys in the boat, taking a picture next to the ruler was not possible with one guy holding the ruler and the other holding the fish. I don't know a good way this can be done without laying the fish down, but believe me you don't want to lay a fish like that down if at all possible.

The biggest message I can try to get out to all of you is BE PREPARED. No one- or at least I didn't- plan on going out and catching a record-breaking fish, but you have expect it every time you go out if you want a chance. Realizing I'm fishing world-class lakes much of the time, there is no excuse to not be as prepared as possible EVERY time I go out. That is the biggest lesson I took from this whole experience, and something I will do from now on.

[bronzeback]

First of all, congrats on the awesome catch!!! Second of all, has anyone actually tried to calculate the size of the fish based on the picture? By using a reference point (the knuckle on his middle finger), I have been having fun trying to calculate the size using my rudimentary math skills. After several calculations to discover the tolerances of my measurements and assuming that his knuckle is similar to the size of my knuckle (although I played with this number too to be sure I could be off a little and still have a good reference point) there is no doubt in my mind that this fish is a legitimate 61". Congrats on the monster!!!

I just did the same thing and had a little different result.

Nasty looking fish though, super thick and a mean mean head on her shoulders. Congrats indeed, were drinks on you that night? Kind of like the guy that shoots a hole-in-one comes back to the clubhouse and buys everyone a round.

I'm just curious about the first time you saw the fish in the water by the boat, what was your initial estimate? I probably would have said she was at least 6 feet long the first time I got a good look at her. But I talk crazy when there's a fish on the end of my line.

[goblueM]

fish&fowl, congrats on the fish of a lifetime and thanks for handling the fish and the story with respect

[DHanson]

F&F- You did the best you could with what you had to work with. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise. The fact that you did catch a monster fish like this, and still thought about the fish first is remarkable. We would be lucky to have more muskie fishermen like you.

For future fishing trips, not that you have done anything wrong up to this point, but buy an actual bumpboard. I own a "muskiebumper" bumpboard and like it a lot. A lot of other guys use a "musky link" bumpboard. Both are great and cost around $60. This is the best way to show the actual length in a photo. Nothing wrong at all to lay a fish down on a board to measure fish. Just make sure you wet the board first so you don't take off too much of the fishes protective slime in the process. Girth can be easily measured while the fish is still in the net while in the water.

[dcmusky]

See thats the problem really is there are so many ways to measure fish and the same fish 3 different guys could get 3 different lengths. I think the true length is when you measure it in the water, its how you first see them and I think its the most accurate representation. Thats how I measuered the one myself and fool got we measured it in the water. I too forgot to girth it so it's really easy to forget girths when trying to get a huge fish back in the water. F&F great fish and congrats, you did the most importaint thing and that's a successful release. And a huge congrats goes out to the net man can't imagine a more importaint person to thank on those biggies.

[CaptainMusky]

idk, I always say the most believable measurement is 49-3/4". Most guys would bump that to 50. LOL

I am just kidding. That fish is crazy big, I have never seen anything like it, nor will I likely ever see one in my lifetime.

I have no reason to think that fish is anything but 61". Tremendous!

It is funny how people expect pictures before they believe anything, then when they are provided those same people choose to ridicule and pick apart everything about said picture. I have pictures of the same fish held by myslef and one of my buddies and it looks HUGE in his hands, but mine it looks average simply because he is a much smaler person. Congrats on the fish and hopefully the replica will look great on your wall!

[Blainebob]

What a fish!! Way to go! Whenever someone doubts the fish I've caught,, I've told them to put there money where there mouth is! Guess what? No takers so far!

[muskyhunter57]

This was caught by K102 DJ Amy James’ cousin 61”

The 61" Muskie!

Monday 09-21-2009 7:58am CT

My cousin, Garrett, caught a VERY large Muskie. He sent an excerpt from a story he wrote about the experience and a picture after I told him many of you had requested it- here you go!

"I feel very fortunate to have landed such a fish. There was a lot of luck involved and the stars definitely aligned for everything to come together as perfect as it did. I also owe a lot to Josh for not only deciding to fish the spot, but also for doing everything right from the moment the fish was hooked. Looking back, there are a few things I?d have done differently, but as far as the fish goes I am glad I released her. I look forward to many future trips to find her again with a few more pounds and inches. As I?m writing this, we have yet to find a taxidermist who can make a mold for such a long fish. What a problem to have!"

Garrett King

Garrett emailed me and he found a taxidermist that went out of his way to find a mold- here's what he sent me...

"I looked for over a month before finally finding a big enough mold to use for a replica of my fish. Rick of Lax Taxidermy has been nothing but helpful and cooperative, along with very excited, since I first called him. I am so glad I now know I can get a replica made and have a chance to get up there and catch her again. It's also nice to know someone else has a chance to catch her as well."

http://i38.tinypic.com/dhe8ad.jpg

This was sent to me via E-Mail. Nice looking fish....doubt it stretches to 61". The Taxidermist is listed in the article.

[Musky_Madness]

Do I dare revive this thread? There's a write up in a weekly outdoors publication this week about this fish...I apologize in advance

[propster]

Joe is a little behind the times

[Norsky]

I read the article and agreed 100% with it. Measurements are very difficult to obtain accurately when there is no tape measure involved, only using a net handle or something else. I've caught a 49" on Minnetonka, and it looked as big, if not bigger than the one in the picture, IT IS ABSOLUTELY a HUGE fish, I congratulate the angler, excellent catch, but 61" ??? all fishermen are liars except you and me, and sometimes I wonder about you

[50inchpig]

Alot of you guys have some pretty small b a l l s to sit behind your keyboard and call a guy you've never even met a liar.

[urban cowboy]

b a l l s

HA

[Scott M]

I'm not calling him a liar, but Joe Fellegy's column in O.N. is pretty accurate...he examined state record and world record fish and they are all about 56-58 inches. The "missing measuring stick so we used two rods" story seems a little fishy, pun intended. If Pete Maina hasn't heard or seen a legitimate 60, I'd take note.

[jcpmn82]

I caught a 62" Musky, but I was alone and forgot my camera......

[Cold Front Pooch]

I love it hw all the nay sayers are the ones still posting, give it a break.

[CommonSense Guy]

60 inch fish are not sean often enough in Vermilion. For all the talk out there there are not too many fish that big but they do exist for sure.

I bet it was trout water in Ontario. The pictures don't do this fish justice if it really was 61. But they are out there for sure

[Silver Scale]

The only 60 inch fish in Minnesota are Lake Sturgeon.....

Let's see. MN record 56 inches. New Michigan record 55 inches. Canadian record Obrein 58 inches. McNair fish from last fall 57 inches. Supposed 60's caught in Lac Seul sure don't look like it. This fish is no where near 60 inches. Big fish yes, 60 no way. I'm not buying it. 60 inchers in Vermilion, yea right. 56 yes, 58 maybe, 60 no way.....

[Cold Front Pooch]

[Note from admin: Please read forum policy before posting again. Thank you.]