no way is the other record "tainted." those brothers aren't armed with needles and HGH.

also, that rainbow trout is a pretty good monument to the effects we the people of the world are having on our fisheries. if you ask me, it's appropriate that the world record rainbow be 'roided out. if somebody doesn't like it they should work to clean up the environment rather than complain about the "fairness" of the record.

not that you were doing that, deeter.

yrs-
Evan!

I think the triploids should have their own category....The IGFA recognizes other hatchery raised sterile sports fish in their own species.....I can't say as I frown on a fish like this being recognized, but to compare it to the rest of the rainbows, they might as well put the Barry Bonds Signature "*" on the wall with it.

OOOHHH! C'mon, Deeter. Do you really believe that crap?? or are you just writing it because you're jealous?? Put either of these fish in a colorado river and they'd eat all your litte dollys up!!

Wasn’t these the two guys who got busted fishing a Nuclear Power Plant cooling pond?

Here's a scoop for you, Deeter: for months now, I've been raising a triploid rainbow trout in a net pen, feeding it steroid-enhanced fish pellets. It now weighs 47.92 lbs, and has a girth bigger than my cousin Susie, who's a defensive tackle on the Detroit Demolition women's tackle football team.

As soon as this fish breaks the 48.5 mark - just enough to bust the hump of those Canadian freak-fish - I'll give you a call. C'mon up here: we'll release the fish, then toss a pellet-fly imitation (with one of those little propellers also tied to the hook) in front of it. You get the whole thing on film, and we'll be FAMOUS (and maybe even rich)!

kirk, Ill take that a little farther and say I dont view the manistee brown as a true brown record. Is that on the same playing field as the Arkansas caught fish? I realize its the same species and all but having access to the lake to fatten up also is a far cry from munching on sowbugs all day.......

It's my understanding that triploids are the same species, but have a genetic mutation - kinda like albino animals aren't different species just mutants.

I also thought that this mutation, which can occur naturally but rarely does, was done to prevent the fish from breeding and contaminating wild fish stocks. I suppose if it isn't expending energy on breeding, that could give it an advantage on growing larger - I don't know the answer to that.

All in all, it seems like a different fish - I agree with the use of an asterisk.

I think scott g goes to far though when he tries to make the case that brown trout with access to a lake shouldn't count. Would you also say that whitetails with access to soybean fields (I don't think you can find any naturally occurring soybean fields) shouldn't be allowed in Boone & Crocket or Pope & Young?

If nothing else that Brown is a hell of a better looking fish than the triploid Rainbow. That Brown still has natural proportions and perfect marking. The big pig triploid Rainbows look like a fish thats taken a few too many trips to the all you can eat buffet line.

If you're saying fish influenced by man shouldn't count as records, you'd have to ignore both of these records, along with the previous brown trout records, since browns were introduced from Europe in the late 1800's. And so many other records could also fall into this category...any fish from a reservoir, or caught in the Great Lakes since most predatory fish are now gorging themselves (I'm sure that brown was among them) on the invasive gobies which i know first hand are everywhere in Lake Michigan. Or any fish that may have descended from stocked populations in natural lakes, or fish caught on farm raised live bait etc. etc. etc. We need to not get ridiculous, and keep it simple.
Bottom line is, a record fish should be a record, as long as it's not caught from a farm raised pond. We don't want to get too caught up in saying how any record should not count, we should be congratulating the anglers who caught them.
Records should follow 3 criteria: It is bigger than the previous record of the same species, it was legally caught, it was caught in publicly accessible waters.

I wouldn't even know what to do with myself!

I doubt I can make any more arguments than have already been made. But to me, they are apples and oranges. The brown, even if stocked, didn't hit the water a massive freak. It was either a small stocker, or may have actually hatched (I can't remember if the Manistee supports natural reproduction of trout). It had to survive and grow. Even if it was a lake run, there are plenty of predators in the lake, both natural and the ones using downriggers. It probably ran up and down the river several times for spawning, a virtual gauntlet I can promise you.

I'm guessing the triploid was a goliath when it escaped. It is genetically altered. At that point the lake it lived in is like a large aquarium.

Great job to both anglers. I am sure they are both lucky and good to hook and land the fish. My issue is with the fish and the environments in which they achieved their size. Seems like there should be a seperate category. And that applies to the bass that are spoon fed munching size rainbow trout in order to achieve their size. Something jus seems "artificial" to me.

A record size fish is a record size fish it still has to survive from when it is small and eat.

Yeah MLH, I saw the same article you did that said it was the biggest. I believe that big king was taken from the Grand River in the '70s or '80s. My personal best king was 32, and that was when I was in 5th grade in the mid '90s...I didn't appreciate at the time what a giant that was. (by MI standards at least)