Mythbusters...

[hanson]

For those who haven't heard yet, a possible state record channel catfish was recently caught on Lake Zumbro near Rochester. The fish was released so we'll never know the full details.

Here's a photo of the fish.

Here's the news story-

One Whopper of a Fish

Jenna Gordon

KTTC TV

ORONOCO, MN -- If you are a fisherman, you either have or are waiting for the chance to catch "the fish."

So big, you are glad you brought a buddy with you to haul it in from the depths of the water.

"All of a sudden my pole came alive. I hooked it and said this is the one," said fisherman Luke Urevig.

The big one.

The fish that every angler dreams about.

"Kept reeling, kept reeling and finally came out and we'd seen it and our mouths just went bump, right to the ground," said Urevig, "It looked like a little dinosaur."

But, not a little fish.

Luke Urevig hooked a catfish measuring 50 inches long and approximately 40 pounds in Lake Zumbro.

His friend, Royce Ronningen, helped net the catch.

"I turned around and sure enough his pole was bending pretty good," says Ronningen.

"The pole I was using doesn't bend for small fish and it was bending a lot and if I wouldn't have had Royce there to help me net it, it probably would have taken me a long time, if ever," says Urevig.

"I didn't want to break the line as I was netting it. I tried to be as careful as possible. I'd hate to loose his fish," says Ronningen.

They didn't lose the fish, though it took more than five minutes to reel the catfish in.

"We've fished for 7 years for this fish. We've caught a lot of fish but nothing like this," explained Urevig.

The guys caught the monster in a secret place they've been fishing for years. They won't even tell us exactly where it is, but we do know it's about a mile north of Fisherman's Inn.

"Secret little spot, zip. We've been going there for a long time and we've caught some pretty big fish there," said Urevig.

They catch, but they don't keep.

"I didn't have the heart to keep it so I threw it back."

Back into the depths of Lake Zumbro.

"This is what it's all about in our eyes."

And, the two are already eying their next big catch.

"Every single year the fish keep getting bigger and bigger and the stories keep getting better and better so we're going to keep doing what we do an have fun while we do it," say Urevig.

The state record for largest catfish caught is 38 pounds and 44 inches set back in 1975.

So the duo, who fish around 3 times per week, plan to go out again tonight to test their luck.

Maybe this time they'll keep it.

Updated: May 21, 2007, 8:55 pm

[hanson]

I tell you guys what, I don't believe it. I want to believe it, but I'm having a really hard time doing so.

There is a video on the HSOforum that has the story and the fish they are handling in the net, which is the fish in the photo, does not look anywhere near what it is reported to be.

So I dug up some info to help decipher the facts.

I've watched the newscast over and over and over again trying to get a feel for how big that fish really is. The part that troubles me is the video of the fish in the net when they are trying to pick it up. Thats not a 40lb fish in the net. My best guess giving them the benefit of the doubt is 25lbs and 38" which is still one heck of a channel cat anywhere. At one point, the gentleman trying to grab the fish could almost get his entire hand across the width of the fish.

I guess my opinion is its a really good fish, but not as good as we are led to believe.

So... I'm going to be a party [PoorWordUsage]er and wave the talk flag. Great story, great photoshop work, and really bad acting on camera. They looked really twitchy and nervous on camera, maybe they were just nervous, I don't know. But that is what makes me question it more than anything.

As more proof... I'd like to present Exhibit 'A'.

This is a length/weight chart from a fellow angler who goes by the handle 'RB'. (I hope he does not mind me posting this info but will gladly remove it if not). They measured and weighed 163 channel cats they caught from the Red River and compiled them into this table.

What is clearly obvious is the curve of length to weight. A 38" channel cat is going to be near 25-28lbs. But a 30" channel cat is going to weigh in that 12-15lb range. If you do the math, a 50" channel cat is going to be way, way, way over 40lbs.

How about Exhibit 'B'

This photo is from Stu up on the Red River at Selkirk. If anyone knows a thing or two about big channel cats, its Stu, so I believe the numbers on the fish in the following photo.

Dimensions on this pig were 40" length x 26" girth, weight in the mid-thirties.

Oh well... enough of my rant. Ya'll can judge it for yourself. Criticize me if you wish for trying to spoil the party.

[Flaco651]

It is hard to believe. I would have to see the video. If it is for real I probably would have done the same thing and released it. I don't need my name in the record book.

[Mr Special]

I'll agree with ya bud. It's a very nice channel, but I don't think it would've broke the #25 mark.

I'll 2nd the talk flag. Plus I don't know anyone that could hold a #40 fish out like that.

[harvey lee]

Chris, the facts are the facts. Some would like us to believe that it was more than what it probably was. I would think if one caught a record fish they would have had it checked out but maybe not all. Nice fish either way.

[Kyle B]

I would have to agree! in the picture it looks like hes got the fish held away from him ,his arms are pretty straight. Its a good size fish I just don't see it being as big as they claim! Kyle

[big musk411]

I agree with the arms straight out comment. Just like all these 67 inch Surgeons people have with thier arms straight out, talk that its 50lbs. Vary nice cat though, much bigger than I have ever caught.

[slipperybob]

That's why I say, there's some journalistic ethics or responsibility to get the facts straight...

[DTro]

I will say it is a huge channel, but I don't buy the measurements. I know people always say with a possible record, your darned if you do darned if you don't.

Here's the hole I found.

They have video of the fish plus stills. Why not take a picture of the measurements? It's a no brainer.

Also channels are very closely related to blues, do some research on a 50" blue and see what the typical weight is

Here's the video: (click on the red video camera on the news page)

Cat Video

[hanson]

Quote:

---

Also channels are very closely related to blues, do some research on a 50" blue and see what the typical weight is

---

Hundo?

[Tyler Holm]

Humm..

I now know of a new spot to work on my KOTC channel.

[audemp]

NO way that fish was 50 inches. Here is a 49 inch sturgeon they dont even compare length wise.

[image][/image]

[DTro]

Ok, after doing some more research on this, I'm convinced that the measurements are off....way off. The alleged numbers are 49x38. The Oklahoma state record is close to ours at 35.15. The measurements of that fish are 39x26.25 (I trust the states measurements) Using two formulas on those measurements I get 31.31 and 32.57lbs both undersized, which has been consistant for larger fish. Plugging the alleged numbers in to the two formulas I get 71.5 and 85.7. The world record is 58 and change. So this fish is at least 20lbs more than the world record??? That's like saying you caught a 40 pound walleye.

I know for a fact that the person who caught the fish has read this thread. I'm sorry if you feel angry that nobody believes you, but the numbers don't lie. It is an awesome fish and maybe would've given the record a run for it's money. I would give that fish 39" all day long, but absolutely not 49". No way No how.

[mplspug]

Where did you get the 49" number? The story says close to 50", but I don't see the guys who caught it quoted as saying that. My guess is it was a 39" or 30 whatever and the reporter either heard wrong or these guys measured hastily and are mis-recalling? I hope it was the reporters fault and not the fishermen or in the least these guys are not purposefully trying to deceive people. Not what fishing is about.

Bottom line is it was nice fish and she's still swimming and those guys had a great night.

[hanson]

Quote:

---

Where did you get the 49" number?

---

Lets just say that I've been personally contacted by the angler and he re-stated to me that 49" IS the correct length measured. They didn't weigh it.

I'm not one to intentionally make enemies in this world but I feel the catfishing community needs (or wants) to know fact from fiction. I'm not here to lay down the law and strictly call talk on these guys, I wanted to provide some valid, legitimate info that will either support or discredit that fish. I think thats fair. If you are going to claim catching a state record anything without valid, tangible evidence, you are subjecting yourself to criticism. Just think of the uproar if it would have been a musky, walleye, or bass.

From what I know about Lake Zumbro, if that fish would have been a plump 35-39" which I believe it was, it was one heck of a fish out of that lake, fish of a lifetime no doubt. But we should also look at some of the other state records that have fallen, fish that are caught in lakes that you would never believe a record was swimming in. Maybe Zumbro was that lake this time, but the fish was released (good job guys) and we'll never with 100% certainty know if it was or it wasn't.

I've told a number of people that I fish with that I'll be releasing the new record Flathead Cat if I ever catch it. So if it ever happens, fire away guys!

I've said my peace and I'm leaving it at that.

[Shack]

Hanson,

That bring's up a good topic on how to handle a large catch. I will start another thread for that, but I would like to get thoughts on how this should be done.

[mplspug]

Ah! Well that changes things. Either way, I am neither here or there with it.

I am with you on releasing even record flat or any fish for that matter. Although with me, I think the fish are safe. !

[sparcebag]

Lookin at the pic,I in the mirror measured my shoulders-22" it looks like hes close to my size,head is to left of one shoulder,tail looks as long as shoulders.So 22 x 22=44 plus extra 5-6 head is beyond shoulder I can believe 48-50 inches.

[Big Cat Dad]

Looking at the photo and video I would have to say......don't think so.