1280lb Hammerhead - Potential World Record

[PanamaJack]

I know a lot of you, especially on family holidays, fish the Gulf Coast of Florida and the 'Keys. And you may well have seen sharks in shallow water, particularly the Bonnethead (midget 'hammerheads') and the dangerous Bull Sharks - they'll occasionally be around docks with the big Stingray feeding on fish carcasses thrown into the water.

But especially during Tarpon-time, Spring and early Summer, you may encounter really massive Hammerheads in the channels. I've heard guides talk about huge fish in the 17' range. And whilst they will target big Tarpon they'll also feed on Stingray - two of their 'favourite' prey species.

Here's one, not quite that big, captured Gulf-side. There's a brief article and some pictures on this url - http://www.saltwatersportsman.com/saltwater/hammerhead. Look at the size of its head and its tail!
Dave

[Dave Godwin]

Hi Dave, did they need to kill it just for the pics?:schmoll:

[shaggy]

have to agree with daveno need to it:uhuh: :uhuh: shaggy

[PanamaJack]

Hi Dave (and Shaggy)
I really don’t know. Is there actually though just one answer?

Certainly in our Club there is a strong release ethic and, if I take 2005 as an example, all of the Sharks and Marlin with the exception of one 650lb Blue Marlin that got tail-wrapped and died were released. And four of the Sharks – three Great Whites and a Six Gill – were estimated at better than 1000lbs, the biggest Great White was estimated by the skipper at 2200lbs (1000 KILOS), and there was one 1000lb plus Black Marlin from Australia’s Great Barrier Reef. But none of them were world record sized fish.

But would that have made a difference? As I said I don’t know. I’ve always felt that the decision had to be down to the individual angler. Skippers obvious can and do influence decisions. And influence it both ways. Certainly most will encourage release. However I remember one instance in Ascension Island where my friend was playing a very large, ‘grander’ sized Blue Marlin and the Kiwi crewman wanted to, as he described it, ‘stroke it’ – gaff it. The kudos of a 1000lb plus Marlin BUT, as much for the boat and its crew as the angler. No, my friend was insistent that it was released.

However whilst we were there an American angler, who’d previously released hundreds of Marlin, similarly hooked a big Blue and determined to weigh it – 1145lbs. Other than a small number of those that had stressed and died this was the first one he’d ever deliberately killed. But I respected it as his choice.

Although it really doesn’t and shouldn’t influence the ethical debate that fish, when examined for scientific purposes - scientists rarely get really big fish to examine, was found to have cancerous tumours on its ovaries. So in killing it he didn’t remove anything from the gene pool or breeding population.

Then, another instance, I recall two of my friends catching what was the first Blue Marlin ever caught on rod and line off the Algarve. It was only a shade over 500lbs, BUT it was a first. So again I can understand the rationale behind wanting to take it in. This again was from an angler who’s caught lots of Marlin which have been released, together with several estimated 900lb plus Bluefin Tuna from the Azores.

But I guess it’s easy to talk about others. Let me now go into the ‘old baring of chest’. Bear in mind that, other than bait, I release virtually all the fish I catch but, in the past, I’ve hooked two fish that were definitely world record size – a BigEye Tuna on 30lb class tackle off Madeira and a 20lb Bluefish on 6 off Faial in the Azores. The first escaped when, with it beaten, the line popped less than 20’ from the boat and the second I took in to be weighed. (Unfortunately we were unable to find sensitive enough scales for the Bluefish and, the next morning, once it had desiccated overnight, it was 5 ounces under the record.) But, to be honest, I had intended to let them gaff that Tuna as well.

So I guess what I’m trying to say I can understand why the angler wanted to take that Hammerhead. And I would have probably done the same.

However, and ‘putting the boot firmly on the other foot’, if one of your anglers was to hook say a 13 or 1400lb Mako Shark, an obvious world record, what would you do? Release or take? Would you try to influence them? As you can see, especially with for you the commercial implications, it’s a difficult choice.
Best wishes
Dave

[shaggy]

hi panamajack u make so good points but it very hard to weight a live shark on a boat without doing some type of damage,if u guess someone would say thats not right,i couldbe wrong but its seems moreof a macho thing?and if caught a big shark i would put it back and would hope anyone would too but at the end of the day it'sup the person themselfs,i just love sharks.shaggy:)

[PanamaJack]

Just one other observation on the Hammerhead story. The angler was fishing with PowerPro, superbraid line that the journalist refered to as 130lb. They don't manufacture that strength so it was probably the 100lb class. But is it, when tested, going to break below the IGFA's stated 60kg, 130lb line class? I'm aware, from people at the Light Tackle Club, responsible for testing lines for UK and European records, that many of the superbraid brands significantly overtest. Just something to be aware of in a UK context.
Dave

[PanamaJack]

Hi Shaggy
Yes, sharks and all those big pelagics are really impressive creatures – masters in their environment. But unfortunately if you try to lift anything of that size out of the water, even utilising a harness or sling, it’s likely to do irreparable damage, rupturing its internal organs by its own sheer weight pressing down without the supporting water.

That why most of our members try to avoid gut hooking fish – circle hooks are very effective in that regard – and play fish quickly with sensible tackle to ensure they can be released with minimum stress. And if you look through our annually presented trophy lists virtually all are for estimated weights of released fish.

However and I guess that was the point I was trying to make to Dave, should record fish in anyway be viewed different? To put it into perspective if it is ratified – and see my last posting that’s not necessarily a ‘done deal’ – then that particular fish will surpass a record that was established back in 1982, a fish of 991lbs.

So firstly, from the angler’s perspective, there is, of course, more than an element of kudos in it – catching the biggest fish, globally, of a particular species. Anglers, like anyone else, like the accolades from their peers. And, in perhaps a less obvious way, don’t we all record our best fish in our profiles that comes up with every post?

But would it be the same if someone just submitted an estimate? (Arguing against myself to some extent, because two of the fish weights recorded in my profile were actually estimates! But they weren’t record fish.) So would anyone, in terms of a national or world record, actually believe an estimate? I can’t imagine they would – people, quite rightly, would suspect vested interests.

Which brings me on to the second point. A skipper who lands a record fish gets a lot of publicity and in turn that generates a lot of extra revenue through increased bookings. And, allied to that, they usually also get sponsorship from tackle manufactures who scramble for accreditation from such guys.
Dave