Lake St. Clair Fishing Forum banner
1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
LSCN Sponsor
Joined
·
2,482 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Looks like the IGFA has rejected the claim to the world record bass. I don't doubt she caught this fish and it measured what it did. But I think this was the correct decision.

FLW Article
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
882 Posts
Makes me wonder if Perry had to jump thru so many hoops. Did a biologist examine his fish. Who is to say his fish was not inaccurately measured or stuffed with lead.
Hell he ate the thing.

Technically she met all the requirements for certification. IFGA approved scale, witness etc etc.
Any other species would have been accepted.

But the things that didn't add up; last picture in the camera (sure), the measurements did not work in the standard formula.

The only thing that would have resolved this whole issue would have been to not release the fish.
Which makes me wonder why she did.


The whole thing is a mess.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
18,804 Posts
It has been stated time and again that if you catch a record largemouth (or smallmouth) the fish must be sacrificed for examination.

FYI George Perry ate his record fish.

Mini
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
882 Posts
QUOTE(John Maniaci @ Jan 26 2004, 08:28 AM)FYI George Perry ate his record fish.

Mini
For whose information?
For my information?


I said as much in my post.
The guy ate the fish.


John, As an avid angler or professional bass fisherman you may know that a world record bass must be sacrificed for acceptance but I would venture to say that the alot of anglers are not aware of this.


This is what I am saying about Perry's record.
Was it examined by a biologist?

For all we know the fish never weighed that much.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
882 Posts
http://www.igfa.org/rulebook/page3.html

Here is the rules.
I can say that her submittal did not have enough photo documentation. The only reason, according to the rules, that a biologist must review the catch is if it can not be identified in the pictures.
I can also say with confidence that Perry's catch did not meet all these requirements either.
 

·
LSCN Sponsor
Joined
·
2,482 Posts
IMO, the fish must be weighed on a certified scale that is capable of measuring to the ounce. Which is exactly what Perry did. I can't except a between this and that measurement done by the angler that caught it. I'm not saying the latest angler wasn't truthful or the scale is not accurate (is her scale calibrated and certified every year?). But with claims like the latest, there is just too much room for deviation and decite. This record is too important. Unfortunately this probably means that some anglers would need to kill their catch.

Now if I catch a 25lb largie (
) out of Erie or Clair, I would stick in the the livewell and haul it up to Lakeside or somewhere with a scale and get that bad boy photo'ed, measured, and witnessed.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
18,804 Posts
QUOTE(MadWags @ Jan 26 2004, 03:52 PM)http://www.igfa.org/rulebook/page3.html

Here is the rules.
I can say that her submittal did not have enough photo documentation. The only reason, according to the rules, that a biologist must review the catch is if it can not be identified in the pictures.
I can also say with confidence that Perry's catch did not meet all these requirements either.

Was the IGFA in existence at the time Mr Perry caught his fish? I believe that the fish as "recognized" as the world record, not "certified" by todays standards...

Mini
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
18,804 Posts
QUOTE(Alex @ Jan 26 2004, 08:29 PM)IMO, the fish must be weighed on a certified scale that is capable of measuring to the ounce. Which is exactly what Perry did. I can't except a between this and that measurement done by the angler that caught it. I'm not saying the latest angler wasn't truthful or the scale is not accurate (is her scale calibrated and certified every year?). But with claims like the latest, there is just too much room for deviation and decite. This record is too important. Unfortunately this probably means that some anglers would need to kill their catch.

Now if I catch a 25lb largie (
) out of Erie or Clair, I would stick in the the livewell and haul it up to Lakeside or somewhere with a scale and get that bad boy photo'ed, measured, and witnessed.
The Boga Grip scale that was used to weigh the fish was certified by the IGFA.
 

·
LSCN Sponsor
Joined
·
2,482 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Yes, but....

"Once onshore, Leaha Trew weighed the fish using a Boga Grip handheld scale, which is certified for accuracy by the IGFA. The scale weighs in 8-ounce increments, and Trew's fish weighed in between 22 ½ and 23 pounds." = not good enough for me. Any record should be measured to the ounce. IMO
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
18,804 Posts
It clearly states in the rules that if the scale has graduations and the weight comes between the gradiations you round down.

So instead of 23 and 22 1/2, should they have said 23 abd 22lb 8oz? Would that make you feel better? lol

Just razzing you man. I agree it should be weight to the nearest ounce on a Dept. Of Agriculture Certified Scale....not a portable one. You can get your scales certified by the IGFA for $35.00 (incindentally the fee to join is the same and you get one free certification).

Mini
 

·
LSCN Sponsor
Joined
·
2,482 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
QUOTE(John Maniaci @ Jan 27 2004, 02:45 PM)It clearly states in the rules that if the scale has graduations and the weight comes between the gradiations you round down.

So instead of 23 and 22 1/2, should they have said 23 abd 22lb 8oz? Would that make you feel better? lol
A little, but I still think it is hookie for a record. Again, just my opinion.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top