Northwest Fishing Reports

I was wondering what 2 lakes you guys think have the best potential in the state to hold the state record largemouth.

My top 2 are Harts and Swofford.

I'M sure not saying. Other than quite a few can.

There are a few out there that could hold it, but only so many lakes can produce enough food for thought without being over populated with other fish. I'm sure potholes and banks and sammamish ect may have a big one in there, but the consitancy of large fish I think is a different story. I find alot of lakes either have a ton of 1 and 2 lb bass and maybe 10-20 in the 8 lb+ range and others have the average size 3-4lbs but don't have an exceptional amount of large fish.

Lakes that get fed periodically with food for bass (planter trout and fry) and aren't as deep as alot of other lakes, and warm quickly with bluegill, that will spawn many times a year if the setting is right can feed and feed and feed bass all year round.

The only exception to haveing all this and not producing exceptionally large bass is that preservation of the species by anglers would have to be minimized and maximized in certain times of the year and size limits. I hear of alot of people catching "Big" 5 lb bass in March, April, May and keep them before they even have a chance to spawn.

I'm kinda throwing this in another direction. But I hear ya by saying "I'm not saying". But if it is out there it will take a by far advanced angler to find him, catch him, and then to bring him to the boat. But on the other hand someone will always win the lottery eventually.

I can think of several potential candidates:

Potholes
Silver-Cowlitz County
Grande
Clear Lake - North
Sawyer
Goodwin
Morton

Just a few I would target.

Russ

Amx wrote:I'M sure not saying. Other than quite a few can.

Right on the money and Basspro is definetly in the right area. There are many lakes in my opinion that hold the state record. But like you said catching them is another story. i`ve seen many in the record range during the spawn on beds. There is a couple members that have caught the record and better. It`s just not worth the hassel turning it in and taking that fish out of the gene pool.

I have seen state record fish in many Lks in Mason and Kitsap. Yea they will be hard to catch, thats keeps me going to these Lks over and over again. I was using 50 lb braid that two fish snaped on the hit with a jig on the drop. The weight on the rod let me know they were 10+ fish. I went with 65 lb this year.So far so good! I will keep on for that fish, as long as I'm here.

[quote There is a couple members that have caught the record and better. It`s just not worth the hassel turning it in and taking that fish out of the gene pool.
[/quote]

Can I get an AMEN!!:bounce:

Probably the biggest largemouth and smallmouth bass are finning around in one of the big reservoirs on the Columbia River but I don't think it is fished enough to produce the new State Record. I think Kapowsin probably has a few very large bass -- maybe state record size. It could be caught by some young lad fishing for bluegill with bobber and worm.

So many lakes around the State have already kicked out fish over 10 pounds. I think there are dozens of fisheries that could potentially kick out a state record fish. I don't think the question is "where" as much as "how" it will be caught.

I agree with Bob that the Columbia River likely harbors multiple state records of both species.

Trails End Lake - Mason County.

Columbia river for sure both green and brown.
I know ive seen two 10+lb fish in a small king county lake this year on the same day.
But as tag said many lakes have the potential for a state record its just a matter of when and how
And one person i know has already caught one and on a topwater lure to boot ;)

There are a lot of bodies of water in this state, I think, that holds records. I believe a few have been caught and I believe there is at least one individual that posts here that has exceeded the record. What one does when they catch it....that is the question.

The Quadfather wrote:[quote There is a couple members that have caught the record and better. It`s just not worth the hassel turning it in and taking that fish out of the gene pool.

Can I get an AMEN!!:bounce:
[/quote]
AMEN!

There are a lot of bodies of water in this state, I think, that holds records. I believe a few have been caught and I believe there is at least one individual that posts here that has exceeded the record. What one does when they catch it....that is the question.

tagwatson360 wrote:So many lakes around the State have already kicked out fish over 10 pounds. I think there are dozens of fisheries that could potentially kick out a state record fish. I don't think the question is "where" as much as "how" it will be caught.

I agree with Bob that the Columbia River likely harbors multiple state records of both species.

Totally agree about the Columbia. Theres quite a few stretches of it that arent utilized for bass fishing that hold some hawgs.

I agree! lots of good water around here with big fish. I think most of us have had that moment where we doa rinky dinky cast too somthin, let it sit on bottom then real it in really fast to cast to somethin else and before you no it theres a 10+ lber hot on your baits tail then ~*PooF*~ she's gone..... whats worse, having the 10+ in your hand, shaking so bad from excitment you flubber, slip, she falls, you grab the line by mistake and snap! back too the bottom lol

All in all, i think there are many areas that hold hugh lunkers around here.

Lotta fish stories Well heres another one. Before I became educated on catch and release my son caught a freaky big largie in a small lake in Snohomish county, August with a senko. No scale but lake resident put it on funky old scale. Well over 10#'s. 22 1/2" x 23" girth. Pictures and everything. Still sitting in my sisters freezer waiting to be mounted. What a waste, but fish of a life time. I believe the state largie record could easly be in a small county lake. And like mentioned before, it might be taken by a young angler.

basser90 wrote:Lotta fish stories Well heres another one. Before I became educated on catch and release my son caught a freaky big largie in a small lake in Snohomish county, August with a senko. No scale but lake resident put it on funky old scale. Well over 10#'s. 22 1/2" x 23" girth. Pictures and everything. Still sitting in my sisters freezer waiting to be mounted. What a waste, but fish of a life time. I believe the state largie record could easly be in a small county lake. And like mentioned before, it might be taken by a young angler.

A lot of work has been done over the years to equate length and girth to weight. The calculations are pretty accurate now.

Assuming the fish was measured from the tip of the snout to the fork of the tail, flat not curved, and the girth was the widest part of the fish, that fish would be about 14.9 pounds. That is a monster by any account for a northern state.

Even if you cut an inch in length for measuring the curve or to the tip of the fin, the fish would have weighed about 14.2 pounds, still a record.

Impressive to say the least, but, not the only one I have seen in Washington.

This brings up a great chance to ask a question. Let's assume one of us caught the "State Record" ANYSPECIES. To record it, it must be taken from the gene pool. Now that fish is probably on the down hill slide as far as reproduction, so that is not a problem with me. Still, a lot of heavy middle weights are kept and they are still in peak reproductive status.

Second issue, to report the fish, you need to have certified scales and witnesses. You also now need to report the body of water you caught it in. Can you imagine what would happen to your favorite lake when every report in the state says that the State Record was caught in ................? I doubt that any fish could survive the onslaught of fishermen.

I am from the East side of the State, SO, if I catch a State Record, I will report it came from the West side. Thanks for the names of some of the "potential" record holders. I'll need to remember them for when.............. OK, never mind.:bball:

I know the calculaters are only estimates. The latest ones I've used on line put's the fish at 11.40 So there is a lot of discrepancy, especially with our Northwestern fish. But not even close to 14#'s. It was an amazing fish. I, to this day have never seen one like it. Plenty in the 7-9 lb. range and 21 to 22 in. but never the girth. It looked like a kite. Shane was 10 and fought it to the 12' boat until he could'nt hold the rod any more, handed it over to me and he grabbed the net and scooped it up. I should try and post the pictures sometime although there not in digital.

Post the pictures if you can Basser90, all you need is a scanner/printer. I would love to see it.
I have personally seen a HUGE bass that was caught by a club member friend of mine. The fish was held in a aerated cooler for hours before I got to see it, as I was bringing a accurate scale with me. The fish weighed 11.2 lbs. I would guess the fish had been caught almost 5 hours prior. I have caught a fish in a tournament that weighed dead on 6 lbs but 4 hrs later it weighed 5lb 12 oz on club scales. They do drop a few under that sort of stress.
It was a beautiful fish, a real jaw dropper for someone who has never been to the southern states to see these monsters.

Moral of my rambling, when you catch that personal best 6 lber, LET IT GO so we all can have fun with that fish, and catch it when its REALLY big.

basser90 wrote:I know the calculaters are only estimates. The latest ones I've used on line put's the fish at 11.40 So there is a lot of discrepancy, especially with our Northwestern fish. But not even close to 14#'s. It was an amazing fish. I, to this day have never seen one like it. Plenty in the 7-9 lb. range and 21 to 22 in. but never the girth. It looked like a kite. Shane was 10 and fought it to the 12' boat until he could'nt hold the rod any more, handed it over to me and he grabbed the net and scooped it up. I should try and post the pictures sometime although there not in digital.

True enough, I go to a site that has specific calculators for each species, so they tend to be more accurate. Still, estimates at best.