Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Holy Yelloweye Batman!

  1. #1
    Member L. G.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    N'ern S.E. AK
    Posts
    838

    Default Holy Yelloweye Batman!




    An insurance adjustor from Seattle caught a rockfish outside Juneau, Alaska, last week that weighed 39.08 pounds and believed to be around 200 years old, The Sitka Sentinel reported.

    Henry Liebman, the adjustor, told the paper that he was fishing in 900 feet of water at the time and about 10 miles off the coast of Sitka. Rockfish, the paper said, have been known to live as far down as 4,000 feet.

    “I knew it was abnormally big (but I) didn’t know it was a record until on the way back we looked in the Alaska guide book that was on the boat,” Liebman told the paper.

    The fish was certified and a sample has been sent to a lab in Juneau where the fish’s age will be officially determined. Liebman, for his part, plans having the fish mounted.

    Troy Tidingco, the Sitka area manager from the state Department of Fish and Game, told the paper that the previous record rougheye was 205 years old and Liebman's that fish was "quite a bit smaller than the one Henry caught," the paper reported.
    Rockfish have a high release mortality because they are caught in such deep waters. They often suffer from an inflated swim bladder after reaching the boat.


    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/07/02...#ixzz2XuFN6900

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Lewisville, TX
    Posts
    335

    Default

    Kinda surreal to catch a fish that might have been swimming around in the days of Andrew Jackson. The Fox news article says its a shortraker rockfish - from what he article says, I assume that these live deeper than yelloweye normally do?

  3. #3
    Member FishGod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Fishing your hole before you get there
    Posts
    1,945

    Default

    Definitely not a yelloweye. It's either a Shortraker or Rougheye. I think I can see pores on the lower jaw, which would be a Shortraker. Hard to tell from that picture, but it's not a yelloweye.
    Your bait stinks and your boat is ugly

  4. #4
    Member duckslayer56's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Maryland...not by choice
    Posts
    2,058

    Default

    All the comments on the news reports keep blasting this guy for keeping it. Got to love people who don't know what they are talking about before they go crazy on somebody. The scary thing is, these people are voting!
    Some people call it sky busting... I call it optimism
    "Swans are a gift" -DucksandDogs
    I am a shoveler's worst nightmare!

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    99577
    Posts
    280

    Default

    Lol catch and release at 150 fathoms.

  6. #6
    Member FishGod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Fishing your hole before you get there
    Posts
    1,945

    Default

    New Picture.jpg

    After seeing this picture, Rougheye.
    Your bait stinks and your boat is ugly

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Seward
    Posts
    279

    Default

    Fishing in 900 ft of water is a chore!

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Juneau
    Posts
    169

    Default

    Looking at the guy who caught it, my vote is electric reel. Not that I blame him for going that route mind you.

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,293

    Default

    Shortraker, A rougheye has more black, and that is likely a little bit big for a rougheye.

    Here is the original Sitka article link. It's stated in it that this is a Shortraker, and is clearer in its language.
    http://sitkasentinel.com/7/2012-05-1...-be-the-oldest

  10. #10
    Member cormit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Tustumena Lake Road
    Posts
    355

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by duckslayer56 View Post
    All the comments on the news reports keep blasting this guy for keeping it. Got to love people who don't know what they are talking about before they go crazy on somebody. The scary thing is, these people are voting!
    I like to catch and eat yellow eye's ..... but it does bother me some when I think about the fish I'm about to eat being older than me, so I try to not think about it too much. Certainly not this guys fault he caught an ancient fish ..... after all, you never know what might eat the bait you offer in the briny deep. And all of us that like to fish deep water knows it's pretty much a done deal once you crank one to the surface .... and they practically turn inside out. It is what it is.

    You wouldn't be very human however, if you didn't feel some remorse ..... for unintentionally catching a fish that was born fifty years before the Civil War.

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,762

    Default

    Some people feel bad about eating a fish that old this is a sport caught fish , I wonder just how old the is old for the big boy's when they fish with miles of ground line , an fish the deep parts of the ocean ,
    most sport fishing people don't fish that deep takes a large reel an a heafty rod an a lot of line as well as no wind [ or very little ] as well as a
    dead tide , even at that you will need about 400 yards of line I think , so I give a hand to the man that got the fish , an hope he ate it
    I know I would have , an enjoyed every ounce , LB that I cooked SID

  12. #12
    Member BigBrown767's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    243

    Default Goldfish

    We caught a pretty big one last week.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    <)))><
    Live to fish, fish to live...

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    99577
    Posts
    280

    Default

    Wow very nice!

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Lewisville, TX
    Posts
    335

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigBrown767 View Post
    We caught a pretty big one last week.
    Ok, I'm pulling out my 'fish ID' hat cause I'm enjoying learning how to distinguish the different big rockfish. I see big pores on the face - is this also a shortraker?

  15. #15

    Default

    That fish turned out to only be 64 years old. Funny thing is the original story went viral with the New York Times and USA Today running with it in their haste without fact checking and printing the original 200 yr old story. Baha
    Alaska Outdoors Television ~ Outdoor Channel

  16. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tdelarm View Post
    That fish turned out to only be 64 years old. Funny thing is the original story went viral with the New York Times and USA Today running with it in their haste without fact checking and printing the original 200 yr old story. Baha
    I heard the end of a am radio conversation re: 64 yrs old...do you know how the age was determined?

  17. #17
    Member cormit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Tustumena Lake Road
    Posts
    355

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Garyak View Post
    I heard the end of a am radio conversation re: 64 yrs old...do you know how the age was determined?

    By counting the growth rings on the otolith ..... a bone from fishes inner ear.

  18. #18
    Member c6 batmobile's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Interior
    Posts
    2,100

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tdelarm View Post
    That fish turned out to only be 64 years old. Funny thing is the original story went viral with the New York Times and USA Today running with it in their haste without fact checking and printing the original 200 yr old story. Baha
    Does anyone know why this one was larger than the previous fish that was 200 yrs old? Is it because its a different type of rockfish or was this sucker just hungry?
    Makin fur fins and feathers fly.

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by c6 batmobile View Post
    Does anyone know why this one was larger than the previous fish that was 200 yrs old? Is it because its a different type of rockfish or was this sucker just hungry?
    That fish could just as easily have been incorrectly aged. The media in general is not always so hot on presenting reality...and certainly dead cold when it comes to follow up or correcting themselves...and then there are those, who for political reasons, present the media with errant information to start with. I bet it tasted good, though.

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
  •