I wonder if he even knows there's a thread on a completely different forum that has reached 3 pages in length...certainly an ego booster.

I caught a fresh little jack steelie today. About 14-16 inches. I had it to hand in less than a minute.

It took me two hours and about 60 casts to get a hit though.

ORIGINAL: TastyTrout

Has he ever provided any proof/reasoning behind it? I don't think that he owes anyone that proof but if you're going to take the time to post all the stuff you have to expect others to not believe.

His reasoning? That's just what he finds fun, keeping records (he's an accountant) and trying to catch as many as he possibly can.

He used to invite anyone who doubted him to join him. Several did and said he's a machine. This was a long time ago though, like 2001/2002.

ORIGINAL: D-nymph

That's just what he finds fun, keeping records (he's an accountant)

Nevermind....makes sense to me now. Accountants are always fudging the numbers to make things seem better than they are...

For the size trout we are talking about here...............less than five seconds.

Ding, Ding, Ding! We have a winner!

Reminds me of a little story...
Before the "VHS" regs were put into place and back in my "trout bum" days, I fished a local lake stocked heavily with trout on a particular morning. This lake hadn't been stocked in over 2 weeks.

The bite was on, every cast. Only missed or lost, maybe, a half dozen fish.

The program consisted of a small, thumbnail-sized piece of skein with a very small and thin piece of chartreuse glo-bug yarn over-hand knotted on the line at the hook eye. This was fished 3' under a weighted float with a 10'6" noodle rod.
Only had to cast aprox. 40'. The rig would hit the water and in no more than 5 seconds, the float would dunk, every single time. never had to wait longer. Never.
I had to quit after 4 hours due to running out of bait(eggs).
As I was walking along the banks of the lake to get back to my truck, an old-timer(not S-10)stopped me and said he was watching me from across the lake. He asked how many I caught and I said, "Oh, I don't know...40 or 50?" I really wasn't sure. He said, "You're way off, son. You landed 74." I said, "Wow. I had no idea it was that many." We made small talk and I continued on my way.

With that said, and if the old timer's numbers are correct, I have no doubt that 200 trout could have been easily caught that day if I stepped up the pace, had the bait and the fish continued to cooperate.
I could only imagine if the bite would have been similar and I was throwin' spinners...

Like 'D said, it's what he likes to do...keep track.

Ironhed

ORIGINAL: mohawksyd

ORIGINAL: TastyTrout

Nevermind....makes sense to me now. Accountants are always fudging the numbers to make things seem better than they are...

Easy, now...

TT you gotta watch the "Bean Counters", sneaky bunch...

Ironhed, I can see where that could happen on the right day in the right place a time or two. But 1700 trips to the stream with over 100 trout sure seems like a stretch. Somedays those fish just don't bite..At least for me..

I'm sure the outrageous numbers being posted online have nothing to do with the fact that he gets paid to do slide show seminars on spin fishing right? lol Just read this advertisement for one of his Harrisburg shows. His method is so effective it's like "electro-shocking" the trout!

Frank Nale - Appearing February 10-12
Would you like to learn the secrets of how to catch more trout than most anglers think is possible - a method so effective that some anglers have compared it to electro-shocking? No, this isn't hype - it's reality! If so, you won't want to miss Frank Nale's fifty-minute spinner fishing slide program entitled "Spin Fishing For Trout."

I have no doubt he catches very high numbers of fish consistently. I even think a 200 fish day could be possible if all the stars align, or if a very small stream was freshly stocked the night before and loaded up. And I think it's cool that he keeps statistics like that. If he put that data in a database with zip codes, for the locations he fished, you could get a database of weather by zip code and do all kinds of cool statistical analyses with it.

He's gota be fudging his real numbers at least a little higher though, to keep the slide show revenue coming in. Think about it, not many people are going to be impressed or drive to see a slide show of a guy catching 100+ trout on the right days. Now make it sound almost impossible but just believable enough to hook people, and a lot more people are going to attend.

Back in my college days me and my buddies would each catch over 100 fish a day just fishing an afternoon, no skill really involved, clear water, jigs, and piles of stockies. we found a couple of creeks that it seemed the stocking was never spreadout and we never encountered many guys, we literally would have fish on as soon as we twichted our jigs. No trebles or bait to mess with, you could post high numbers really fast.

He's gota be fudging his real numbers at least a little higher though, to keep the slide show revenue coming in. Think about it, not many people are going to be impressed or drive to see a slide show of a guy catching 100+ trout on the right days. Now make it sound almost impossible but just believable enough to hook people, and a lot more people are going to attend.

After reading his summaries for the last 10 or so years, and from what I know of him, I don't think he needs the money. Trust me.

He simply digs what he does and I see nothing wrong with that.

Ironhed

It's not about catching the fish. It's about the supposed numbers in the amount of time. It would literally require him to jog along side the stream without pause, never snag or have a tangle, catch a fish on every cast, rip the fish out of the water, speed write a journal entry -- non-stop... for four days straight...

Sorry if it sounds unreasonable.

Anyway the burden of proof falls onto the person making a claim. Without proof intelligent people aren't going to believe it.

What if I told you I saw a unicorn on the side of I-79 last night?

So many doubters... It is really funny. Comparing the Erie watershed to a very nice central Pa wild trout stream is apples to Oranges. He does not fish the same steams. He does not go after pellet heads or stockies to increase numbers. He rarely fishes the same stretch within 2 weeks. As bings said, sometimes the fish don't bite. That is simple.....he doesn't fish on these days. If he documents fish kept, you really don't think he knows weather patterns, stream flows, water temps???? He knows exactly what stream to fish on any given day. If it's not right he doesn't go. It's amazing a guy tells you he caught 50 steelhead , he's a liar, but I have seen guys pull fish after fish out when no one else is catching. Thats fishing everywhere. Including in central PA. Most guys try to hit a 5 gallon bucket practicing casting, this guy hits a styrofoam cup 10-15 yards away 8 out of 10 times. 5 out of 10 go in the cup. His brother, Mark, writes an article called "naturally speaking". He is a retired biology teacher. Good fisherman as well, but not Frank. In one day the most I caught was 40 something and I stink at wild trout fishing, but it was a good day for me. Franks friend was with me and while I was stuck in the laurel, I held my line out of the water so he could fish the hole, he landed 7 while I watched. It was less than 5 mins. Bang bang bang. All native brookies. We ended up with over 130 and we ate lunch, drove to 2 different streams and left by 2:30. An once again, I stink. It is really an amazing experience. But to some I was just probably dreaming.

My friend and I have pulled out roughly 150 in one evening, if it was just one of us who knows, but our catch rate was similar, Im not sure what to think to be honest.
I mean those were days we still talk about.
In a 5 day span we can catch over 200 on March Browns, but like I'm speechless I dont know what to think

woO kAreS duUDs trOut fisHin is kIdZ stuF

jisT dUMb fiSh

My friend and I have pulled out roughly 150 in one evening, if it was just one of us who knows, but our catch rate was similar, Im not sure what to think to be honest.

Two people, same catch rate, 150 fish? Here's what to think: you each caught about 75.

i heard frank nale killed a bigfoot with his bare hands in 3.258 seconds....just sayn'

Hahahaha!

First, we had Chuck Norris, then we had the most interesting man in the world...now we got Frank Nale.

Hope he never hooks up with Carl (the geatest steelhead guide ever).
Could you imagine the numbers they could put up at the stop sign hole.