|
Post by windcutter on Oct 13, 2007 21:54:38 GMT
A monster right enough well done that man and well done to grant getting it back in and away in good health ;D in fairness i'd probably have passed out
|
|
|
Post by ibm59 on Oct 13, 2007 21:54:46 GMT
Wow. Unless that's a wee brownie being supported by Grumpy and Sleepy , it's a bloody monster !
|
|
macsalmo
Member
Salmo dreamer
Posts: 370
|
Post by macsalmo on Oct 13, 2007 21:58:51 GMT
Wow. Unless that's a wee brownie being supported by Grumpy and Sleepy , it's a bloody monster ! ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by smokiesalmon on Oct 13, 2007 22:03:45 GMT
the man has just caught the loch ness monster........................what a fish eh troops.....................long live the monster great to see it returned.
|
|
|
Post by salmonnut on Oct 13, 2007 22:14:20 GMT
Congatulations to the man or woman who caught the monster,,,,A fish of a lifetime................ 1 we all strive for in our dreams...............You are a lucky person, i raise my hat to you......
|
|
|
Post by whippy on Oct 14, 2007 7:53:33 GMT
Are you sure that is the correct picture, that fish only looks to be about 40 inches.
|
|
|
Post by sewin on Oct 14, 2007 7:56:54 GMT
Cracking fish, probably 5SW but it definitely can't be claimed as a record withoiut being weighed on scales that can be checked. It makes you wonder what the fish found dead on the Wye would have weighed, it was 59" long by 33" girth.
|
|
|
Post by whippy on Oct 14, 2007 8:00:23 GMT
And when you compare the ration between length and girth to other fish you can't help but wonder if someone got a measurement wrong. 56 inches and a 40 inch girth....sounds more like one of the roly poly women.
|
|
|
Post by stantheman on Oct 14, 2007 8:49:18 GMT
Is that the only photo available
|
|
|
Post by tynetraveller on Oct 14, 2007 9:03:53 GMT
The fact that it is half in the water hides just how massively deep that fish is.. I think it will be a 50+ and who knows, maybe it will be a record. I would love to see a conventional 'square -on' shot..
|
|
|
Post by lochman on Oct 14, 2007 9:24:55 GMT
Sturdy scale says: girth (inches) X girth (inches) X length (inches) all divided by 800 = weight of fish in pounds. using length 56", girth 40": 40 x 40 x 56 divided by 800 = 112 pounds!!!! or with 52" length 40 x 40 X 52 divided by 800 = 104 pounds!!! "Adam Reid displays a large Kenai king. This fish measured 55-1/2 inches in length and 34-1/2 inches in girth as sealed by Fish and Game, and weighed in at 82 pounds on a registered scale! " I got this information from the net, there is a picture there, however I can't seem to paste it in. The fish in question here is nearly six inches narrower than the Ness fish, and weighed 82lbs. Well done that man anyway! look forward to hereing more! either of above, if accurate, would be a World record! Accurate & verifiable length, girth, vs some definitive known sized object, as well as photos (some fish scales) would be needed to record a new Brit Record methinks. GC
|
|
|
Post by donnieW on Oct 14, 2007 9:29:50 GMT
I almost feel sorry for the captor of the fish - talk about a "no-win" situation. Can't claim a record without weighing it but imagine the uproar if he'd killed it. How many anglers or ghillies would carry scales capable of weighing that beast?
|
|
|
Post by ibm59 on Oct 14, 2007 9:34:34 GMT
|
|
|
Post by granitec on Oct 14, 2007 9:57:32 GMT
Kenai King 2003 82lbs GC
|
|
|
Post by salmonnut on Oct 14, 2007 10:00:41 GMT
Jeez... Thats no a fish, its a railway sleeper with a tail
|
|
|
Post by granitec on Oct 14, 2007 10:03:29 GMT
Record Chinook (King) Salmon - Kenai - weight verified 97lbs GC
|
|
|
Post by granitec on Oct 14, 2007 10:59:32 GMT
Would be really great if this Ness fish was taken on the NessC fly! ;D GC
|
|
|
Post by Willie The Gillie on Oct 14, 2007 11:08:12 GMT
Really Superb Stuff & Fantastic to know that our fish can still grow huge in the sea as more and more big fish are again turning up in our rivers. Also great to see a huge salmon like that being returned which is an even more unusual thing. Very Well Done To Whoever Caught The Fish. Best Regards Jock
|
|
|
Post by highlander on Oct 14, 2007 12:18:10 GMT
Certainly a big fish but by the picture I saw & congrats to the angler for landing such a mighty fish no way does this top 64lbs. Anyway as others have said there is no way on this earth that them can claim a record as the correct criteria to do so was not followed but I suspect they already know this. A lovely fish but no record in my opinion. Tight lines
|
|
|
Post by vid1973 on Oct 14, 2007 12:18:26 GMT
Any photos of this monster yet !!!!!
|
|