Home | Tournaments | Calendar | Weather | Merchandise | Sponsors |
|
California Spearfishing Talk here about spearfishing on California's Pacific Coast, and post those reports and photos! |
|
Thread Tools | Rating: | Display Modes |
11-21-2012, 04:35 PM | #31 |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 8,082
|
Re: Old Giant Lingcod Picture
|
11-21-2012, 04:44 PM | #32 |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 8,082
|
Re: Old Giant Lingcod Picture
For the first time looked hard at the pic. The max size of the largest rockfish is 36" so if you compare the rockfish to the lings they are not that big.
the pic is deceptive to say the least. |
11-21-2012, 04:57 PM | #33 |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 135
|
Re: Old Giant Lingcod Picture
Definitely are rockfish larger than 36", Cowcod, Rough eye, Short raker etc. As far as for the size of the lings they are definitely some toads and I know draggers still occasionally get some around the 5' mark off the CA coast. Back then I am sure a longline draped over a virgin reef with a bunch of small salmon for bait would produce some real monsters.
|
11-21-2012, 05:17 PM | #34 |
Austin Derry
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Laguna Beach
Age: 34
Posts: 3,611
|
Re: Old Giant Lingcod Picture
Wow... Great photo!
Imagine going out and getting a stringer of 50lb lings and then cruising down south and smackin a few of these beasts. Ahh I wish we still got fish like that on a regular basis... |
11-21-2012, 07:46 PM | #35 |
Queerboard Kook
Join Date: Jan 2009
Age: 42
Posts: 2,536
|
Re: Old Giant Lingcod Picture
I'm pretty sure those are Totuava. I could be wrong, but look at the tail.
|
11-21-2012, 07:47 PM | #36 |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: On the Bering Sea
Posts: 346
|
Re: Old Giant Lingcod Picture
There are many linked variables that ultimately determine the maximum size and population density of lingcod (as well as almost every other fish), many of which have been mentioned in this thread so far. Prevailing oceanographic conditions, quality and quantity of forage species (which is often influenced by oceanic conditions), suitable habitat for hunting, breeding, and fishing pressure, genetics, and many others all play a part.
As stated in previous posts, there are monster lingcod in California, though we don't see them as often as one might in Canada and Alaska. Based upon what information I've been able to find regarding their basic biology and ecology, the big models prefer depths that are outside the depth restriction for recreational anglers. Also, keep in mind that the 300 foot depth restriction is not a statewide limit; the Central, San Francisco, Mendocino and Northern management zones in California have increasingly stringent depth limits due to yelloweye and canary rockfish. So, it is conceivable that there is a much larger portion of suitable habitat that may be holding large lingcod that is inaccessible by the recreational angler. California/northern Baja is also the southern end of the lingcods' geographical distribution (the northern end is around Kodiak Island, Alaska). It is not uncommon to find that the frequency and density of larger individuals is less at the ends of a species' range. If the fish in the photo are representative of an average catch in northern California around the turn of the century, imagine what you might find as you moved closer to the center of their distribution? Ocean, how did you determine with such accuracy that the rockfish in the photo is 36 inches? Or are you just stating that no rockfish of any species has ever exceeded 36 inches in length? Do you have some fancy photo analysis software with a database of known lengths and proportions of glass bottles from the early 1900's that allowed you to extrapolate the length of said rockfish? If so, I'm sure everyone would like a length estimate of the lingcod as well. I know I would. By the way, this guy was longer than 36 inches and was probably a young, spry teenager who was vigorously chasing the ladies when Alexander Hamilton was still being nursed. This species gets even larger.
__________________
Freedivers do it on a single breath. Halibut biologists love the 'buts. |
11-21-2012, 09:37 PM | #37 |
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Cameron Park, Ca.
Posts: 16
|
Re: Old Giant Lingcod Picture
The largest H&L ling from Alaska stands at 87#. It's likely that there are some of those off the north coast but for shallow water rockfish fishing folks are not geared up for them. I spoke with a couple of divers about 30 years ago who were diving the sea stack offshore from Orick; they landed a 35# ling between them on SCUBA. They did not have a loaded gun between them when the big one came out for a bite. They said it dwarfed the one they had. They're out there.
|
11-22-2012, 12:10 AM | #38 |
Chris Saxl
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Napa, CA
Age: 44
Posts: 250
|
Re: Old Giant Lingcod Picture
Well, I think I got a little too excited on this one. I can't see anything to really gauge size, now that you all mention it. As for max weight:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lingcod...ote-fishbase-4 Thats is from Wikipdeia, which is crap, it does however reference fishbase, which is pretty good. Says 130 and has a reference cited. However Milton Love, in CMTYWTKATFOTPC (actual acronym for wonderful book- and sequel to PMTYWTKAFOTPC) Says 82.6lb, and if I had to put money on it, I'd side w/ Love. Any one else have old, big fish pic's? Last edited by Defofthecrown; 11-22-2012 at 12:11 AM. Reason: typo |
11-22-2012, 12:24 AM | #39 | |
fuzzy logic
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 1,906
|
Re: Old Giant Lingcod Picture
Quote:
|
|
11-22-2012, 12:20 PM | #40 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 8,082
|
Re: Old Giant Lingcod Picture
Quote:
This area does not have the cowcod. How long is that rcokfish in the picture? |
|
11-22-2012, 12:36 PM | #41 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 118
|
Re: Old Giant Lingcod Picture
Quote:
http://www.farnorthscience.com/2007/...om-the-deep-2/ http://www.afsc.noaa.gov/ABL/MESA/mesa_sa_rock_rbrf.htm Both fish have ranges extending into California waters and may exceed 36in in length. What was the name of your "DFG book?" Could it have been referring to fish commonly (and presently) caught in our recreational catch? Last edited by Mo-Jo; 11-22-2012 at 12:51 PM. |
|
11-22-2012, 02:55 PM | #42 |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: On the Bering Sea
Posts: 346
|
Re: Old Giant Lingcod Picture
That shortraker was 39 inches and 52 pounds. . .not from California though.
Information can easily become outdated, same as technology. The ocean is a big place, and no matter how well we think we have sampled/studied it, there are always more surprises. For example, there is a population of California scorpionfish (sculpin) that live off Cape Mendocino. If you look at F&G's fish bulletin 157 (or fishbase.org), their range is described as only extending to Santa Cruz. The same publication (and fishbase.org) indicates the cowcod's northern range as Usal, Mendocino county. I personally have caught cowcod offshore of Eureka in Humboldt county while doing research.
__________________
Freedivers do it on a single breath. Halibut biologists love the 'buts. |
11-22-2012, 04:03 PM | #43 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: California
Posts: 92
|
Re: Old Giant Lingcod Picture
|
11-22-2012, 06:11 PM | #44 |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 135
|
Re: Old Giant Lingcod Picture
Definitely have caught Cowcod on a tow off of Eureka, also longlining for black cod routinely turn up monster Rougheye. As I have seen from previous posts you seem to enjoy taking your observations and extrapolating them into "facts".
|
11-22-2012, 07:11 PM | #45 | |
My spawn kills on....
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Huntington Beach, Ca
Age: 53
Posts: 8,572
|
Re: Old Giant Lingcod Picture
Quote:
__________________
Safety is but an illusion; Every grain of sand was once a mountain. Every speck of dust..... was once a man. Nothing can stop this, in time. So use the time you have well..... you won't get it back. |
|
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|