WRB-2.0

Smaller bass, those under 2 lbs will hit anything, anytime anywhere. Adult size bass can be caught nearly on nearly anything during the spring when they are in shallow water. To catch adult size bass over 4 lbs, the percentages are far better, IMO, if you use; live bait like shiners and crawdads, plastic worms, jigs, spinnerbaits and crankbaits running on or near the bottom. Yes top water lures work at certain times, just not consistently. I have gone to a double buzzer most of the time, slower and more water spray seems to get better action. Grass or weeds on lures with treble hooks tends to kill the vibration of the lure and always clean my worms or jigs between cast if needed. Keep your eye on the road Catt, thanks for sharing your thoughts. WRB

There is nothing like the taste of forbidden fruit. Nearly every bass fishermen at some time has fished where they shouldn't. The time to be a pioneer and search for out of the way private bass lakes or ponds is when you are young enough not to be responsible for your actions. Adults tend to be arrested. Try to get permission to fish private ponds or lakes, no harm in asking, could be painful if you don't. WRB

First don't hold it by the lower jaw with a thumb inside it's mouth, it will damage the jaw hinge. Hold it like the smallie posted earlier, for the picture. To clam the bass hold it upside down, belly up, they tend to stop moving. Don't keep the bass out of water any longer than 30 to 45 seconds, unless you plan to keep it. WRB

NLMB + FLMB are intergrades, not hybrids. Don't forget the pure FLMB planted into a lake can find each other and spawn pure FLMB, even in a lake with NLMB, after several spawning seasons. Lets wait and see what the Kurita bass turns out to be before jumping to conclusions. WRB

Big bass are extremely difficult to keep captive and alive long enough to validate the weight and take decent pictures. My general rule is; don't keep the bass out of water any longer than you are comfortable holding your breath, any longer and the bass starts to over stress. About 10% of bass caught and put into live wells, then released at the end of the day do not survive. If a bass is bleeding or can't swim upright, it's in very poor shape. Better to take it home for a meal then to feed it to birds, turtles or whatever finds it. In-Fishermen had it right with their selective harvest ethic, then today's C& R every bass caught. Ray Scott was perfectly happy donating the 15 bass limits in the old days to church charities. Ray claims he introduced C & R to reduce bass mortality, he was forced into it due to the bad PR. Ray's original stand was sport fishing couldn't harm a bass fishery. I was hard over on C & R back then and had written Ray a few letters regarding the damage tournaments were having to bass populations. Today I'm less an advocate of C & R, unless the bass are being release in a healthy condition. WRB

You asked a perfectly good question related to the pond you fish and a big bass being kept. Ponds are very different than larger bodies of water, they are subject to over harvesting and under harvesting depending on the number of bass verses the amount of prey available to keep them healthy. Your pond produced one big bass that you know of, my bet is there are more, keep trying to catch them. C & R wasn't always practiced, it's new to some areas in the country. When I was younger and practiced C & R before it was common, other fishermen would get up set to see me release a big bass. I was performing revival on a big bass, swishing water through it's gills and a few bystanders were watching. I released the bass one guy booted me off the end of the dock as I was bent over. That got my attention and was angry, the guy was gone by the time i got back onto the dock. So C & R can be good or bad, depending on how your look at it. WRB

Do you have thumb? If you do, try using it to apply light pressure to prevent the line from spring off the spool. Relying totally on the reels anti backlash mechanism will not prevent the spool from over traveling the line in all conditions, lure weights or rod action. Also try line dressing like KVD's, wet line tends to stay on the spool a lot better then dry line. WRB

Nice Calicos. Football head? only use those on the federal breakwater. Those look like Clemente bass, unless you went south. Didn't see your post in time to guess weights; they look more like 7's, then 5 & 6. WRB

Chris, the age issue with pure FLMB living less than 12 years I believe comes from their native range studies in Florida. When introduced into cooler, deeper California lakes the pure FLMB live longer, up to 15 years. The Zimmerlee bass was 14 years old for example. The lake Isabella, Kern county CA, were some of the fastest growing FLMB/NLMB F1's that I know of; reached 10 lbs in 7 years, 18 lbs in 10 years, then the population crashed. The cause was thought to be low water during the winter snow pack runoff lowered the core lake water below 45 degrees and FLMB can't survive cold water. Isabella had a phenomenal forage base at the time the F1's were introduced. The Japanese bass look similar late 80's Isy bass with unbelievable football shaped heavy body mass. There should be more giants showing up in Japan before this run is over. 6 lb NLMB from a cold water region is a big bass worth bragging rights. You can't compare NLMB to warm water FLMB with year around growing seasons and lots of food, different bass. WRB

That is the trend in California lakes, the first generations tends to produce the largest bass. In nature there will be exceptions, that's the basic pattern to date. The Zimmerlee 21 lb 15 oz and Easley 21 lb 3 oz were both validated as pure FLMB. The Dixon Dottie bass? don't know if she was a pure FLMB or not, maybe someone can enlighten us. It should be interesting to learn what the Kurita bass; pure FLMB or intergrade. WRB

Just the opposite. California NLMB were planted in the late 1890's and the state record was 14 lbs 9 oz. The pure FLMB strain grows the largest in California and declines a little with each intergrade. It was my understanding the the Japanese FLMB came from California around the 1980 time period. WRB PS; published a In-Fishermen article back in '86 titled "A Rare Chance for a World Record" that details the FLMB California history, if interested. Research the internet or if you can't find it, I will be glad to email you a copy.

Thanks for taking the heat off of me for a few threads. Researching the Internet I discovered bass fishermen are known as red necks, may need to change that to carrot tops. What upsets me the most is agreeing with Muddy that it's about time we have a new record. Cheers. WRB

The water temperature that affects bass is at the depth the bass are using. Bass boats have surface temperature gauges and some fishermen assume the water temperature is the same throughout the water column. Depending on the depth of the lake, wind and air temperatures during the day and night, the water temperature is usually cooler as it gets deeper. WRB

Not true, one of the most common types of scales in the post offices back then came from Toledo Scale Co. The model mentioned was known as the "postal model" or 789, Patent as early as 1912. The Toledo Scale Company was making these scales as early as 1912, this scale was called the "lightweight" scale, it could handle packages up to 40 lbs. This model was found to still be in use in 1973 in one US post office. Toledo Scale was established in 1900, and today, is know as Mettler Toledo. Still going strong, we use a few of their scales at various hospitals. A new born baby that is sick, is monitored closely for weight gain and weight loss, a baby's dosage will be determined by its weight, so accuracy is very critical in my job. Exactly It cracks me up when I read total nonsense about processes and procedures used during that time period, the scales of that era were just as accurate as those of today without digital readouts. Putting The discussion into context was the IFGA 2 ounce rule. Scales are only accurate within the incremental divisions on the scales and within a percentage of total weight. Weights and measures calibrates scales accordingly. The vintage Toledo scale referenced has marked increments each 1/4 pound, with marks indicating 1 ounce increments that are close to the needle width. The calibration would be based on 1/4 lb increments. The Chatillion brass hand held scale uses a slide indicator that lines up visually with each division, both have parallax issues reading accurate weights. Both scales were OK for what they were used for, however easily misread. Today's digital read out scales are easy to read, however few on the market are accurate and require calibration annually with a calibrated power source. Battery power variances cause inaccurate readings. The Toledo scale statement was good and informative and not accurate. 3 beam type scales are accurate, used to weigh gold and other precious metals and date back centuries, however not used to weigh bass. At the end of the day what matters is a new world record bass.

Japan is not done with record size bass and don't be surprised if the next mark is set around 25 lbs. There is going to be a lot of new pressure focused on lake Biawa, it's not it's first rodeo and is prime for several more giants. This catch will also regenerate record attempts in Cuba, Mexico and US lakes, but IMO the Japanese lakes have the sleeping giant bass population and it's just had it's wake up call. Happy 4th, enjoy ther holiday. Tom

You use whatever scales are available during the time period the bass is caught. I used the 25# lab quality Chatillon scale with 1 oz increments during the 70's to 90's. The problem with a hand held spring scale is parallax, trying to line up the graduations exactly and a live bass not fully cooperating. If you got within an ounce, that was good enough. If you wanted a more accurate weight it met transporting the bass to a market with a certified scale, the local lakes didn't have certified scales at the lakes I fished. Trying to keep a giant bass alive and well, transporting created problems as time was critical. Bob Crupi fell into that trap with his 22.01 bass, poor documentation and no witness to validate the catch as he released it. When the Perry bass was caught, it was weighed on a postal scale. The only scales available back in the early 30's with weights over 20 lbs were 100 lb scales with graduations of 1/2 lb. To get a 22 1/4 lb, the scale reader needed to split the 1/2 lb graduations and who will ever know if the scale was accurate. In Perry's defense, no records for fresh water bass existed until the 50's, when his catch was grandfathered into the record books. It is what it is, the established mark to beat. IGFA requires 2 oz greater than the current weight, so there will be a co listed world record, until those records fall. Tom

It was Bass'N magizines big bass reward program, Scott didn't have anything to do with it. The reward got up to 8 million, before Dickerson caught Dottie, then LLyods of London dropped the insurance and the contest ended. That program was a real circus and agree the whole world record pursuit during that period was bad for the sport. It brought out the worst in trophy bass fishing, more cheating and poaching then anyone will ever know. I believe Ray Scott's interest was in trying to keep some integrity in the world record. We had several potential world record bass frauds; the True and Dupree bass, both reported to be 24 lb bass caught in northern Cal, for examples. The promise of money tends to bring out cheating. The Japanese are honest by nature, but there is still a lot riding on this new record and I believe Scott will insist on a lie detector test. Time will tell. The fact that the bass was a live bait fish removes the lure dealing issues. Not all trophy bass fishermen are lairs and cheaters, most have discovered catching giant bass requires complete dedication to details, bass behavior and hundreds of 15 hour days on the water. Tom

This is the Ray Scott reference that caused a negative reaction. The IGFA doesn't require a lie detector test for authenticating a world record catch. Ray Scott has published that he will not accept a new LMB record without a lie detector test. Tom

Ray Scott is a voting member for IGFA records and joined to insure any bass that may become a new all tackle record must pass a lie detector test and meet all the IGFA record criteria. Manabu Kurita's catch will be closely scrutinized by the IGFA board. I hope this bass makes it and becomes a new world record or co-record as it may turn out. Congratulations Manabu Kurita.

Mentioned Japan in the June 1st Giant bass thread, it kinda got lost in all the BS about the Perry bass. Tom

Paul, this is the same guy who caught a 18lb from the same lake last year. There was some question about trespassing when the 18 was caught? He will need all his luck to get this bass listed by IGFA as a co record and pass Ray Scott's influence with the IGFA. So far it looks legit. Tom

This fish looks legit to me and calculates out close to the reported weight, based on the photo. This catch, if submitted to the IGFA, will be closely looked at. How it was caught, witnesses, all the validation needs to be right. The fish needs to be examined. It looks like this angler was prepared to take photos with measurements, however no photo of the scale was included. Time will tell the tale.

Need the length and girth to calculate the weight; L X L X G / 1200 = lbs. L = length from tip of closed mouth to center of fork in tail. Girth measured around the widest area, dorsal fin down. Average LMB girth is 75% of length, however can be up to 100% for extremely heavy body bass.

Lucky Japanese angler just caught a new world record LMB; 22.31 lbs (10.12Kg), 29.4" long, lake Biwa, Japan.