Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 72

Thread: World record caliber Kenai king

  1. #1
    Member fishNphysician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen WA
    Posts
    4,516

    Default World record caliber Kenai king

    In the other thread, a side discussion was started about what length of fish it would take to topple the reigning world record Kenai king caught by Les Anderson.

    First off, everyone should know that is an exceptionally large fish that folks have been trying to beat (I might add, unsuccessfully) for over 27 years! According to IGFA, its certified measurements were 58.75 x 37.25.... in comparable round numbers, let's call it 59 x 37. In other words, HUGE!

    In the other thread, I spoke of the 3 x 5 rule...

    Quote Originally Posted by fishNphysician View Post
    3 x 5 refers to the relative proportions of girth and length. For every 5 inches of length, there's roughly 3 inches of girth.

    While there will be the occasional outlier, for the overwhelming majority of Kenai kings....

    A 35" fish is gonna be 21" around give or take an inch.
    A 40" fish is gonna be 24" around give or take an inch.
    A 45" fish is gonna be 27" around give or take an inch.
    A 50" fish is gonna be 30" around give or take an inch.
    A 55" fish is gonna be 33" around give or take an inch.
    I also said that it would take a Kenai king of at least 58 inches long to break the record. If it ain't 58, it won't make the weight. And even then, that 58 inch fish would have to be an exceptionally girthy specimen that borders on breaking the classic 3 x 5 rule, or actually breaks it. Possible? Infinitesimally so. Likely? Exceedingly not.

    Just so folks can see the caliber of MEGA-buck we are talking about, I thought I'd share some photos. As I said in the other thread, the three biggest fish killed on the river in the past 10 years are 87# (Erickson) , 88# (LLoyd), and 89# (Berg). I'm aware of a 4th fish caught by Brad Adams that was rumored to be high 80's as well, but to my knowledge, the fish was never sealed.

    Here's Mel Erickson's exceptionally bright 87# fish at 55 x 34...



    Here's Zac Lloyd's 88# fish at 58 x 35...



    Here's Tim Berg's 89# fish at 57 x 34...



    The common denominator for all these fish besides being EXCEPTIONALLY large is that NOT ONE was able to beat the record Kenai king. Give or take a pound, each was about 10# shy of breaking Mr Anderson's 1985 record.

    .
    .
    .
    .
    .


    I'll end this post with a pic of a fish I believe could have beat the record..... but only if it had been caught a few weeks earlier. This is Thompson's MASSIVE 59.5 x 38 buck taken in 1993. The tail-span on this beast measured 17 inches wide! Check out the wrist on this monster fish....
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .

    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .




    Now the rest of the story....

    I said this fish could have toppled the world record, but when it was finally put on a scale, it only weighed 90.3#. How could this possibly be the case when each measurement exceeded that of the reigning world record?

    It's because the fish was actually taken post-spawn.... with NO MILT SACS present when it was cut open. Anyone who has ever killed a 50# buck or better knows that each milt sac can be as large as a small salmon itself. Imagine what each milt sac weighed in this beast.
    "Let every angler who loves to fish think what it would mean to him to find the fish were gone." Zane Grey
    http://www.piscatorialpursuits.com/uploads/UP12710.jpg
    The KeenEye MD

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,448

    Default

    Incredible fish Doc. We need to do whats needed to insure they are with us for our kids to fish. tough decisions now or dire consequesces later.

  3. #3
    New member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    5,639

    Question Size matters? Why?

    Quote Originally Posted by kgpcr View Post
    Incredible fish Doc. We need to do whats needed to insure they are with us for our kids to fish. tough decisions now or dire consequesces later.
    What have "world records" to do with fishing? Exactly why does size matter?

    Too deep for me . . .

    Attachment 60808

  4. #4
    Member RainGull's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    The S.E. of the N.W.
    Posts
    950

    Default

    Just FYI, for those who may not know, the largest King Salmon recorded (as per the great state) was 126.5 lbs taken from a fish trap at Red Bay on POW that now resides in the Clausen Museum in Petersburg. The great state lists this one as the tops (non-sport caught of course). Now that's something to shoot for!

    The picture (I'm sure) does not do the fresh fish justice. Also note that it was a chromer taken in salt.
    10941_512.jpg
    Picture from the Capitol City Weekly

    Don't we all wish those genetics had been passed on! Something to think about...
    Science has a rich history of proving itself wrong.

  5. #5
    Member RainGull's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    The S.E. of the N.W.
    Posts
    950

    Default

    Some close contenders:
    KING1.jpg
    Science has a rich history of proving itself wrong.

  6. #6
    Member akiceman25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Two Rivers, AK
    Posts
    1,284

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcus View Post
    What have "world records" to do with fishing? Exactly why does size matter?

    Too deep for me . . .
    Its simply human nature to be competitive Marcus...

    Competition is one of the most basic functions of nature. Those best able to compete within an environmental niche survive. Those least well adapted die out. Competition remains a powerful instinctual drive in human nature. We compete against each other, we compete against ourselves, and we compete as groups against other groups. Even when the negative aspects of competition inspire us to attempt to intellectually deny this aspect of our nature, we typically end up competing at being non-competitive.

    Feel free to read more...

    http://www.kortexplores.com/node/89


    Now...back to the great thread by the fish doc.
    I am serious... and don't call me Shirley.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KM2K7sV-K74

  7. #7
    New member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    5,639

    Question Rising above our animal nature?

    Quote Originally Posted by akiceman25 View Post
    . . Competition is one of the most basic functions of nature. Those best able to compete . . survive. Those least well adapted die out. . .
    That's well said, iceman, and I agree.

    However, only man has the ability to rise above such base, animalistic functions and respond to nobler motives.

    To each his own . . .

  8. #8
    Member 4merguide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Kenai Peninsula, Alaska
    Posts
    9,749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fishNphysician View Post
    In the other thread, a side discussion was started about what length of fish it woul
    I said this fish could have toppled the world record, but when it was finally put on a scale, it only weighed 90.3#. How could this possibly be the case when each measurement exceeded that of the reigning world record?
    Isn't it also true that all of the measurements of Les's fish could have been substantially larger if he had weighed it what?......5 hours earlier? I think I remember that was the time frame from being caught to making it to the scales? Didn't he also have it out in the sun for a number of those hours?
    Sheep hunting...... the pain goes away, but the stupidity remains...!!!

  9. #9
    Member cjustinm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Kotz
    Posts
    1,004

    Default

    some monstrous fish thats for sure....

  10. #10
    New member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    8

    Default Competition? Meh . . .

    Competition may bolster the ego of the insecure, but, in this case (killing trophy fish) offers no evolutionary advantage and selects for smaller fish in the future.

    Be a real man, take a photo and then let 'em go.

    Handmade

  11. #11
    Member RainGull's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    The S.E. of the N.W.
    Posts
    950

    Default

    To be honest I have always enjoyed catching small scrappy fish far more than the big ones. My father used to get mad at me for it. I wouldn't enjoy reeling in a blue whale on a winch I'm sure, but I sure love pulling in a scrappy 6" dolly on a light spinning rig. I suppose it's a strange balance of what's possible. If you use 1 lb test and a light rod and play a 6" fish for 20 minutes it would be a fairly brutal thing to do to the fish, but when you balance what's possible by hand you can rationalize that you're getting it in as fast as possible and not feel bad. I don't like prolonging landing a fish deliberatley to play them if it's not necessary, but I still enjoy the smaller scrappy acrobatics even if they are 5 second landing jobs.
    Science has a rich history of proving itself wrong.

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    214

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Handmade View Post
    Competition may bolster the ego of the insecure, but, in this case (killing trophy fish) offers no evolutionary advantage and selects for smaller fish in the future.

    Be a real man, take a photo and then let 'em go.

    Handmade
    Be a real man, don't be self-righteous and dictate to others how you think they should act in life.

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by akiceman25 View Post
    Its simply human nature to be competitive Marcus...

    Competition is one of the most basic functions of nature. Those best able to compete within an environmental niche survive. Those least well adapted die out. Competition remains a powerful instinctual drive in human nature. We compete against each other, we compete against ourselves, and we compete as groups against other groups. Even when the negative aspects of competition inspire us to attempt to intellectually deny this aspect of our nature, we typically end up competing at being non-competitive.

    Feel free to read more...

    http://www.kortexplores.com/node/89


    Now...back to the great thread by the fish doc.
    I killed them all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I win!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

  14. #14
    Member fishNphysician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen WA
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RainGull View Post
    The picture (I'm sure) does not do the fresh fish justice. Also note that it was a chromer taken in salt.
    10941_512.jpg
    Here's a pic of the fish before Jonas Bros. did the skin mount.... 53.5 x 39!



    Caught in Point Colpoys fish trap 1939, northeastern tip Prince of Wales Island

    "Let every angler who loves to fish think what it would mean to him to find the fish were gone." Zane Grey
    http://www.piscatorialpursuits.com/uploads/UP12710.jpg
    The KeenEye MD

  15. #15
    Member Milo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,472

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PAcWest View Post
    Be a real man, don't be self-righteous and dictate to others how you think they should act in life.
    Rep point for you,,,
    Death is like an old whore in a bar--I'll buy her a drink but I won't go upstairs with her.

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Eagle River
    Posts
    53

    Default

    Enjoyed the thread and the pictures are great.

  17. #17
    Member fishNphysician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen WA
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fishNphysician View Post

    The common denominator for all these fish besides being EXCEPTIONALLY large is that NOT ONE was able to beat the record Kenai king. Give or take a pound, each was about 10# shy of breaking Mr Anderson's 1985 record.

    From IGFA...

    Weights needed to defeat or tie existing records

    1. To replace a record for a fish weighing less than 25 pounds (11.33 kg), the replacement must weigh at least 2 ounces (56.69 gm) more than the existing record.
    2. To replace a record fish weighing 25 pounds (11.33 kg) or more, the replacement must weigh at least one half of 1 percent more than the existing record. Ex: At 100 pounds (45.35 kg) the additional weight required would be 8 ounces (226.7 gm); at 200 pounds (90.71 kg) the additional weight required would be 1 pound (.453 kg).

    3. A catch which matches the weight of an existing record or exceeds the weight by less than the amount required to defeat the record will be considered a tie. In case of a tie claim involving more than two catches, weight must be compared with the original record (first fish to be caught). Nothing weighing less than the original record will be considered.


    .
    .
    .
    .

    Bottom line... to beat the current world record will require the contender to pull a certified scale down to at least 97 pounds 12 ounces. In round numbers, let's call it 98 pounds.

    Now out of the 125,000 or more kings taken out of the river in the past 10 years, these four were the closest contenders for a new world record. Yes, they were MASSIVE fish in every respect, but each fell short of dethroning Anderson by about 10 pounds. Even the longest fish at 58" was still 10 pounds shy of breaking the record.

    My point is that there is no reason to ever consider killing a giant Kenai king for a potential record unless it's at least 58" x 36"

    Even then, it's unlikely to beat the record unless it is an absolute wide-body tidewater chromer carrying its enormous girth clear back into the caudal peduncle (tail wrist). I'm talking a Kenai king in the very best shape at the absolute prime of its life. If it shows any signs of advancing sexual maturation.... elongating kype, "slabbing up" with a sharply ridged back, darkening or obvious redness.... it will need to be even longer or girthier.

    The take home message? Unless it's clearly mortally wounded, any king shy of that 58 x 36 threshold should be released to perpetuate its obvious genetic fitness. A record it ain't. Just let it go!
    "Let every angler who loves to fish think what it would mean to him to find the fish were gone." Zane Grey
    http://www.piscatorialpursuits.com/uploads/UP12710.jpg
    The KeenEye MD

  18. #18
    New member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    5,639

    Thumbs down Yes, Virginia, size matters . . .

    Quote Originally Posted by fishNphysician View Post
    . . there is no reason to ever consider killing a giant Kenai king for a potential record unless it's at least 58" x 36"
    . .
    The take home message? Unless it's clearly mortally wounded, any king shy of that 58 x 36 threshold should be released to perpetuate its obvious genetic fitness. A record it ain't. Just let it go!
    Unless it's at least 58" X 36"? Really!

    The unadorned, real "take home" message here, stripped of its feel-good rhetoric, is that any king larger than the 58 X 36 threshold should be killed because it might be a record. So, let's get 'er done, boys, we'll continue to kill one out of every twelve caught and released as we continue to try for the fame and glory of a new world record king.

    Hey, size matters . . . . . . to some. Genetics of the really big ones? Who needs 'em?

    Pathetic . . .

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    3,073

    Default

    Marcus,
    Should every fish caught be killed?

    Should one only fish if they are going to kill every fish caught?

    Should one only meat fish?

    I think doc's point is that don't kill a really big fish because it might be a record, he is giving a reasoned explaination that if you desire a world record then it will probably have to be "x" big, if it isn't then don't kill it. What I get from your posts is that that one should never let a fish go, no matter how big. So if I go fishing tomorrow and catch a 58" fish I should kill it because it will die if I release it, but since I caught it and killed it I am "bad" because I took out the genetics of the really big ones.

    What would you do? Lets say we have an average healthy run of fish, you would like a king salmon to eat, a nice 30lb buck with silver color would be ideal, you catch a 80lb king that is blushed up pretty good, it is colored but would probably still eat good. Do you let it go or kill it taking those genetics out of the river?

  20. #20
    Member fishNphysician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen WA
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yukon View Post
    I think doc's point is that don't kill a really big fish because it might be a record, he is giving a reasoned explaination that if you desire a world record then it will probably have to be "x" big, if it isn't then don't kill it. What I get from your posts is that that one should never let a fish go, no matter how big. So if I go fishing tomorrow and catch a 58" fish I should kill it because it will die if I release it, but since I caught it and killed it I am "bad" because I took out the genetics of the really big ones.
    BINGO!

    But alas, Marcus is far too entrenched in his belief that all C&R of Kenai kings is immoral/unethical to ever understand the reasoned explanation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcus View Post

    The unadorned, real "take home" message here, stripped of its feel-good rhetoric, is that any king larger than the 58 X 36 threshold should be killed because it might be a record.
    Give it a rest, old man. Don't twist my words nor put any in my mouth. No need to convolute my thoughts with your version of my "take home" message. Just read the words for what they are... posted in plain spoken English. Yes, some are out there seeking to kill the next record king. All I'm saying is it is utterly pointless for those folks to kill fish that are NOWHERE near the world record. It's pretty stupid to choose to kill a 55" sealer just because some ignorant Anderson-wannabe thinks he/she just landed the world record.

    For the record, I have no personal need to kill the world record king. Unless its mortally wounded, any fish over 40 goes back in my boat.
    "Let every angler who loves to fish think what it would mean to him to find the fish were gone." Zane Grey
    http://www.piscatorialpursuits.com/uploads/UP12710.jpg
    The KeenEye MD

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •