Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[greese30]

Saw this on HuntBC -- WOW!!!!!

http://www.theprovince.com/travel/West+lands+Haida+Gwaii/5296964/story.html

Can't remember seeing it here so thought I would pass it on.  Sure hope that fish passes on its genes in its native river!

[Sandman]

Saw this on HuntBC -- WOW!!!!!

http://www.theprovince.com/travel/West+lands+Haida+Gwaii/5296964/story.html

Can't remember seeing it here so thought I would pass it on.  Sure hope that fish passes on its genes in its native river!

I was working the docks at the QCL when that last monster was brought.  They get a couple over 70 pounds each season.

[1son]

wow what a beast imagine having that thing at the end of your line

[silver ghost]

it brought tears to my eyes reading that the guy did the right thing and released it. there are too few of those large, beautiful springs around to end it's bloodline. I always release the biggest fish I catch as they have clearly done something right to have survived all they have been through to reach the size they got to. survival of the fittest. It's good to see there exists sensible anglers out there. either that or i've been spending too much time on the fraser lol

[BigFisher]

Awesome catch, good on him for releasing that big doe.
That fish looks its size, but how exactly did they weigh this fish while it was alive? A gill scale is out of question with a fish that size. hmm, I wounder where they came up with that weight.

[holmes]

there is a formula, length x girth x girth divided by 750 or 800....holmes*

[Steelhead King]

i would like to know the actual measurment of that fish... looks big.. 
@ holmes,  the actual formula should be divided by 800 but i know some lodges like to use the 750 indtead... the final result usually be a few pounds different.

[holmes]

ya i thought it should be 800 but they probably wanted to make it sound bigger or something, who knows, its a beast anyway, here are the actual measurements....51.5 L x 35 G.....holmes*

more pics here
http://www.sportfishingbc.com/forum/showthread.php?16821-84-lbs-landed-in-the-Queen-Charlottes!

[jacked55]

is this formula pretty close for other species of fish or just salmon? for example like a sturgeon or whatever?

[Dogbreath]

is this formula pretty close for other species of fish or just salmon?

AFAICT the formula was developed by weighing and measuring a lot of dead fish.

I imagine different body shapes mean different formulae-Google is your friend in that regard.

[Tex]

The formula is mostly used as an approximation for chinook salmon, though you could probably get a fair guesstimate for almost any salmon or trout by simply modifying the divisor (bottom number, in this case, 800).  When I used to guide, the formula was found to be pretty darn accurate, though every fish is different and body shape DOES change how close it was for some fish we caught that were unusual in shape (such as extra thick all the way through the body, having small heads, etc).

I doubt you could use it for a fish like a sturgeon, as it's a completely different shape.  Never tried though.

Tex

[Fish Assassin]

Whatever formula you choose to use it's still a humungous salmon

[Sandman]

is this formula pretty close for other species of fish or just salmon? for example like a sturgeon or whatever?

The divisor is related to the species, I believe the 800 was for salmonids, but will work for other species of similar body shape.  Here are some for other game fish.

bass weight = (length x length x girth) / 1,200

pike weight = (length x length x length) / 3,500

sunfish weight = (length x length x length) / 1,200

trout weight = (length x girth x girth) / 800

walleye weight = (length x length x length) / 2,700

[typhoon]

These guys use a divisor of 690 for steelhead and claim:

In total, we measured and weighed 97 fish ranging from 3 to 33 lbs.  Results for the various species are graphed below.  The center trend line, which is the best fit for steelhead (denominator 690), appears to work well too for the other species.  This extrapolation to other species, however, it highly tentative since it is based on so few samples from other species. Note that 80% of the samples for all species combined fall within the high and low trend lines, which correspond to +/-8% of weight.

http://flyfishingresearch.net/fishweight/weightcalculator.html