Fishing The Fly Scotland
Index => Main Discussion Area => Topic started by: Graham Ritchie on 14/10/2007 at 15:59
-
A very large salmon was caught off the River Ness yesterday. Possibly heavier than the current British record.
http://salmo.proboards74.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1192297109&page=2
-
(http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n89/rattrala/1562022035_55b29de119_o.jpg)
-
:shock
-
There has been a lot of debate about this on one of the Pike angling sites. I have to agree with the general view that this fish is not over the 64 pounds..probably closer to 40-45 pounds.
The first length x girth was given as 56 x 50 inches...the second was 56 x 40 the third 52 x 40
There is then a post saying that the length of 56 inches is the correct one, as measured by 6 different people. Then another post says 4 people measured it at 56 inches. yet another says 54 inches!
If you use the girth x girth x length devide by 800 formula to work out its weight, the shortest, thinest report fish would work out at 104 pounds!!!!!..the biggest reported would be 175 pounds!
Using the Gowan calculator that was developed on the Tay and has proved to be accurate to 5% (On Tay fish) you get a small weight of 126.8 pounds and a high weight of 212 pounds!!!! :shock :shock
You can do your own estimates here :) http://www.letsflyfish.com/weight.htm
Unfortuantly most calculators do not relate to UK Atlantic salmon...but the Gowan one was worked out using 826 salmon from the tay.
I personnally think it is a fantastic fish, but no where near the record...perhaps a 50...but certainly not over 65. You only have to look at the cast of the fish in somers to get a good idea of sizes.
I did find it amusing that amoung the congratulations on catching what is obviously a very large fish, many said well done for returning it. Is it me or is the fish a tad coloured and therefore should have been returned by law? :z4
One last thing, and this was noted with Pike, but is relevant here...if you lay a fish on a measuring board, you get one reading, if you then take a tape measure from the fork of the tail and have it follow the contours of the fish to the snout you get a much longer reading as the tape is following all the curves of the fish. In the case of a particular Pike I saw, laid flat it went 42 inches, measuerd with a tape it went 50 inches..enough to add about 20 pounds to the fish using a weight calculator.
Still a great fish..well done...another image of it... (http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q265/backs4more/Bigfish2.jpg)
-
Would have thought fish was about the forty lbs. mark give or take five lbs. eachway. Certainly a very large cock fish going by the kype in the picture and by law would have to be returned
-
My wealth of knowledge would guesstimate this fish to being 45-50lbs. Its a fair old kipper. Its hard to tell from the photos. Wish it was me that dragged it in. :cry
Thanks
Colin
-
There were several pictures posted on the Fish the Fly website but they have been taken down...might have something to do with the images showing the fish was big, but no more than about 45 pounds.
Just got this quote from the Times too "Mr Sutherland refused to speculate on the weight of the salmon, but he did admit that at least one of his measurements — the alleged 50-inch girth — may have been wrong. "
I can only suspect this was a publicity stunt to get some interest in the river. One of the Salmon boards suggested the beat is going up for sale soon!...Nessie me thinks.. :wink
Its a great shame that this fish has been left open to so much speculation. Personally I would have takne photos of it out the water and being measured so there was little doubt. It is undoubtadly a magnificent fish all the same
-
Does anyone know what it was caught on
Great fish tho :z16
-
Apparently taken on the fly...but then other reports from a certain ghillie on that beat suggest that that might not be the case either :z10
Its a fantastic fish, so why make up things about it? Grrrrr.
Latest story is that it is not a salmon but a Ferox!! :shock
-
Doesn't look like a trout to me :z15
However or whatever it was caught on it's a belting fish, but I suspect well short of record status :z3
-
take a close look at the tail unless i'm mistaken salmon don't have a spotted tail but trout do.
???
-
When they've been in the river for a while and as 'coloured up' as that fish is/was then spots will appear in the tail, particularly in a cock fish :z16 although if it were freshly run the chances are that any spots in the tail would hardly be noticeable.
-
Hi Hamish,
How's things ?
Yep, I agree with you. Definitely a salmon , and definitely not a British record.
The pictures , particularly of the head in the T+S , show that this is a very big fish , however , 45-55lbs ?, the spot pattern being particularly parr like , !!!
The world of Fisheries Science is truly a strange place . A mutant , a migrant or or very old Scottish gentleman ?
Paul.
PS: were scales taken ?
-
Hi Paul- no bad ta :z16
I don't know if scale samples were taken.... I hope they were as the analysis could prove very interesting indeed :z5 :z15 I'd wager on 9 years old+ (if I had any money to wager :z4 ).
-
Scale samples were sent to Pitlochry for checking.
-
Have just realised that fifty inch girth is almost twice the size of my waist Does any one know the real sizes?
-
Turns out that they did not measure it accurately. One of the scientists at Pitlochry estimated it at 45lb plus, they were unable to give a more accurate figure than that. The fish had been in freshwater for up to 5 months, so would have certainly been well over 50lb when fresh. There were no scales taken, salmon start to reabsorb their scales after a long period in fresh water and it is extremely difficult to obtain scale samples from really coloured fish, especially cock salmon whose skin goes almost leather like.