I wanted to share a short article I read about the next world record bass in regards to california. My opinion is a world record is a world record regardless where it was caught, when it was caught, 0r who caught it as long as it was not snagged netted or trapped I feel it should deserve recognition. with that said check out this article.

http://www.bagwellsbasstactics.com/Articles.php/content_id/21

jerryG

I Agree with you
they could not take away the record from a persn just because the bass was fed trout (although it is unfair for us east coasters!!;)

but the record is a record
maybe one day they will split the resords in accordance to region or strian of bass

BEN

To say that bass were "fed" trout their whole lives is a misrepresentation. Yes, they live in systems where trout are stocked, but to say they are "fed" conjures up visions of a fish bowl with hand feeding.

Threadfin shad are/have been stocked into many waters. Thus, if a big fish is caught there should we say "that doesnt count, that fish was fed shad its whole life." And, bluegill and crappie are stocked in many waters, so if a WR is caught were they are stocked should we all say....., well you get the point.

If somebody had a very small pond with some Floridas in it, and the landowner ram packed it with trout (while minimizing the number of bass in the pond), then they caught a WR in it, then we may have an argument. However, all systems in Cal that produce huge fish are naturally functioning systems, most of which trout are native to. So the whole "canned hunt" argument is not valid, not even almost.

And, anybody who thinks its easy to catch one of these "hand fed fatties" better think again, cause it aint easy at all.

Texas and Florida are just jealous. Theres a reason I live in Cali, and its not because of the cheap gas and cheap real estate.:(

Well just to throw in my .02, I think the article was totally "fair and balanced". Bagwell made the same point that there are plenty of lakes where other fish are stocked to essentially "feed the Bass". And as far as I could tell he seemed to say that wherever the WRB came from was fine with him.
I have one additional thought. I don't think Ca bass get so big solely because they are fed trout. Its part of the reason, but another big part is the temperate Ca weather that brought many of us here in the first place. I have fished for and seen a fair number of 10+ bass both in Fla and here in Ca, and those Fla bass are really lanky compared to Ca bass. The reason is the growing season. Bass are cold blooded so their metabolism goes up and down with the temp. That in turn affects how they metablolize their food. If its cool the food goes to body mass. If its hot the food goes to metabolic energy. In Fla and to some degree Texas the water temps can climb into the 90's in the summer causing the bass to burn off lots of weight. Conversely in Ca the water stays below 75 almost all year yet it rarely drops below 45 to 50 in the winter. So the bass stay active enough to feed and put on pounds nearly all year. So without our Ca weather you could feed them anything you want and they still wouldn't reach Ca size.

I think it's interesting that some people claim the Southern CA. situation is "unfair", but they don't say anything about the Share Lunker program that is run by Texas Parks and Wildlife.
In 1996, they spent 17 million dollars on a facilty specifically designed to create 150,000 genetically superior fingerlings a year.
They do this buy collecting 13+ pound females and putting them in a lab that is run to produce bass with designer genes. These bass are then distributed to public and private waters.
I don't have a problem with what is going on in So. Cal. or Texas, but it amazes me that some people think planting trout gives fishermen an unfair advantage, but stocking "Frankenstien Bass" is legit. Go figure.
Tree
Happiness is a tight line and a stiff pole.

what you have in California is the perfect environment to grow trophy bass- nothing wrong with that- the same can be said for some of the Mexican lakes, the more they clamp down on commercial fishing in trophy lakes, especially with gill nets, the better chance 20+ fish will come from south of the border. Those fish are getting fat on tilapia and other natives, but they too have the advantage of good genetics in a very good environment to grow trophies. Bagwell's article was pretty good, sometimes he seems kind of kooky but he definetly got that one pretty good. The biggest momma of them all got that big in a Georgia backwater, so I don't see any reason for right coasters to have a problem with the fish back east not being able to compete. I do like the fact that the boys in Texas are busting their ass to catch up with Cali, all the while seeing nothing but tail lights!! I'm no biologist, but there are probably 10-15 lakes in California that have an honest 20 swimming in them, or a good shot at growing one. How cool is that??? }(

Man this is just dumb..you would think world record ment a bass cought anywhere is the world on rod and reel. If someone is jelious that there chances may not be just as good as some one who lives in Ca, I dont think anyone is stopping them from moving here? I guess that some guys think that we have Bass that jump through hoops while we "feed" them trout but oviously that is not the case. I am sure that most ca. locals know that most of the larger lakes w/ trout or hitch and the delta have 20+ bass even if the record is 18lb or something like that, they are out there why have'nt we cought them? Prehaps they are "Feed" too much :+

don't forget that the record could easily come from NorCal.

Cerebelli...I guess there's always a chance of it happening in The Delta and possibly Amador. Maybe FishChris will find that 18 pounder again that he hung at Rancho last year and it will be twenty-plus. But where else do you think is a good bet for it to happen here up in Nor. Cal?

Happiness is a tight line and a stiff pole.

any lake with florida strain and stocked trout...