# New (pending) world record blue cat!



## JimmyMac (Feb 18, 2011)

A *143lb* blue was caught out of Buggs Island lake during the Showdown tourn last night. Holy cow, what a fish! 

Here is the only pic going around of it right now, can't wait for the others to show up.


----------



## JimmyMac (Feb 18, 2011)

It was caught below the bridges during the tournament but not in it.


----------



## ducky152000 (Jul 20, 2005)

what a monster red X  cant see it man.


----------



## Chuck P. (Apr 8, 2004)

Damn...What a fish.


----------



## JimmyMac (Feb 18, 2011)

Another pic and more info on it









http://www.wset.com/story/14936103/record-setting-fish-caught-at-kerr-lake


----------



## TheCream (Mar 19, 2009)

That is just insane. Yikes! :B


----------



## TomC (Aug 14, 2007)

pleas tell me that monster was released.


----------



## JimmyMac (Feb 18, 2011)

TomC said:


> pleas tell me that monster was released.


Sadly no, the fish is dead now . With a fish of that size, seems like it would be extremely hard to keep alive for a long period of time.


----------



## Joey209 (Oct 17, 2007)

I cant wait til they do the autopsy. I bet ya that fish is only like 30 yrs old. Those big blues keep gettin bigger at an earlier age


----------



## TheCream (Mar 19, 2009)

JimmyMac said:


> Sadly no, the fish is dead now . With a fish of that size, seems like it would be extremely hard to keep alive for a long period of time.


One of the pics I saw showed the fish in some sort of tub/tank, like they tried to keep it alive. After a 45 minute fight, any fish would be iffy on surviving. Long fights can kill the fish if they get too stressed.


----------



## Joey209 (Oct 17, 2007)

TheCream said:


> One of the pics I saw showed the fish in some sort of tub/tank, like they tried to keep it alive. After a 45 minute fight, any fish would be iffy on surviving. Long fights can kill the fish if they get too stressed.


I think they got to keep it alive until DNR gets there at least.


----------



## CMH (May 28, 2011)

I always chuckle when I read responders to a monster fish post- "I hope it was released..." First of all any outlandishly large fish of any species is very old and will pass away not long after you or I catch. Perhaps it will last another year or so, but good chance it won't, especially after being caught, photographed and oogled for ten minutes, or even five.

If someone catches a fish of a lifetime, then it simply makes sense to get it mounted if that is your desire. IF I catch a Ohio state record, or close to it, largemouth/smallmouth/saugeye it is going on the wall and all you fanatical releasers can send your hate mail my way- I will laugh at every one of them.

I release 99% of my bass, but occasionally keep a few for dinner...I was at Burr Oak lake a few weeks ago and saw the largest saugeye floating near dock area 4. I know my saugeye weights, and it was at least 9 lbs., and died of old age, most likely. If I would have caught that a few weeks earlier, wouldn't it have been silly to release it?


----------



## TheCream (Mar 19, 2009)

CMH said:


> I always chuckle when I read responders to a monster fish post- "I hope it was released..." First of all any outlandishly large fish of any species is very old and will pass away not long after you or I catch. Perhaps it will last another year or so, but good chance it won't, especially after being caught, photographed and oogled for ten minutes, or even five.
> 
> If someone catches a fish of a lifetime, then it simply makes sense to get it mounted if that is your desire. IF I catch a Ohio state record, or close to it, largemouth/smallmouth/saugeye it is going on the wall and all you fanatical releasers can send your hate mail my way- I will laugh at every one of them.
> 
> I release 99% of my bass, but occasionally keep a few for dinner...I was at Burr Oak lake a few weeks ago and saw the largest saugeye floating near dock area 4. I know my saugeye weights, and it was at least 9 lbs., and died of old age, most likely. If I would have caught that a few weeks earlier, wouldn't it have been silly to release it?


Not to get too sidetracked, but my personal preference would be a reproduction mount over a skin mount any day. I personally like them better, I think they look better and will last and age better than a skin mount. I have a list of fish I have good photos and measurements of that some day (hopefully in the not-so-distant future) I will get some reproduction mounts done. All I need are good photos and some measurements, and the fish gets to live if it can. To each their own on the C&R debate, I have no issues with anyone legally keeping something they caught. But I do not buy the "that fish will die soon" idea. It's too much like the deer hunting idea of "if I don't shoot this small buck my neighbor will." My hunting properties are surrounded by people who kill a lot of deer, but we let bucks go every year and almost every year they resurface and we see the benefits of letting them go. Look at some of the record and near record fish that were caught and transported to a place like Bass Pro Shops. Not only did they live, they lived a good while after being caught and moved. Fish die, obviously, but if a fish is 20 years old and the normal estimated life span is 25 years, saying that it could die tomorrow isn't a suitable excuse for me. But that's just me.


----------



## Whaler (Nov 16, 2004)

One of my pet peeves is when you see these pros on TV catching a fish whether it be a Bass , Walleye, Mukie , etc. and holding it out of the water and admiring the colors or the size and posing it for the cameras. They stand there and say how good the lure is that they caught it on or how great the lake is where it was caught. They only do this to sell lures or advertise a lake or camp. All the while the fish is stressing more and more and even if it swims off it may pop again in a few minutes especially a Muskie. If you're going to release a fish don't fool around release it !


----------



## CMH (May 28, 2011)

Amen Whaler...


----------



## Dave_E (Apr 6, 2004)

That blue cat has to be half walrus, half hippo, half rhino, half Rosie ODonnell.

It's big enough to half that many halves.


----------



## JimmyMac (Feb 18, 2011)

Dave_E said:


> That blue cat has to be half walrus, half hippo, half rhino, half *Rosie ODonnell*.
> 
> It's big enough to half that many halves.


This almost made me spray pepsi out of my nose.


----------



## JimmyMac (Feb 18, 2011)

More pics.


----------



## Rod Hawg (Jan 13, 2011)

Heard it was being certified.


----------



## streamstalker (Jul 8, 2005)

TomC said:


> pleas tell me that monster was released.


It's a non-native species in that area, and the the biologists are concerned about its spread. I'm pretty sure that I read that they are not supposed to be released after catch in some waters. 
http://www.bayjournal.com/article.cfm?article=4148
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local...r-own-creation/2011/06/27/AGBj30sH_story.html



> A team of fisheries managers from around the region is considering suggesting that states come up with plans to control blue cats, OConnell said. The specifics are being worked out, but they could include stronger penalties for stocking the fish in new rivers and streams, a government subsidy for harvesting blue catfish, or attempts to increase the commercial market.


----------

