CARLSBAD, Calif. — A Southern California man has a fish tale which, if true, could give him one of angling's most cherished records.
Mac Weakley said he caught a 25.1-pound largemouth bass on Monday at Dixon Lake in San Diego County. After weighing it on a hand-held digital scale, he released it.
Weakley plans to pursue the record, even though the fish was foul-hooked, meaning the hook lodged in the fish's body, not its mouth. He said it wasn't snagged intentionally.
Jason Schratwieser of the International Game Fish Association said the group would consider the fish as a world record.
The biggest bass on record weighed 22 pounds, 4 ounces. It was caught in 1932 by George W. Perry at Georgia's Montgomery Lake.
To see the entire story and photo goto: www.startribune.com/531/story/322161.html
So what do you think? Should a foul hooked fish hold a world record? What about all those fish that have been caught, foul hooked and released without the credit, wouldn't this open up the potential for lots of complaints? I think everyone that ever caught a potential record should file a complaint, if this is accepted. The rules should apply to all. Even if he didn't intend to snag it, it was in fact snagged. Just my thought.
Hey if it was me, I'ld try to get it noticed too. So I completely understand. And a world record in hand would be tough not to photo and record, but here in Minnesota it is an illegal fish to keep.
I think a fawl hooked fish should still hold the record. it was the biggest bass ever caught, right? lets be serius, lets say you fawl hooked the 25 pound bass adn new it was the world record. 95 percent of anglers would say they caught that fish right. If you get lucky enough to fawl hook a fish than it should be legal.
I think a foul hooked fish is different than one caught when trying to catch one. I can see that they call it a caught fish, but if that's not an allowed fish to keep, should it be a record? I don't know. I know that a few years ago someone accidentally caught a sturgeon out of season and the resort owner made him put him it back, but the DNR later told him they would have allowed him to keep it, since it was a state record. But I don't know that that is OK.
Either way, if they do or don't, we will have a record of sorts. And it was a big fish in the photo so that raises the blood levels of all anglers and with it still swimming that's an awesome thing.
Are you going to go down to this lake and throw some lures at that big boy?