Massive Kispiox Steelhead

Discussion in 'Steelhead' started by Itchy Dog, Jan 29, 2009.

  1. Pretty impressive fish here: 45.25", 25" girth, may have tipped scales at an calculated 40.75lbs. May be the largest steelhead caught on a hook and line.

    From Fly Fisherman March 2009 issue.

    Attached Files:

  2. Thats interesting it was landed in 5-6 minutes. Karl's fish was landed quickly as well and he had said that the fish grounded on a shallow bar and he was able to grab it. I wonder if they dont realize their own size when they get that big! I mean they swim around in the open ocean all that time and maybe they just dont realize how far their gut sticks out!
  3. Certainly does make you think. Seems like a fish that big would just be so powerful, especially relative to the rod size and weight that he caught it on. I wonder if it's just that it takes a great amount of energy to move that 40lb fish mass. Not exactly lean and mean and the fish looks like it's been in the system for a while. Hard to say. I caught a hatchery summer fish about a week ago that fought like hell, and then a few days later caught a chrome bright winter hatchery fish that was a dud. Still, interesting. I've seen the photo but never read the story behind it. Awesome fish.
  4. "...taking 67 digital photos."

    Remarkable fish, but 67 photos?!? :mad: I guess that makes up for the quick fight, eh? Must have still been in guide mode, where everyone wants a million grip & grins to prove that they caught something on their $7,000 fishing trip.

    Awesome story otherwise... just step in, make a few swings and SHWIIIING! Obviously a talented guy, but perhaps a little caught up in the moment.
  5. I can see where he would have been excited. That thing is just a pig. In my younger days I spent two seasons guiding in the Iliamna area and as cool as it is, there's nothing like that up there. Plus, taking a photo like that back up to all your guide friends would be some good bragging. I think 67 was his insurance that he would have at least one good one.
  6. Yep 67 photos let us see them.
  7. Wow, quite a fish! Since the rise in popularity of wild steelhead CnR from the 80's, to the manditory CnR regs in place now I wonder how many record steelhead have been caught that couldn't be certified? Trey Combs book talks of several Skagit fish topping out over 40". One supposedly caught by a fly fisherman was measured around 48" i believe.
  8. Just to clarify, this fish was 45.25" not 42.25". 42.25" didn't look right; my largest fish was a 39" buck with huge shoulders that was about 20lbs based on that formula.
  9. The accepted formula used 800 not 690. 690 is the new kid on the block. Old formula comes in at 35.35#'s.

    Clay Carter caught a giant Kispiox fish that made it into Combs last steelhead book. I have seen several photos of his fish- photos that show the true size of the beast from a different angle vs. the shot Combs printed (where the fish is tilted towards Clay, bent, and somewhat slinking into his lap- the other shots show the true length and depth). 37#'s using the OLD formula. As is reported with Lemire's Thompson giant of 41X26. 34.6#'s old vs. 40.1#'s new.

    So which is it? Unless these fish are weighed (killed, witnessed, and certified) there is always going to be some fishermans ruler factor!!! Part of the fun I suppose.

    The gentleman that is mentioned in several publications with the giant Skagit fish is Jerry Wintle. One hell of a nice guy.

  10. he looks like one of those SF guys in Afghanistan.
    maybe they photoshopped the SAW out and dropped the big fish in:rolleyes:

    damn, what a hog. has kind of a surprised look about his face too.
    ok, here goes the next wave of the Kispiox stampede. wonder what the Cottonwood Pool will look like next October?
    Blue Creek, Part Deux.:rofl:
  11. wasn't wintles fish 53" according to legend?
  12. I thought it was 50 inches but the knocked it back 2 inches because they thought nobody would believe them. So 48 inches plus.
  13. Wintle's steelhead wasn't measure with a tape. He measured it against his fly rod. Back at camp John Farrar brought out a tape measure and put it on the rod where Jerry marked it, and that read 48". Just for useless information, I had a solid hit in the exact spot Jerry hooked his fish somewhat earlier that day. Ah, the woulda' coulda' beens.

  14. 67 photos!? Thats a way to treat the biggest fly lined fish with respect... Beautiful fish, and well done, but come on now. I can see 5 photos, maybe, but I never even do that many and I like taking photos.
  15. what really funny is before he left alaska he fish the kenai and landed a 33x22 inch rainbow then wen to B.C. I think he should retire and look for a new sport with new goals. He is done.
  16. come on guys his girlfriend was there if she loves steelheading as much as he does she was probably just clicking away with the camera from the time it hit the beach and the entire time he was trying to nicely remove the hook. your right 67 is a lot of photos but im sure not all were poses for the camera. what a great fish I wouldnt care if it was the biggest ever caught it would by far be the biggest I EVER CAUGHT.
  17. The article doesn't say, perhaps the adipose fin covered part of the text, but are we led to believe this fish was released? Or, after 67 photos, perhaps the question would be was it intentionally or unintentionally killed?

    God knows we wouldn't want a fish like that mucking up the gene pool.

    Just asking.
  18. s'OK, Citori, we speak sarcasm and tongue in cheek here:thumb: all my previous wiseass comments aside. (like scorpion said to the's just my nature)

    that was actually my first concern too, on seeing the article in the mag--that 67 pictures, even if rapidly taken, might be a little excessive if one wants to release the fish with as little stress possible. I start getting nervous at two.
    Though I've never caught a fish of such morbidly obese proportions, in my experience it's the littlest and the biggest fish that seem most vulnerable to a bellyup on release.
    In any case, it's an amazing achievement/stroke of dumb luck for this fellow, the Karma vixens must really dig his 'do.

    an hour ago I was speaking with an old Canadian friend of mine who used to fish the Thompson in the 70's...and didn't know about this years closure.
    Your gene pool comment is particularly poignant in that context, could be applied to any WA/OR/BC river right now.
  19. I guess I am getting old. The juice I get is between the first cast of the day and when I get to hopefully slide a native back into the current. Everything else is just noise. Even the pictures fail to jack up the hearbeat a tick or two. I have caught my share of really nice fish, and dream about doing it again. But it is the potential for catching that now outweighs the actual catch. With Puget Sound runs having gone extinct in our lifetime, the spectre of not being able to wet a line with the expectation, or hope, of hooking one of those magnificent fish is daunting. I hope he slid it back, and I hope that incredible specimen went on to do many laps in the gene pool. More than that, I hope my grandkids, and their kids have the opportunity to do more than just read about it on the internet.

    I really appreciate the "stroke of dumb luck" comment - both for the fish and the fisherman. Oh, well, everybody's got to be somewhere...

Share This Page