The world-record muskie weighed 69 pounds 15 ounces—including the sand poured into its belly. The world record smallmouth weighed 11 pounds 15 ounces—after it was stuffed full of lead and engine parts. The world record walleye—never weighed 25 pounds, with or without stuffing.

Shaken by a rash of illegitimate records, public trust is probably at an all-time low. Not only was the world-record muskie a hoax, but several line-class records for muskie have been thrown out as well. The smallmouth taken from Dale Hollow Lake by D.L. Hayes in 1955 actually weighed 8 pounds 15 ounces, according to the testimony of the man who packed three pounds of metal into the fish at the behest of his boss, a publicity-hungry resort owner.

Not surprising then, that the blurry, overexposed photo of a walleye from Tennessee that reportedly weighed 25 pounds on a certified scale has finally been discounted. Al and Ron Lindner doubted the veracity of the record for more than 25 years, and In-Fisherman ran numerous editorials that questioned Mabry Harper’s “record” during that period. Last summer, the Freshwater Fishing Hall of Fame finally agreed with that assessment and disqualified Harper’s catch.

Ted Dzialo, director of the Hall of Fame, said the decision was made by committee. “I’m sure In-Fisherman had questions about the record,” he said. “In fact, I remember an article you did on the subject. Our board of governors meeting decided to disqualify the record based on measurements of Harper’s hands in relation to the length and depth of the fish. We decided that Al Nelson’s 22-pound 11-ounce walleye (taken from Greer’s Ferry in Arkansas) should be the true world record.”

Why the sudden demise of so many old records? “Hey, things were a little looser in those days,” he laughed. “People weren’t as meticulous about records back then. Harper caught a nice fish, no question. But we feel it couldn’t have weighed 25 pounds.” Estimates of the true weight of Harper’s fish, after close analysis, now rest in the 17- to 19-pound range, according to Dzialo.

Honest records affect all anglers. The new record establishes an attainable goal for trophy walleye hunters, true. But records are important for many other reasons. World-record fish give us at least an approximate sense of the maximum size a species can attain. State and provincial records measure the potential a region has for producing fish of world-class status. Line-class records define our limitations and challenge us to redefine them.

Information about bodies of water, presentation, time of year, and other data that surrounds each record provides a running history of how we fish, what methods take the biggest fish, and much, much more. Records place everything relative to fishing in proper perspective. Unless the record is a hoax.

When a wildlife officer came to inspect Harper’s walleye, all that remained was the head and a question. Could a walleye actually weigh 25 pounds? Apparently not. We know that walleyes in the 20-pound class were caught in that region during the early 1960s. They were those “firsts” we often talk about—in this case, the first generations of walleyes reaching old age in those reservoirs. But no verified catches of a walleye over 23 pounds have ever occurred anywhere in North America, before or since, in commercial nets or in game-and-fish netting surveys. Nor has one washed up on a beach that might have approached the mythical 25 pounds.

Nelson’s fish was 2 pounds 5 ounces lighter than the phony world record. That’s a quantum leap to the top-end weight a popular fish species can achieve. When individual fish begin to approach that top-end weight, every additional ounce represents a geometric progression. Consider the next four largest walleyes ever recorded. The difference between number two and number five is 2 pounds 6 ounces—almost the same as the leap from number two to the phantom record.

To place it in perspective, compare it to other freshwater records for extremely popular fish. The difference between the top two largemouths is about 4 ounces. The biggest two northern pike taken in North America are 6 ounces apart.

Yet, some records do make dramatic jumps. A 40-pound brown trout taken from the Little Red River in Arkansas several years ago tops the next biggest brown on record by 1 pound 7 ounces. Browns, however, were introduced fairly recently to those Arkansas rivers—just long enough to achieve such monstrous dimensions. A bigger brown may yet be caught there, or in Lake Michigan where the new Seeforellen strain is reaching weights approaching 25 pounds in four years. No such hope existed for walleye anglers chasing an impossibly bogus standard.

But what about king salmon? The largest fish on record, according to the International Game Fish Association, is a 126-pounder taken in a commercial net. The all-tackle world record, meanwhile, is 97 pounds 4 ounces. The discrepancy there is over 28 pounds, yet the question is, can anybody actually land a king over 100 pounds in the confines of a raging river in fall, where kings tend to be right after achieving maximum weight? It’s possible that many fish over 100 pounds have been hooked. Landing them is another matter, which is less true with walleyes, even if they could top 25 pounds.

Such reasoning leads to the next logical step. Have giant walleyes that approach or top the new world record been caught or found through methods other than angling? Legends and myths abound, the most notable rising from Greers Ferry and the Columbia River. On the banks of Greer’s Ferry, also in Arkansas, biologists and anglers claim to have found skeletons of walleyes over 40 inches long. Those fish could have weighed well over 20 pounds, but 25? The fact that the new world record walleye, Nelson’s 22-pound 11-ouncer, was taken from Greers lends credence to such tales, but hardly serves as verification.

Rumor has it that a walleye over 25 pounds found its way into a native American’s net along the banks of the Columbia. Guides say a wildlife officer witnessed the fish. But, according to Paul Wagner, fisheries biologist for the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, it ain’t so, Joe. “I hear that story every year, but I don’t think anyone in our office has ever seen anything surpassing the Oregon or Washington state records, let alone a fish of world-record proportion.”

Which leads us back to where we started. Does the potential exist for walleyes to weigh 25 pounds? The world record received serious scrutiny over the past few years, and the consensus among most experts proved true. Harper’s fish simply couldn’t have weighed 25 pounds. Analyzed repeatedly, some say the photo is legitimate, yet reported girth (29 inches) and length (41 inches) statistics don’t jive. According to Steve Quinn, staff fisheries biologist at In-Fisherman, “A 29-inch girth isn’t physically possible for a walleye 41 inches long. Using a time-tested formula (girth2 x length ÷ 800), those measurements describe a fish weighing close to 40 pounds.”

An Arkansas fisheries biologist, who wishes to remain nameless, said, “I really doubt that a walleye could weigh 25 pounds in August. Maybe in February, but not in August.” This from a man who over the years handled numbers of fish over 20 pounds during his agency’s quest for eggs and milt.

The new mark of 22 pounds 11 ounces might be beaten, but probably not from any existing arena. The giants of the Tennessee Valley are ghosts of the past. Some biologists say the brontosaurus ‘eyes of Greer’s Ferry were the result of a diet rich in trout, which no longer exists to any great extent. And the Columbia River, as Wagner points out, has yet to produce a walleye much over 20 pounds, either from a net or by angling.

I’ve said it before—you’ll win the state lottery twice before hooking a 20, and you won’t land that one either. But that doesn’t mean you can’t break a record. In fact, an absolute parade of mammoth fish have trooped through the outdoor pages of late, many toppling state, provincial, or line-class marks.

Oklahoma and Ohio state records were broken last year, the latest shots fired in the recent battle of the bulge. In all, 19 state records for walleyes have been established since 1990. Some of those records stood for a long time before falling, one of many indications that this could be the best time in history to hook a fish over 15 pounds.

Safe money would bet that the advent of catch and release allows more fish to attain trophy size than ever before. Certainly, better fishery management keeps more populations at optimum size, while regulations like slot limits increase the number of trophy fish. Many more walleye waters exist now than 30 years ago, with the addition of so many reservoirs and the spreading popularity of walleyes coast to coast.

Critical contributions also came from the Clean Water Act (CWA) and environmentally minded fishing groups. When the CWA was adopted by Congress in 1971, Lake Erie was dying, her native walleyes all but extinct. The Detroit River and Saginaw Bay were cesspools. Green Bay and Lake Ontario were following Erie toward a filthy demise. Each of those fisheries now ranks among the best in the world, with proven potential to produce gargantuan walleyes, following monumental cleanup efforts.

Sources are expanding, but it probably won’t be enough to produce a world record any time soon. What does it take to produce a world record walleye? Long life spans, big water (where fish can escape pressure for many years), an efficient source of fuel (most notably shad, trout, alewives, or smelt), a long growing season, mild winters, the right genes, and incredible luck. Yet you could find all that and still not catch a 20 in a lifetime of trying.

The most accessible records today are probably of the line-class variety. According to the National Fresh Water Fishing Hall of Fame, the 25-pound line-class record is 10 pounds 9 ounces, which could be broken with relative ease on a long list of waterways around the continent. The record for 2-pound test is 10 pounds 3 ounces, which could certainly be attempted in most regions where walleyes swim. The 15- and 16-pound-test marks are both in the 12 pound range, well within reach.

Most other records require a walleye over 14 pounds. That might demand a little travel. The following waters deliver the best odds for bagging a walleye over 14 pounds today. Waters marked with an asterisk currently offer the best potential for producing a new world record.

Bay of Quinte, Ontario.

*Bull Shoals, Missouri.

*Columbia River, Washington-Oregon.

Fort Peck, Montana.

Fox River, Wisconsin.

*Greers Ferry, Arkansas.

Lake Erie, New York-Michigan-Ohio-Ontario-Pennsylvania.

Lake Ontario, New York-Ontario.

Saginaw Bay, Michigan.

St. Lawrence River, Quebec-New York-Ontario.

Tobin Lake, Saskatchewan.

Good luck. Should those walleye winds blow favorably upon you, just call and say, “This time it really is so, Joe!”