50 # ????

I observed a photo of the recent catch by Al Maas in the Outdoor section of the Duluth News Tribune. When comparing this fish to actual fish that were killed,weighed, and mounted (Peter Haupt 47# & Jerry Nelson 48# ) It is hard for me to believe this fish is 50# even though it is 57"long. It does not have the shoulders and overall mass that these confirmed fish had!! Muskie fisherman have a bad habit of putting weights on fish which they release. Why not just give the length and a brief description of its build(chunky,fat,obese,skinny)instead of embarrassing yourself with an outrageous over estimate!!!!

I am sure that I am not the only muskie fisherman disgusted by the over exaggeration of recent catches to promote the sport! In my opinion these are great fish and deserve some recognition (CONGRATULATIONS) , but not to the point of insulting the intelligence of those who really know!

Todd Williamson

Todd,

Why are you so bent about this situation? The gentleman(guide) that caught this fish is one of the most well respected anglers in the State of MN. Why would an angler of his stature stretch the truth? You might want to consider the following before you spout off next time . . .

-Al saw this fish in person and held it unlike yourself who is making a judgement based off a photograph.

-Al has caught more fish in his day then you probably ever will, that alone should establish some credibility.

-He released it! Most people would have taken a club to a fish of this magnitude - I mean give the guy a break.

Yes I too am disgusted that someone tried to insult my intelligence!

Todd, you must be kidding, right? You are the only one making all of us anglers look stupid, cut the guy some slack. I will also say that the angler in question has a wonderful reputation and more integrity then you'll ever have.

[Turgeon]

Todd its real simple ....you are picking on the wrong guy!

Mr Maas is a class act and would have a WAY better idea about a fishes size than 99% of the muskie anglers around. Like I said simple.

[Ballistic]

I am a long distance friend of Al's, and do not care if the fish was 50# 45# or 30#. It was a good fish. I don't know how much experience, integrity, or anything else everyone else here has, but I can tell you this:

This is a generally crabby thread.

[Dan Dean]

Todd you might think twice about your post Al Maas is the class of the field, a true pro who always has the time to chat with you. Lets also remember that Al released this fish to be caught again, and he deserves alot of respect for that. Al has probably caught more 50" fish than any one I know, who cares if it was 42lbs or 52lbs it was one heck of a fish and it still swims today!

Dan Dean

[Jim McCullough]

I thought about turning this thread into cyberdust, but sometimes it's good to stay out of it and let the membership take care of it. It then leaves a record of what not to do. Don't be too hard on Todd guys, I have talked to him via email several times and he is a good guy. I'm sure he now knows of what he did.

After reading all the responses to Todd's email re:the 57" Al Maas fish, all I have to say is cool your testosterone jets! First of all Todd has a right to express his opinion like any one else without being ripped from limb to limb in the process. The bigger issue here has to do with honesty and integrity in muskie fishing as far as I'm concerned. In my opinion, by Mr. Maas stating that he thinks that this fish weighed over 50 pounds without having taken a girth measurement or weighing the fish automatically makes his assertion of the fish's weight questionable because it's a guess, there's no proof. It's a beautiful huge fish, there's no question of that, but by making an "educated" guess as to the fish's weight, it again throws tarnish on the credibility of muskie fishermen and women. I personally have caught three muskies which all weighed between 30 and 36 pounds. I can state this as fact because the fish had girth measurements taken and/or were weighed in the net. I can tell you that if I had caught a 57" muskie, I would have made sure that I got a girth measurement before I made any claims as to the weight of the fish and probably would have taken pictures of the fish being measured, etc so I could make an honest legitimate and verifable claim as to the fish's weight. Even if you don't weigh the fish, at least with the length and girth measurements you can do the formula to get an approximate weight. In order for Mr. Maas' fish to have weighed 50 pounds, it would have had to had a girth measurement of nearly 27 inches. He stated himself that it was a "lean" fish and from the picture it definitely looked like a long, lean fish. Do I think the fish weighed over 50 pounds? Not that it really matters because it's a beautiful fish, but I don't think it weighed that much--my thought would be that it weighed in the mid-40's pound area. Throughout it's history, muskie fishing and muskie fishermen have had a problem with the truth (as have all fishermen I guess). That's why there's always even been disputes and alleged record fish have been disproven. Catching a huge muskie is a great experience--actually catching any muskie is a great experience. By exaggerating the truth or alleging unproven or unprovable claims as to the size of fish we catch damages the sport of muskie fishing and creates controversy. But more than that it affirms the belief that muskie fisherman are liars or more politically correct are "truth impaired." Let's please try to be credible fishermen and women. But always keep in mind that the adage "see it to believe" applies. Don't believe everything every muskie fisherperson says unless they can verify it in a credible manner (girth measurement and length and photos). Well, now I've given you all a new target so Todd can sleep a little easier tonight! Thanks for reading.

[Steve]

"honesty and integrity of Muskie fisherman" - let's look at this in further depth. First off, how is his assupmption of this fish weighing 50 pounds in ANY way effect you or I? Fact is it doesn't; and as a muskie angler I could care less that we as a class are known to stretch the truth- each to is own, but I'm not shallow enough to let it bother me. I guess it bothers you however. If muskie anglers were known to be meat maggots and clubbed everything we caught, then I might do something to better the image. But the fact remains, this class of anglers puts a higher percentage of fish back to the water then any other, period!

If your going to stand by Todd and support his arguement your barking up the wrong tree and choose to argue just for arguements sake! The facts remain, the angler in question is TOP Notch, has caught thousands of muskies and furthermore the fish lives - give it a break your arguement has no legs to stand on.

fisherwoman,

Pretty naive to sit her and start saying that he should have taken a girth measurement, we don't know the situation. What if the fish was stressed or hooked deep and Mr. Maas didn't want to risk taking the extra time to take another measurement, would you still stand by your statement? Does he not have the resume to make an estimation, I'd say he does. I once fished with a nationally recognized muskie fisherman who never measures fish, and claimed he'd always be within a half inch. I called him on it and he was right on with every fish, just like Mr. Maas this guy has literally caught thousands of fish. I guess what I'm saying is pick another target.

Yourself and Todd included are lashing out based on jealously, I'm jealous also but won't do it at anothers expense!