37 inch Brown Trout

And for starters playing the fish on "spincasting tackle" (I don't care what you say pcray and am deliberately overlooking the accuracy of your post for the purpose of my post) tires it and stresses it far more than on fly gear. This fish was toast well before they even took it from the water. I really don't have any idea what these spin doctors thought they were doing. It's a good thing we got the watchful eyes of experts here on PAFF to call out such Busch behavior. A fly rod and a release with your arm down through the ice (and the fish still in the water) was definitely what was called for here.

 
That would be some release to see... Tough to get the Simms tail slap with the little hole in the ice haha
 
Kray, I didn't know that entire lake was private, that is some interesting info. Thanks.

 
http://fishandboat.com/water/lakes_nonpfbc/wallenpaupack/00wallenp.htm
 
krayfish2 wrote:
Has that lake not produced the state record brown and several that were close to record size? No secret. One thing most don't know is that the entire lake is private property .....as well as the surrounding land.
Click to expand...

The record prior to the one caught in Walnut Creek (Erie) was from Wallenpaupack.

When you state the lake is private property, I assume you mean that it is owned by an energy generating company (originally PPL, then Talen, and soon Brookfield). But generally one of the requirements of the permitting process is that a percentage of land and water be made available for public recreation. Much of the lower Susquehanna River and the land surrounding it is private, in that Exelon, Safe Harbor Water Power Corporation, and soon Brookfield own a lot of what is there. But it's open for recreation, and in some cases, the state picked up some of the land and added it to state parks and the Lancaster County Conservancy receive a big chunk of land too (also technically private, but open to the public).
 
The susky is navigable waters so you can be on banks up to flood stage with no problem. You just cant walk across someone's posted land to get to it.
 
There are big trout in that Lake, including some big bows and big brookies and we're talking about fish over 20 inches. not dinks of 12 inches.
 
Chaz where do the brookies and rainbows come from reproduction? PFBC stocks fingerling browns only?
 
It is way to hard to judge the exact size of something that size from a photo without a tape next to it. They said they measured it with a tip up and it was out of the water for 2 minutes.....where is the 1 minute of footage from when they measured it? Was that left out on purpose or were they not sharp enough to get that part on video, knowing everyone would be questioning a 37" claim? One thing is for sure, that is a monster brown.
 
If I had to guess I would say 28-30" compare it to the inseam of their pants if it I 37" then they would easily both be 7' tall
 
That fish is nowhere near 37".

Can anybody honestly look at the linked fish (which is 32") and convince themselves the Wallenpaupack trout is bigger than this one?

http://stevedally.photoshelter.com/image/I0000.hoZrbSlf8U

I doubt it is even 30". I'd guess 27". It's a really big brown trout, but a 37" brown will probably weigh between 15-25 pounds.
 
i'd guess it was 32" or so, 12-14lb.

whilst surprised at the C&R it makes sense if you are a specimen hunter to put em back, which is quite common in Northern New England.

i did wince at the holding it vertical though.

regardless of the method, its always interesting to see big fish from local waters.

there are also striped bass in that lake too.

i've always wanted to rent a boat there one May and fish it for both species. its $80 for three hours or $100 for 5hrs, which is not bad between two anglers.

the maximum depth is only 60ft so drifting along the drop offs could produce some big browns on nymphs and wets, where there are weed beds, or where there are offshore points you can drift across - thats how we used to fish big lakes in the UK.

cheers

Mark
 
PennypackFlyer wrote:

Now FD, if we put your head underwater for 2 minutes I think you'd change your tune.
Click to expand...

Despite rumors to the contrary, I am not cold blooded.
 
Reeder wrote:

BTW, when I used to ice fish for perch, I would throw them on the ice where they would freeze solid. Then when I took them home and put them in the sink to thaw... Darn things would come back to life and swim around in the sink. Not just one, or some... ALL OF THEM!
Click to expand...

I've seen them swim around in the sink after they were thawed and filleted.
Click to expand...

Well, I must be better at filleting fish because afterwards, mine just kind of twitched. ;-)

I gotta tell you about a channel cat I caught a few years back. It was just short of 2 foot long. Nice size. I was actually fishing for dinner, so I filleted it. I then thew it in my other pond to feed the fish and turtles.

A few hours later, I went for a ride in the woods, past the pond and saw that catfish was still "breating." I know what you guys are thinking, that I am a cruel bastage. I resemble that remark. Before filleting it, I bashed it on the had and it swear it wasn't moving when I threw it in there.
 
Big-Bass wrote:
I ice fish and catch and release 99% of the time..cold weather can do quick damage on a fish ...
Click to expand...

I agree, and I don't recall ever taking a camera with me when ice fishing.

But in the video in question, it was a relatively warm, and considerable amount of water on the ice. I'm not going to be critical of how they "handled" it and glad to see they threw it back, even though it was just a brown trout. ;-)
 
Reeder wrote:
It is way to hard to judge the exact size of something that size from a photo without a tape next to it. They said they measured it with a tip up and it was out of the water for 2 minutes.....where is the 1 minute of footage from when they measured it? Was that left out on purpose or were they not sharp enough to get that part on video, knowing everyone would be questioning a 37" claim? One thing is for sure, that is a monster brown.
Click to expand...

Not everyone.
 
chadm wrote:
If I had to guess I would say 28-30" compare it to the inseam of their pants if it I 37" then they would easily both be 7' tall
Click to expand...

The one guy does appear to be over 6 foot tall unless his buddy is a [d]dwarf [/d]little person.

The fish is longer than his inseam, so I bet his estimate isn't all that far off. I'd say it is longer than gabe's fish. Plus Gabe is holding his out make it look bigger. I'm betting his is no more than 30.5." He loses at least an inch for being a weenie.

BTW, his is stocked.

I'm surprised that so many people even care.
 
its 36 or 37--
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Montana Angler Fly Fishing
Harman's North Fork Cottages


Real Time Data From
the USGS Site

Share this page

Back
Top