Monster **** and I'm glad he released it but I'm skeptical that thing was 89" from nose to tail. I'd gauge it closer to 72" but still the fish of a lifetime for most people.
I agree 110%. Sent it to the owner of a charter operation in the keys and one in PR. Both laughed and said no way. 2nd "record" fish caught in SPI this year.
Of course length and really girth is very important. There is a troll on here that really hates me for lifting my Tarpon out of the water with multiple people and trolls me. I'd like to listen to guys like Scott if this is a record Texas Tarpon, because I have a tremendous respect for what those guys do even though it's tight lipped and I don't blame them.
But I can screen shot one of the bigger outfitters who I know in the keys, and also another one that many of us have fished with from PR. Both were laughing in their replies which we joked about fish this new record and other things. They have spen decades fishing for them daily, not just in their waters, but around the Caribbean/Africa. And both these captains of multiple boats will the first to give huge props in a big fish.
It seems like when a possible record or personal best fish is posted on this board, it's 95% legit(trout, reds, snook, flounder, etc) with guys not lying. I just spent 2 days in Galveston bringing my boat up here from SPI after repairs catching bull red after bull reds. Had no experience here though I live here but always fished SPI. Caught my biggest to date, all on video, pics, etc. Seems almost everybody on this board has that integrity. But when guys off this forum claim to catch a new Texas record Tarpon, and we get these pics, or the ones I posted a month ago by the guy on the ski, there's a disconnect. I've never caught a trout over 28" in 30 year of fishing, but after many Bulls, I caught my first over 40+ " and caught more over that this week. Again, first time ever with full fight videos and pics.
Why the possible lying for publicity? Why are the guys on this board legit on their personal best, yet these tarpon which I've boated(not a costal US practice which are similar in size) exaggerate them?
Noway a 75" inch tarpon is a record. That's more like a 150-160 pound fish. They didn't mis peak, I stated that it wasn't 89" and they keep claiming it is and they have more pics but won't post them. These SPI guys have already made the claim that their jet ski tarpon was a new world record a couple months ago.
Few people carry measuring tapes long enough to measure a fish this big. Also, there is often confusion when running calculations. People get confused because Texas requires overall length vs. most weight calculations that use fork length. Fork length is all that matters when calculating weight. Assuming the guy is six feet tall, which he may not be, the fish measures out to about 80 inches fork using reference points in the picture. That is likely close if he claims the fish is 89 inches overall. That averages out at 190 lbs. Big fish for sure, but not quite a record.
Overall, photo doesn't make the fish look even that big, but often angles etc. with cameras cause problems with sizing fish from a picture.
Few people carry measuring tapes long enough to measure a fish this big. Also, there is often confusion when running calculations. People get confused because Texas requires overall length vs. most weight calculations that use fork length. Fork length is all that matters when calculating weight. Assuming the guy is six feet tall, which he may not be, the fish measures out to about 80 inches fork using reference points in the picture. That is likely close if he claims the fish is 89 inches overall. That averages out at 190 lbs. Big fish for sure, but not quite a record.
Overall, photo doesn't make the fish look even that big, but often angles etc. with cameras cause problems with sizing fish from a picture.
I thought this method had a mathematical error somewhere associated with it? As in don't you have to subtract 8.2% from whatever the chart gives you using the fork length method? The method I have been told to use is (girth x girth x length to the tip of the tail) /800.
And Scott I completely agree with you on this fish not being a record.
Yes that is the chart I was told that had the mathematical error in it of being off by 8.2%, as in the formula is valid but the chart has the error. Just wondering if you had heard anything about that
Not the end of the world, I would just hate to think I have a potential record fish after using a method, then killing it and finding out it is indeed short.
The formula has been tweaked, but I don't think it is that far off. I'll pull one of the new charts and post it on the new formula when I get a chance.
chart above, the girth would have to be a minimum of 50" if the length was 7'-5",to beat the world record (don't know if that is the world record he states) The biggest I have caught/pictured/released was about 160.
Heh heh....this guy lifted a 300 pound tarpon half out of the water? Now that's some muscle. One time near POC we had the World Series playing on the boat radio, it was almost sunset. Hooked several tarpon at once, and fought the last one until long after dark, on only 30 pound line. Pitch black night, and that fish took us a mile. We finally grabbed the 150 or 200-pound Ande leader and hung on. Lip-gaffed it for a few moments. Two of us could only lift the head out of the water, and my buddy worked out in the gym religiously. This was 20 years ago. We should have timed the fight, it felt like 9 p.m. when he got back, not sure. Cold, hungry and ready for strong drink. We didn't try to measure the girth and length, but it was big.
To my eyes, that fish on the beach looks dead and maybe 140 pounds, max.
Here is Tom Gibson's 210 pound Texas state record, that stood for what, 20 years?
Heh heh....this guy lifted a 300 pound tarpon half out of the water? Now that's some muscle. One time near POC we had the World Series playing on the boat radio, it was almost sunset. Hooked several tarpon at once, and fought the last one until long after dark, on only 30 pound line. Pitch black night, and that fish took us a mile. We finally grabbed the 150 or 200-pound Ande leader and hung on. Lip-gaffed it for a few moments. Two of us could only lift the head out of the water, and my buddy worked out in the gym religiously. This was 20 years ago. We should have timed the fight, it felt like 9 p.m. when he got back, not sure. Cold, hungry and ready for strong drink. We didn't try to measure the girth and length, but it was big.
To my eyes, that fish on the beach looks dead and maybe 140 pounds, max.
Here is Tom Gibson's 210 pound Texas state record, that stood for what, 20 years?
Not really close. It was a 192 lber. Nice fish but there have been a dozen or so fish around 200 lbs caught in the last couple years up and down coast. The fish would have been closer but was too skinny.
True, however apparently the method used to calculate the weight on the boat was the fork method with the error in it...possibly the reason why they thought they had a record?
With the older calculation, it still comes out to 206.92 - pretty short of the state record. I don't blame them for bringing it back to see, but it is well short of the state record. It was 85 x 40 inches. The state requires an 85 inch fish to be killed. That does not mean that every 85 inch fish will be a state record. They set it at 85, anticipating you could have a fat 85 inch fish that could break the record of 210 lb 11 ounces. The fish in the video came out to 78 x 44 inches and 199 lbs.
The map below shows where the fish went. Tag came off in December.
Nice fish. Definitely bigger than the claimed record
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
2 Cool Fishing Forum
7.4M posts
115.9K members
Since 2004
A forum community dedicated to anglers in the Texas area. Come join the discussion about fishing guides, bait, safety, gear, tackle, tips, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!