Missed World Record?

Another confusing world record possibility at Lake Dixon:

http://www.signonsandiego.com/sports...-bn21bass.html

Hopefully readers of this board will read up on IGFA rules and avoid the
problems these three guys evidently got into Monday on Lake Dixon. Foul
hooked, no measurements, no certified scales, no biologist species
certification, and maybe the list of problems that could prohibit his World
Record status goes on and on (help landing it, lure/line status, notarized
application, etc. are all possibilities). As more stories about the catch
go public, we'll probably find out more of their sad story.

You can bet that the IGFA will conduct exhaustive studies and analysis for
any all tackle world Largemouth Bass record. Let your mind wander as to the
nature of "exhaustive studies" they may fund. IGFA told me that they use
independent testing laboratories to verify line strength. There are lots and
lots of hoops to jump through to get an IGFA certified world record and
there are a lot of people behind the scenes who will try to take it away
from you.

"Must be caught legally" is one big obstacle. I just hope any readers here
persevere and do all the right things they have to do to get the world
record they deserve. It would be a shame to get caught up in the
excitement of the moment and loose a potential world record. Calmer heads
would have kept it alive and taken this gorgeous fish to the Marina in their
live well so it could be kept alive and put on display so fishing families
everywhere could enjoy it. The living World Record fish on display would
sharply contrast with the current picture of the three Lake Dixon Stooges -
Larry, Moe and Shemp who squandered HIS big chance!

Good luck to all!
John

"John" wrote in message
...
Another confusing world record possibility at Lake Dixon:

http://www.signonsandiego.com/sports...-bn21bass.html

Hopefully readers of this board will read up on IGFA rules and avoid the
problems these three guys evidently got into Monday on Lake Dixon. Foul
hooked, no measurements, no certified scales, no biologist species
certification, and maybe the list of problems that could prohibit his
World Record status goes on and on (help landing it, lure/line status,
notarized application, etc. are all possibilities). As more stories about
the catch go public, we'll probably find out more of their sad story.

You can bet that the IGFA will conduct exhaustive studies and analysis for
any all tackle world Largemouth Bass record. Let your mind wander as to
the nature of "exhaustive studies" they may fund. IGFA told me that they
use independent testing laboratories to verify line strength. There are
lots and lots of hoops to jump through to get an IGFA certified world
record and there are a lot of people behind the scenes who will try to
take it away from you.

"Must be caught legally" is one big obstacle. I just hope any readers
here persevere and do all the right things they have to do to get the
world record they deserve. It would be a shame to get caught up in the
excitement of the moment and loose a potential world record. Calmer heads
would have kept it alive and taken this gorgeous fish to the Marina in
their live well so it could be kept alive and put on display so fishing
families everywhere could enjoy it. The living World Record fish on
display would sharply contrast with the current picture of the three Lake
Dixon Stooges - Larry, Moe and Shemp who squandered HIS big chance!

Not to pee on this guy's Cheerios or anything, but if the IGFA does
recognize this as the new world record, I for one will be extremely
disappointed.

Certainly, it is a big fish, but if he didn't provide ALL of the criteria,
length, girth, weighed on a certified scale, etc., then he has no hard proof
that he actually caught a new world record. Without proof, then there
should be no record. AND, it was foul-hooked for God's sake!!!!
"California Department of Fish and Game regulations state that a fish, to be
legally caught, must be hooked in the mouth while it tries to take a bait,
lure or fly." is what the article states. So according to California law,
it wasn't a legal catch to begin with! I don't care that he "didn't intend
to" snag the fish, as attested to by his fishing buddies, he still did,
unless he can convince the IGFA that the fish struck with it's pectoral fin!

Jeez, back in the 70's, I submitted an application for a line class record
king salmon to the IGFA and it was rejected because the line sample I sent
was 4 inches too short! It didn't matter that I had everything else
required, photos, measurements, verification by a Wisconsin DNR official,
etc, it was that the line sample didn't measure the "proper" length.

I know that there is a lot of money on the line for a new world record
largemouth, but I don't see how the IGFA can even consider it! If they do,
then the entire process is tainted in my estimation.

Had he made a legal catch, followed ALL the rules as required in the IGFA
submission process, and then was awarded the World Record, I would be
leading his cheering section.
--
Steve @ OutdoorFrontiers
http://www.outdoorfrontiers.com
G & S Guide Service and Custom Rods
http://www.herefishyfishy.com

I agree Steve, It was foul hooked for crying out loud, and these guys are no
stranger to the record I'm sure, But I think the reason they didn't go
through all the paperwork and procedures is the fact that they knew it would
not be recognized.

What would have been cool is if it was donated to an aquarium. 25 pound
bass on display for all to enjoy, yet the record would remain intact. That
would have been classy. This fish is a sitting duck, on a lake populated
with duck hunters. If for some reason it is recognized, I'll be highly
disappointed too

--
www.wermieerniebaits.com
Making fish regret their decision on a daily basis
"Steve @ OutdoorFrontiers" wrote in
message ...

"John" wrote in message
...
Another confusing world record possibility at Lake Dixon:

http://www.signonsandiego.com/sports...-bn21bass.html

Hopefully readers of this board will read up on IGFA rules and avoid the
problems these three guys evidently got into Monday on Lake Dixon. Foul
hooked, no measurements, no certified scales, no biologist species
certification, and maybe the list of problems that could prohibit his
World Record status goes on and on (help landing it, lure/line status,
notarized application, etc. are all possibilities). As more stories
about the catch go public, we'll probably find out more of their sad
story.

You can bet that the IGFA will conduct exhaustive studies and analysis
for any all tackle world Largemouth Bass record. Let your mind wander as
to the nature of "exhaustive studies" they may fund. IGFA told me that
they use independent testing laboratories to verify line strength. There
are lots and lots of hoops to jump through to get an IGFA certified world
record and there are a lot of people behind the scenes who will try to
take it away from you.

"Must be caught legally" is one big obstacle. I just hope any readers
here persevere and do all the right things they have to do to get the
world record they deserve. It would be a shame to get caught up in the
excitement of the moment and loose a potential world record. Calmer
heads would have kept it alive and taken this gorgeous fish to the Marina
in their live well so it could be kept alive and put on display so
fishing families everywhere could enjoy it. The living World Record fish
on display would sharply contrast with the current picture of the three
Lake Dixon Stooges - Larry, Moe and Shemp who squandered HIS big chance!

Not to pee on this guy's Cheerios or anything, but if the IGFA does
recognize this as the new world record, I for one will be extremely
disappointed.

Certainly, it is a big fish, but if he didn't provide ALL of the criteria,
length, girth, weighed on a certified scale, etc., then he has no hard
proof that he actually caught a new world record. Without proof, then
there should be no record. AND, it was foul-hooked for God's sake!!!!
"California Department of Fish and Game regulations state that a fish, to
be legally caught, must be hooked in the mouth while it tries to take a
bait, lure or fly." is what the article states. So according to
California law, it wasn't a legal catch to begin with! I don't care that
he "didn't intend to" snag the fish, as attested to by his fishing
buddies, he still did, unless he can convince the IGFA that the fish
struck with it's pectoral fin!

Jeez, back in the 70's, I submitted an application for a line class record
king salmon to the IGFA and it was rejected because the line sample I sent
was 4 inches too short! It didn't matter that I had everything else
required, photos, measurements, verification by a Wisconsin DNR official,
etc, it was that the line sample didn't measure the "proper" length.

I know that there is a lot of money on the line for a new world record
largemouth, but I don't see how the IGFA can even consider it! If they
do, then the entire process is tainted in my estimation.

Had he made a legal catch, followed ALL the rules as required in the IGFA
submission process, and then was awarded the World Record, I would be
leading his cheering section.
--
Steve @ OutdoorFrontiers
http://www.outdoorfrontiers.com
G & S Guide Service and Custom Rods
http://www.herefishyfishy.com

It looks like the fish has a good chance of being certified by the IGFA.
Mac is going to submit it, and they will probably except the
measurements requirement via pictures and video. The foul hooked part is
a matter of credibility I suppose. I have mixed emotions, naturally I
wanted to see John or Mike get the fish, and a "good hook up" would have
been what everyone wanted to see. Oh well, we will know in a month or
so.

John K

"John Kerr" sez:

It looks like the fish has a good chance of being certified by the IGFA.
Mac is going to submit it, and they will probably except the
measurements requirement via pictures and video. The foul hooked part is
a matter of credibility I suppose. I have mixed emotions, naturally I
wanted to see John or Mike get the fish, and a "good hook up" would have
been what everyone wanted to see. Oh well, we will know in a month or
so.
As I posted elsewhere I'm still confused. Here is more of the story in a
link supposedly to an eyewitness interview.

http://www.bassfan.com/news_article.asp?id=1660

In part of the interview with Barnett (one of the boys?), this appears:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From the dock, Barnett said he had a clear view of Weakley's presentation,
hookset and landing. Note that the fish was bedding in clear water.

"After less than an hour, Mac swung for the first time," Barnett said. "He
ended up swinging a total of five times, and on the fifth swing he got it.
(The swings) were on separate casts. He'd do a flip here, a flip there, then
a swing.

"I was counting. And he was using the same bait, which is really rare - for
a fish to be so interested in the same bait.

"(Dickerson) did throw his Mission Fish in there once, but didn't swing."

According to Barnett, Weakley connected on his fifth swing. "They got the
fish and it went straight out to deep water - like a tow truck. They yelled,
'Get the net! Get the net!'

"Right before they netted it, Dan and I saw the fish. It was foul-hooked
down the left side of the fish, right next to the dorsal fin."

The trio netted the fish about 10 feet away from the dock. "They were
flipping out," Barnett said. "Then they said, 'We have to go talk to our
lawyer.' So they went out to the middle of the lake.

"After 15 minutes they came back. I was talking with - I believe it was Mac,
but I can't say I'm positive. It was either Mac or Jed. One of the two came
up - it's the only blurry memory - and they were standing with me and Dan,
and (Mac or Jed) said something like, 'Yeah, there's a weird mark on its
side.'

Barnett added: "I don't know why he said that, because Dan asked him before
what they were going to do with it because it was foul-hooked. I don't
know - it was trippy, a little weird."







Barnett said his brother Dan then brought attention again to the foul hook.
"They said, 'I don't know about this mark - what's up with that?' But Dan's
like, 'Yeah, that's where you foul-hooked it."

At that point, Barnett noted there was some silence, then he remembers Mac
saying, "Hey, just let the fish go - get rid of it."

----------------------------------------------------------

So help me out John. So did he just keep flipping until he snagged it? And
did all three go out in the lake so he could get lawyered up and all get
their stories straight? So under California law would Mike get a citation
if he had kept a foul hooked bass? Was that the real reason he released it
back into the lake?

I hope this gets straightened out. I'm still confused.



John

Steve said:

I know that there is a lot of money on the line for a new world record
largemouth, but I don't see how the IGFA can even consider it!

As I recall IGFA has three statuses or categories for world record status,
Pending, Current and Defeated. Also as I recall, IGFA requires a completed
notarized application before they "consider" a record status change. If and
when IGFA believes somebody's application meets enough of their criteria for
world record then they move the application status into "Pending." As I
recall if they find out ANYTHING wrong in the application, it never even
gets into IGFA's Pending category. Also if somebody's Pending is determined
to be the world record, the Current record (if any) is reclassified to
Defeated. Also seems I recall if later on some cheating is discovered, IGFA
may go back and reclassify a Current to Defeated and reinstate the previous
Current record.

And sadly as Steve said "ANYTHING wrong" in IGFA's opinion could mean
something as trivial as four inches instead of 12.

If they do, then the entire process is tainted in my estimation.

Had he made a legal catch, followed ALL the rules as required in the IGFA
submission process,

This is also a good point. A 25 pound bass may be caught legally (say by
legally seining or maybe trot lining) but not being caught as a game fish is
caught.

and then was awarded the World Record, I would be
leading his cheering section.

Me too. But my point was to encourage folks to keep their fish alive and
let the biologists and officials see it and verify that is legitimate. I'm
all for catch and release but these guy's rush to throw her back really
muddied their water and clouded their chances for a legitimate world record
application.

John

"John" wrote in message
...
Steve said:
SNIP

and then was awarded the World Record, I would be
leading his cheering section.

Me too. But my point was to encourage folks to keep their fish alive and
let the biologists and officials see it and verify that is legitimate.
I'm all for catch and release but these guy's rush to throw her back
really muddied their water and clouded their chances for a legitimate
world record application.

There are any number of ways to keep a fish alive and healthy regardless of
boat size. They could have put the bass in a large, aerated cooler, in a
mesh "livewell" such as bank fishermen use or even on a stout rope stringer
through the lower jaw.

I can see how this fish could be a "release division" record, but the
all-tackle, all-time world record? NO WAY!!! Come on! In order to be in
the record books, it's based on a fish's weight. In this case, the fish was
never weighed on a certified scale, so that in and of itself should
disqualify the catch. Anyone can buy a Boga Grip, send it in and have it
certified to IGFA standards. I don't know about you, but if I was fishing
waters where a potential world record "ANYTHING" was swimming, I'd have
spent the couple hundred bucks for a certified Boga Grip.

I'm still not buying it.
--
Steve @ OutdoorFrontiers
http://www.outdoorfrontiers.com
G & S Guide Service and Custom Rods
http://www.herefishyfishy.com

Missed World Record?

Group: rec.outdoors.fishing.bass Date: Tue, Mar 21, 2006, 1:44pm (CST-2)
From: (John)
Another confusing world record possibility at Lake Dixon:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/sports...-bn21bass.html
Hopefully readers of this board will read up on IGFA rules and avoid the
problems these three guys evidently got into Monday on Lake Dixon. Foul
hooked, no measurements, no certified scales, no biologist species
certification, and maybe the list of problems that could prohibit his
World Record status goes on and on (help landing it, lure/line status,
notarized application, etc. are all possibilities). As more stories
about the catch go public, we'll probably find out more of their sad
story.
You can bet that the IGFA will conduct exhaustive studies and analysis
for any all tackle world Largemouth Bass record. Let your mind wander as
to the nature of "exhaustive studies" they may fund. IGFA told me that
they use independent testing laboratories to verify line strength. There
are lots and lots of hoops to jump through to get an IGFA certified
world record and there are a lot of people behind the scenes who will
try to take it away from you.
"Must be caught legally" is one big obstacle. I just hope any readers
here persevere and do all the right things they have to do to get the
world record they deserve. It would be a shame to get caught up in the
excitement of the moment and loose a potential world record. Calmer
heads would have kept it alive and taken this gorgeous fish to the
Marina in their live well so it could be kept alive and put on display
so fishing families everywhere could enjoy it. The living World Record
fish on display would sharply contrast with the current picture of the
three Lake Dixon Stooges - Larry, Moe and Shemp who squandered HIS big
chance!
Good luck to all!
John
=======
First off, there were no livewells to put the fish in....Dixon only
rents small boats, no others allowed. Second, these guys were not
"dummies", they fish that lake every day. They knew the fish was there,
and where it was at. They bought a camping permit that allowed them
first boat rental of the day, and were on the fish at first light. Mac
has caught a 19 lber there, and Jed holds the 4th largest bass ever
recorded....the same fish 3 years ago! They are all featured in the book
"Sowbelly", and they knew exatly what they were doing! They had no
choice...there were wittnesses that saw the foul hook!

If it did get certified, there are about 4 or 5 peope that can say they
caught the world record bass.....the same one over and over again, just
smaller as the catch dates go back in time. John Jr was the first to
find that fish about 5-6 years ago, Mike Long caught it a day later and
it weighed 20+ lbs, then Jed caught it again 3 years ago when it weighed
21.7 lbs. It is to say the least, and infamous bass!

John K

Thanks JK !
Your "inside line" to this story clears up the water some.
"John Kerr" wrote in message
...

Missed World Record?

Group: rec.outdoors.fishing.bass Date: Tue, Mar 21, 2006, 1:44pm (CST-2)
From: (John)
Another confusing world record possibility at Lake Dixon:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/sports...-bn21bass.html
Hopefully readers of this board will read up on IGFA rules and avoid the
problems these three guys evidently got into Monday on Lake Dixon. Foul
hooked, no measurements, no certified scales, no biologist species
certification, and maybe the list of problems that could prohibit his
World Record status goes on and on (help landing it, lure/line status,
notarized application, etc. are all possibilities). As more stories
about the catch go public, we'll probably find out more of their sad
story.
You can bet that the IGFA will conduct exhaustive studies and analysis
for any all tackle world Largemouth Bass record. Let your mind wander as
to the nature of "exhaustive studies" they may fund. IGFA told me that
they use independent testing laboratories to verify line strength. There
are lots and lots of hoops to jump through to get an IGFA certified
world record and there are a lot of people behind the scenes who will
try to take it away from you.
"Must be caught legally" is one big obstacle. I just hope any readers
here persevere and do all the right things they have to do to get the
world record they deserve. It would be a shame to get caught up in the
excitement of the moment and loose a potential world record. Calmer
heads would have kept it alive and taken this gorgeous fish to the
Marina in their live well so it could be kept alive and put on display
so fishing families everywhere could enjoy it. The living World Record
fish on display would sharply contrast with the current picture of the
three Lake Dixon Stooges - Larry, Moe and Shemp who squandered HIS big
chance!
Good luck to all!
John
=======
First off, there were no livewells to put the fish in....Dixon only
rents small boats, no others allowed. Second, these guys were not
"dummies", they fish that lake every day. They knew the fish was there,
and where it was at. They bought a camping permit that allowed them
first boat rental of the day, and were on the fish at first light. Mac
has caught a 19 lber there, and Jed holds the 4th largest bass ever
recorded....the same fish 3 years ago! They are all featured in the book
"Sowbelly", and they knew exatly what they were doing! They had no
choice...there were wittnesses that saw the foul hook!

If it did get certified, there are about 4 or 5 peope that can say they
caught the world record bass.....the same one over and over again, just
smaller as the catch dates go back in time. John Jr was the first to
find that fish about 5-6 years ago, Mike Long caught it a day later and
it weighed 20+ lbs, then Jed caught it again 3 years ago when it weighed
21.7 lbs. It is to say the least, and infamous bass!

John K

"John Kerr" sez:

First off, there were no livewells to put the fish in....Dixon only
rents small boats, no others allowed. Second, these guys were not
"dummies", they fish that lake every day. They knew the fish was there,
and where it was at. They bought a camping permit that allowed them
first boat rental of the day, and were on the fish at first light. Mac
has caught a 19 lber there, and Jed holds the 4th largest bass ever
recorded....the same fish 3 years ago! They are all featured in the book
"Sowbelly", and they knew exatly what they were doing! They had no
choice...there were wittnesses that saw the foul hook!

So more of the story is coming out. So John help me out. Is this what
really happened?

The three legally bought a camping permit so they could get a boat first and
beat everybody lined up trying to get on the lake and run their newly rented
boat over to where they knew this big bass was spawning so they could be
first to foul hook her. So they wanted to be first where she was so no one
could see them fishing? These guys had planned this in advance. Is that
right? Is it in Monte Burke's book what they were going to do? So they had
planned in advance to foul hook her or to hopefully snag her in the mouth so
they could get the world record? And once he foul hooked her, all three
could not lie and say he caught her legally because the lake was so small
there were other witnesses that saw him foul hook her? The other witnesses
not in the boat could not see the scale show 25 pounds either I bet. So is
that why he threw her back in the lake without measuring her or weighing her
on a certified scales so he or one of his buddies could foul hook her
another day? Did these guys really plan on doing this in advance? Were
these guys really that smart or did they just get caught foul-hooking
spawning bass and tried to cover it up?

I'm confused. I don't know what really happened, John. I'm sure glad I'm
not on the IGFA committee that has to evaluate their application.
John