Please Sign In

Please enter a valid username and password
  • Log in with Facebook
» Not a member? Take a moment to register
» Forgot Username or Password

Why Register?
Signing up could earn you gear (click here to learn how)! It also keeps offensive content off our site.

World Record Bonefish Pending IGFA Status

Recent Comments

Categories

Recent Posts

Archives

Syndicate

Google Reader or Homepage
Add to My Yahoo!
Add to My AOL

FlyTalk
in your Inbox

Enter your email address to get our new post everyday.

December 02, 2009

World Record Bonefish Pending IGFA Status

By Tim Romano

Via: Montana Fish Bum Blog

I came across this blog post over on montanaflyfishingguides.com and while the dates don't seem to jive with when it was written I thought I'd revisit this question that we've posed a couple of times here on flytalk.

The blog sates that, "Our good friend Captain Ted Christie of the Florida Keys and angler Michael Swerdlow of Islamorada caught a pending world record bonefish on fly November 27, 2008. (I'm still not sure if he meant to say 2009) Michael’s bonefish weighed 15 pounds, 6 ounces and was on 16 pound tippet. Michael is an dedicated angler spending countless days looking for these monster ghosts of the flats."

The previous IGFA men’s record was 14 pounds, 12 ounces on November 2001 also at Islamorada.  

It would appear that the angler and captain either...

...killed the fish for the record books or it died after the ensuing fight. The back story says nothing about if the fish was alive or dead. Either way this is a tremendous catch and excellent fish.  But...

Curious how you all feel about record keeping and killing animals just for a record?  I do kill fish to eat them, but that's it. I'm sure most people with big game mounts on their walls also ate the animals.

I can't say I've ever had a potential world record in my hands, but I still can't imagine bonking it over the head just to get my name in some book. How about you?

TR

Comments (15)

Top Rated
All Comments
from MLH wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

I like catching big fish and love to see what is actually out there. I couldn't care less about having my name on the record books, though some rationalize, saying that the fish deserves it. If I caught an obvious record I have no idea what I would actually do.

If my guide insisted on keeping the fish? Probably agree to take it in, alive, if at all possible. But do you remember that scene in Dirty Old Men where Ann Margaret releases that giant walleye while Walter Matthau freaks out? That would be priceless.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from The Armchair Ou... wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

I'd keep a fish like that for the record book. If released, that fish is not going to the old fishes' home. Instead, it will wind up a meal for something at some point. I'm all for catch and release if you don't plan to eat the fish, but releasing a potential record is just a symbolic gesture. Whatever gets you through the night . . .

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from doesthismakemyb... wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

I mean, it sounds plausible. But if it really was caught in 2008 and the IGFA hasn't approved it then it's probably sketchy...

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from shane wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

Although I'm not a fan of killing fish for records, I can understand. It's one fish, and as a record fish, it has obviously had plenty of time to get its great genetics out there. On the other hand, who are we to kill something for no reason other than bragging rights and a place in a big book?

When I tied or possibly beat the OH bluegill record (measured equal, never weighed though), I just put her back. I have no regrets.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Koldkut wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

I can't justify killing a fish to get my name in the books. If it was a record fish and it didn't make it, then sure, but otherwise healthy fish I don't intend on eating go back after a grip'n'grin.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from JKSMITH wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

Alaska has a Catch and Release Trophy program. Here's a link to the State website:

http://www.sf.adfg.state.ak.us/Trophy/index.cfm/FA/certificates.release

I think it's the best of both worlds, you can be proud of your fish on two levels - he was a biggun and you let him go to fight another day.

More states should adopt similar programs.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Tosh Brown wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

Not for me, but if that's what you need to measure your "manliness" then go for it. A few years ago I caught an accidental flounder on fly that was about the size of a toilet seat. I bonked him on the head, but not for the record. I have a serious weakness for broiled flounder with crab/shrimp stuffing.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Little Moose wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

Measure & Weigh him. Get some pictures. Let him go. Have a mount made from measurements & pictures. A fish like that deserved to be caught again.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from donwackerman wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

I know all three of the guys in this photo, i was their. These are two of the best Guides in Florida and one of the best fisherman is have ever had the pleasure to meet and guide ( i am a guide in Wyoming ). The dates are correct, and the fish did die after the fight, but, was honored by being mounted real, not plastic. This fish will be honored and appreciated for the rest of time in Mr. Swerdlows home. I was honored to be their and see and know all three of the great people. The bonefish weight is 15 lb. 8 oz. CONGRATULATIONS !!!
DON WACKERMAN

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from fflutterffly wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

what's the difference if you kill the fish to eat or for the record... It's still dead. If we could rely on the honesty of the claimant I'd prefer not killing anything for a record. But honesty is not one of humanities strongest ethics. when I fish a tournament the catch must be verified by two other fisherman. Why not just do it that way: verification, signatures and photo's with a measuring board kept on each boat or a certification tape measure. I'm not into records so my take is not ego driven, but if one must see ones name in a book.... than you might have to do the dead deed.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from earlyriser81 wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

If you are not going to eat it throw it back. Take a picture and some measurements and set it free to grow and fight another angler.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from ryanmayward wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

I still don't understand the moral high ground that comes with eating a wild animal. Why is it more acceptable to kill a trophy animal and eat it than to kill one and hang it on your wall? As other readers have pointed out, it's still dead in the end.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from texasflycaster wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

I like and abide by the ideals of fly fishing, including catch and release. However, how much bigger does anyone think this bone will get before it becomes shark food? I am no expert, but imagine this fish is much closer to the end of its life-cycle than the beginning. Perhaps there is a better, more technological, way to register records that would involve not killing the fish? That is where we need progress - in the record registration process. The imitation mounts aren't super realistic yet either. texasflycaster

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Little Moose wrote 2 years 8 weeks ago

A fish like this passes good Genetic Genes every time it spawns.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Gil Finn wrote 2 years 7 weeks ago

Hey fellas,
You have a witness here that the fish died. Also, a reference to the character of all the anglers. If these guys do this all the time. How many big toads do you think they HAVE released over the years? Because I do know alot of guides and fly anglers in that area, I tend to believe that if the fish hadn't died, they would have released it. I do have an opinion about killing for records though. My pop and I released 5 potential world record Rooster fish off Baja a few years ago. Our guide was the current record holder in that line class. When the guide asked my dad if he wanted to enter a 50+ as a record on 10# test and told him we would have to kill it, to my total amazement, the old man said "let her go". "That's to beautiful a creature to kill for a piece of paper to hang on your wall!"he said. After releasing the beast we hooked and landed 4 more over 50(2 each). It was my best day of Rooster fishing in 20 years with over 30 landed (23 on fly). The best day for the guide to date, too. The best part was watching the big fish swim away into the Pacific to get bigger! We saw fish in the 90 to 100lb range that day.

0 Good Comment? | | Report

Post a Comment

from donwackerman wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

I know all three of the guys in this photo, i was their. These are two of the best Guides in Florida and one of the best fisherman is have ever had the pleasure to meet and guide ( i am a guide in Wyoming ). The dates are correct, and the fish did die after the fight, but, was honored by being mounted real, not plastic. This fish will be honored and appreciated for the rest of time in Mr. Swerdlows home. I was honored to be their and see and know all three of the great people. The bonefish weight is 15 lb. 8 oz. CONGRATULATIONS !!!
DON WACKERMAN

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from fflutterffly wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

what's the difference if you kill the fish to eat or for the record... It's still dead. If we could rely on the honesty of the claimant I'd prefer not killing anything for a record. But honesty is not one of humanities strongest ethics. when I fish a tournament the catch must be verified by two other fisherman. Why not just do it that way: verification, signatures and photo's with a measuring board kept on each boat or a certification tape measure. I'm not into records so my take is not ego driven, but if one must see ones name in a book.... than you might have to do the dead deed.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from JKSMITH wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

Alaska has a Catch and Release Trophy program. Here's a link to the State website:

http://www.sf.adfg.state.ak.us/Trophy/index.cfm/FA/certificates.release

I think it's the best of both worlds, you can be proud of your fish on two levels - he was a biggun and you let him go to fight another day.

More states should adopt similar programs.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from MLH wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

I like catching big fish and love to see what is actually out there. I couldn't care less about having my name on the record books, though some rationalize, saying that the fish deserves it. If I caught an obvious record I have no idea what I would actually do.

If my guide insisted on keeping the fish? Probably agree to take it in, alive, if at all possible. But do you remember that scene in Dirty Old Men where Ann Margaret releases that giant walleye while Walter Matthau freaks out? That would be priceless.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from The Armchair Ou... wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

I'd keep a fish like that for the record book. If released, that fish is not going to the old fishes' home. Instead, it will wind up a meal for something at some point. I'm all for catch and release if you don't plan to eat the fish, but releasing a potential record is just a symbolic gesture. Whatever gets you through the night . . .

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from doesthismakemyb... wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

I mean, it sounds plausible. But if it really was caught in 2008 and the IGFA hasn't approved it then it's probably sketchy...

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from shane wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

Although I'm not a fan of killing fish for records, I can understand. It's one fish, and as a record fish, it has obviously had plenty of time to get its great genetics out there. On the other hand, who are we to kill something for no reason other than bragging rights and a place in a big book?

When I tied or possibly beat the OH bluegill record (measured equal, never weighed though), I just put her back. I have no regrets.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Koldkut wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

I can't justify killing a fish to get my name in the books. If it was a record fish and it didn't make it, then sure, but otherwise healthy fish I don't intend on eating go back after a grip'n'grin.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Tosh Brown wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

Not for me, but if that's what you need to measure your "manliness" then go for it. A few years ago I caught an accidental flounder on fly that was about the size of a toilet seat. I bonked him on the head, but not for the record. I have a serious weakness for broiled flounder with crab/shrimp stuffing.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Little Moose wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

Measure & Weigh him. Get some pictures. Let him go. Have a mount made from measurements & pictures. A fish like that deserved to be caught again.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from earlyriser81 wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

If you are not going to eat it throw it back. Take a picture and some measurements and set it free to grow and fight another angler.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from texasflycaster wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

I like and abide by the ideals of fly fishing, including catch and release. However, how much bigger does anyone think this bone will get before it becomes shark food? I am no expert, but imagine this fish is much closer to the end of its life-cycle than the beginning. Perhaps there is a better, more technological, way to register records that would involve not killing the fish? That is where we need progress - in the record registration process. The imitation mounts aren't super realistic yet either. texasflycaster

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from ryanmayward wrote 2 years 9 weeks ago

I still don't understand the moral high ground that comes with eating a wild animal. Why is it more acceptable to kill a trophy animal and eat it than to kill one and hang it on your wall? As other readers have pointed out, it's still dead in the end.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Little Moose wrote 2 years 8 weeks ago

A fish like this passes good Genetic Genes every time it spawns.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Gil Finn wrote 2 years 7 weeks ago

Hey fellas,
You have a witness here that the fish died. Also, a reference to the character of all the anglers. If these guys do this all the time. How many big toads do you think they HAVE released over the years? Because I do know alot of guides and fly anglers in that area, I tend to believe that if the fish hadn't died, they would have released it. I do have an opinion about killing for records though. My pop and I released 5 potential world record Rooster fish off Baja a few years ago. Our guide was the current record holder in that line class. When the guide asked my dad if he wanted to enter a 50+ as a record on 10# test and told him we would have to kill it, to my total amazement, the old man said "let her go". "That's to beautiful a creature to kill for a piece of paper to hang on your wall!"he said. After releasing the beast we hooked and landed 4 more over 50(2 each). It was my best day of Rooster fishing in 20 years with over 30 landed (23 on fly). The best day for the guide to date, too. The best part was watching the big fish swim away into the Pacific to get bigger! We saw fish in the 90 to 100lb range that day.

0 Good Comment? | | Report

Post a Comment