Rare catch...another great day 5/31

[wakina]

I was sure glad to read that information! I would be absolutely sick to know we harvested a fish that was supposed to be extinct. If I would have given it more thought, we should have released this one.

With all of the time, money and effort put forth to no avail by several state, local, federal and Canadian agencies to capture, dead or alive a specimen Blue Pike. It would be more than a 1 in 1 billion chance that any blue colored walleye would actually turn out to be a Blue Pike.

[Zander Man]

Where's a picture?

[Eyezcrazy]

Where's a picture?

It's in the first post on page 1 of this thread Zander Man.

[jproffitt10]

Definitely can notice the difference! Did you eat it? Most likely, at least according to the scientists I spoke to, that this walleye is not a blue pike, but a walleye with a coating of blue slime. Check out information about blue pike and blue walleye at the following link:
http://wildlakeerie.com/?s=blue+pike

[B can man]

Not accusing anyone of anything here, but was that image enhanced in any way?

The blue on the collar of the tanktop seems way too blue. The net handle appears quite blue. The entire fish is blue except one little spot on the gill, which is regular walleye color. The water is VERY blue, which isn't abnormal sometimes, but it doesn't seem to match up with the low quality photo taken.

Self-correcting cameras can add colors to a picture in a funny way, but there sure seems to be a lot of extra blue in this pic.

I was actually scrutinizing the picture for age (checking to see if it was from the 70's or 80's due to the texture of the photo). I was looking at the instrument cluster and other things when all of the extra blue popped out at me.

Eyecrazy has been a good contributor to the site, which is why I am not eager to point a finger, but am wondering if the photo got self-corrected or chenged in some other way.

[wakina]

Not accusing anyone of anything here, but was that image enhanced in any way?

The blue on the collar of the tanktop seems way too blue. The net handle appears quite blue. The entire fish is blue except one little spot on the gill, which is regular walleye color. The water is VERY blue, which isn't abnormal sometimes, but it doesn't seem to match up with the low quality photo taken.

Self-correcting cameras can add colors to a picture in a funny way, but there sure seems to be a lot of extra blue in this pic.

I was actually scrutinizing the picture for age (checking to see if it was from the 70's or 80's due to the texture of the photo). I was looking at the instrument cluster and other things when all of the extra blue popped out at me.


Eyecrazy has been a good contributor to the site, which is why I am not eager to point a finger, but am wondering if the photo got self-corrected or chenged in some other way.

If you read the original post (edited: an amended to actually the 4th post in this thread) it very clearly stated that this is a picture of a picture because he was unable to or not capable of uploading the photo from his phone.

You are correct that Eyezcrazy has been a good contributor to this forum. With that in mind why would anyone deliberately post false or altered material or pictures and jeopardize their good standing with other members?

This post by me is only intended to point out that there was a concern on Eyezcrazy's part about the photo's quality, so he took the time to point out that this was not the original photo as appearing on his phone's camera and uploaded here for our viewing but was actually a picture of the original as it would appear on his phone. I accept that explanation and do not question the authenticity of his post, catch or picture.


The photo also shows that both fish have apparently been bled as the area under the gills has been cut. A practice not common in the 70's or 80's.

[Eyezcrazy]

Not accusing anyone of anything here, but was that image enhanced in any way?

The blue on the collar of the tanktop seems way too blue. The net handle appears quite blue. The entire fish is blue except one little spot on the gill, which is regular walleye color. The water is VERY blue, which isn't abnormal sometimes, but it doesn't seem to match up with the low quality photo taken.

Self-correcting cameras can add colors to a picture in a funny way, but there sure seems to be a lot of extra blue in this pic.

I was actually scrutinizing the picture for age (checking to see if it was from the 70's or 80's due to the texture of the photo). I was looking at the instrument cluster and other things when all of the extra blue popped out at me.

Eyecrazy has been a good contributor to the site, which is why I am not eager to point a finger, but am wondering if the photo got self-corrected or chenged in some other way.

Wow, is that what I get for sharing something special to the forum? I can tell you that the fish was as blue as the photo and it was from last weekend. Maybe the DOW who talked with me and looked at the fish can verify this if he reads our forum. You can say your not pointing fingers, but when you say something like you thought the photo was from the 70's you are pretty much calling my a liar.
I explained how I had to post the pic because I couldn't upload it from my phone. But thanks to my friend Wakina, I will post it now directly and the color is even more vibrant than the previous pic because as I said, I had to take a pic of the pic to post it. I guess I'll stop sharing!

By the way....I always thought you were a good contributor too!

[Bggeary]

Wow, is that what I get for sharing something special to the forum? I can tell you that the fish was as blue as the photo and it was from last weekend. Maybe the DOW who talked with me and looked at the fish can verify this if he reads our forum. You can say your not pointing fingers, but when you say something like you thought the photo was from the 70's you are pretty much calling my a liar.
I explained how I had to post the pic because I couldn't upload it from my phone. But thanks to my friend Wakina, I will post it now directly and the color is even more vibrant than the previous pic because as I said, I had to take a pic of the pic to post it. I guess I'll stop sharing!

By the way....I always thought you were a good contributor too!

Eyezcrazy, let it be like water on a ducks back. Keep up the posts, and I think that was the prettiest walleye I've ever seen!

[B can man]

Eyecrazy, I did not call you a liar. Nor, would I ever call a multiple contributor to this site a liar. Don't let the fact that I was scrutinizing it make you think that I was calling you a liar. What brought me to the point of looking that hard at it is the fact that I was wondering why there wasn't a much bigger deal being made about the catch (maybe something in a newspaper or on the odnr site) as I thought that this was very very news worthy.

I asked for more information about the picture and the extra blue to try to understand why this wasn't being made a bigger deal out of.

By the way, I will rarely, if ever forego seeking an answer or asking a question to avoid offending someone. Not sorry, but that is me. I hate what society has become with political correctness and have made up my mind to just say what is on my mind. I usually am more cordial about it, but this morning I had come off of a 12 hour shift and just wanted an answer about why this wasn't a news story.

Obviously, seeing the original picture and the lack of extra blue in it, I feel even more that this should be a bigger story!

As a side note: I have seen things like this that have started a "ooh... ahh... ohhh" line of posts to only be "gotcha! we were messing with you!" threads later at the end. Which further lends to my original thought of "why isn't this being made a bigger deal out of?!". I don't know you personally. Are you a jokester? Are you prankster? Do you do things that make people groan instead of laugh? Are you an upstanding guy that would never pull such a joke or prank? You see now that I don't know you? I kinda wish I did know you, as I like many people who like fishing as much as I do.

[Eyezcrazy]

Listen.....I am not going to get into a pissing match over this. I was just sharing an experience we had last weekend and giving a fishing report. I was just as excited about my niece catching her first walleye and spending the day with my son. I thought the blue walleye just made it that much more memorable. But when you go as far as to say you were looking at my instrument panel to estimate the year of the photo....I would say you thought I was not telling the truth....which means you thought I was a liar. At any rate, I am about as straight a shooter as you will ever meet so I took offense to your accusations. Not that I need to prove anything, but that instrument panel is on a 2005 Seaswirl 210 (Google it and compare)and my son is not wearing a 70's haircut and the Under Armour shirt was not even thought of. Here is another photo of my niece fighting her first walleye so you can gather any other info that helps you.

You know the funny thing is for all the years I have been a member of this site....I think this was the first pic I have ever posted. So much for that!

Well, I have tried several times to upload the photo of my niece with her smile fighting that walleye but I keep getting errors. I am finished with pics!