Walleye a 1/2 lb shy of state record netted in Wisconsin

Vollmer

Founder
Administrator
Joined
Jul 2, 2014
Posts
6,344
Likes
854
Points
483
Location
Surrey, ND
CWxTgTRWIAE3hR0.jpg
A Wisconsin wildlife official caught a walleye that was half a pound short of the state record.
The fish, caught on Lake Wazee, weighed 17.5 pounds and 32.3 inches long, the La Crosse Tribune says. The state record walleye is listed as an 18-pound fish caught in 1933 on High Lake, according to DNR records.
Daniel Hatleli, a fisheries biologist with the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, with the help of fish technician Brad Betthauser, landed the walleye on Dec. 16.
They weren’t even looking for the fish – they were out on the lake to check for cisco, a forage species, the Journal Sentinel reports.
After weighing the walleye on an uncertified scale, they returned it to the lake – giving the fish the chance to grow and possibly break the state record.
That is, if someone is able to catch it, the La Crosse Tribune notes.
Lake Wazee is a unique lake. The 350-foot deep lake started as an iron mine – and when the pit filled with water, Lake Wazee was born, the Journal Sentinel says.
“Because of its uniqueness, a lot of your typical fishing techniques you would use in most lakes around here and in Wisconsin aren’t going to apply,” Hatleli told the La Crosse Tribune.
The deep lake has “very clear water,” which makes it a popular destination for scuba divers, the Journal Sentinel says.
 




Bed Wetter

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2015
Posts
7,094
Likes
433
Points
368
Location
Cold
After a certain resident sea captain began the practice of manipulating photos of landed fish, I can't tell if that thing is 3 lbs or 30.
 

johnr

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2015
Posts
19,997
Likes
3,591
Points
803
Location
Dickinson
That's what I thought, doesn't really in the picture look that damn big.

I am full of doubt and mistrust.
 

Captain Ahab

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2015
Posts
10,528
Likes
442
Points
418
Location
Timbuktu
I believe this one was 17.23 lbs @ 34.5 inches. Looks like the 'sconnie one might be a bit embellished with a 17.5 lb fish at only 32.3 inches. Maybe 13ish .

17.23lbwalleye.jpg
 
Last edited:

Kickemup

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2015
Posts
5,416
Likes
59
Points
298
Location
Lamoure ND
Look at the cheeks on that thing^^^^^^ That might be as good as pickled muskie.
 

5575

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2015
Posts
3,725
Likes
587
Points
423
I believe this one was 17.23 lbs @ 34.5 inches. Looks like the 'sconnie one might be a bit embellished with a 17.5 lb fish at only 32.3 inches. Maybe 13ish .

mrmilker_large.png

I thought the same thing Ahab, 13ish to me. I've been around a couple in that 15-17 and they looked allot bigger than that one. My buddies wife caught this piggie. It went 17 lbs.
6cb91f_308e11abea5e4ac38e390b6ab2621b54.jpg
 
Last edited:


Duckslayer100

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2015
Posts
4,611
Likes
189
Points
293
Location
ND's Flatter Half
Ditto. I was intrigued by the weight, but that fish should be WAY fatter at only 32.5 inches long to hit the 17-pound mark. Plus, it looks like he's holding it Corporal-Snook style. A 17 pound fish is going to appear gigantic even if you're bear hugging it.
 

5575

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2015
Posts
3,725
Likes
587
Points
423
Duckslayer is right about the bear hugging thing believe me!!

6cb91f_6d145193f5514192a6afe87634e46d3c-1.jpg
 
Last edited:

Recent Posts

Friends of NDA

Top Posters of the Month

  • This month: 159
  • This month: 136
  • This month: 120
  • This month: 110
  • This month: 105
  • This month: 87
  • This month: 84
  • This month: 79
  • This month: 76
  • This month: 75
Top Bottom