Sharphooks
Well-Known Member
I took the liberty of posting that picture on a website where the fishermen who read it commonly see 50 to 100 lb fish in their daily boating (tuna, tarpon etc). I asked them to guess the weight of that fish. Most responders said “50”, one guy allowed “60”. I’m with Serengeti on this—-I’m thinking , mid to upper 70's
I commercial fished and saw lots of 40’s and got pretty good at eyeballing weights which I got to confirm when they wrote up the fish ticket. I also fished the Kenai for 5 years straight and saw lots and lots of 60 to 70 pound fish (back in the early 80’s). These were dead fish hanging from gallows in the front yards of the lodges so I have a pretty good idea of chinook weight relative to a human body standing beside it
Yes, maybe fishermen are jealous and downgrading the weight of another guy’s fish is in our genes, but I’d also make the argument that rigorous scientific method is important and that formula gets a bit sketchy when girth comes into play.
I fished the Skeena system for 40 years every fall and know my way around big steelhead. I’ve seen 42” fish that based on that formula, should have weighed low 30’s but they were snaked-out and weighed mid-20’s. I’ve seen 38” fish that by that formula should have weighed 18 lbs but due to the stunning girth of the particular fish, ended up weighing 25 lbs.
This fish weighed 97 (after sitting in the back of a pick-up truck in the hot sun). You can see how the girth travels all the way back to the anal fin. No doubt on the weight of this one:
That Rivers fish is a beauty and I love the smile on the gal that caught it but you can see the girth doesn’t carry through to the anal fin—-it starts to taper just behind that guys right hand. It’s a beauty, a once in a lifetime fish, but the number begins with a 7, maybe an 8, but not a 1
I commercial fished and saw lots of 40’s and got pretty good at eyeballing weights which I got to confirm when they wrote up the fish ticket. I also fished the Kenai for 5 years straight and saw lots and lots of 60 to 70 pound fish (back in the early 80’s). These were dead fish hanging from gallows in the front yards of the lodges so I have a pretty good idea of chinook weight relative to a human body standing beside it
Yes, maybe fishermen are jealous and downgrading the weight of another guy’s fish is in our genes, but I’d also make the argument that rigorous scientific method is important and that formula gets a bit sketchy when girth comes into play.
I fished the Skeena system for 40 years every fall and know my way around big steelhead. I’ve seen 42” fish that based on that formula, should have weighed low 30’s but they were snaked-out and weighed mid-20’s. I’ve seen 38” fish that by that formula should have weighed 18 lbs but due to the stunning girth of the particular fish, ended up weighing 25 lbs.
This fish weighed 97 (after sitting in the back of a pick-up truck in the hot sun). You can see how the girth travels all the way back to the anal fin. No doubt on the weight of this one:
That Rivers fish is a beauty and I love the smile on the gal that caught it but you can see the girth doesn’t carry through to the anal fin—-it starts to taper just behind that guys right hand. It’s a beauty, a once in a lifetime fish, but the number begins with a 7, maybe an 8, but not a 1
Last edited:
