# 18 lb Canada!!!



## Rick Acker (Sep 26, 2002)

I know I was skeptical at first too, before I picked up. However, it weighed 18 plus on my digital fish scale...Monster none the less...It was like mounting a Swan. Shot by Greg Warcken near LaMoure!


----------



## Leo Porcello (Jul 10, 2003)

If that was indeed 18lbs it was worth a doz Dropzones.


----------



## ndwaterfowler (May 22, 2005)

Nice mount, interesting pose. He should have had it mounted with a cackler so that it looked more like an 18lb honk.


----------



## bandman (Feb 13, 2006)

:rollin: To all you naysayers last year on this subject-------*HA**!* :jammin: :jammin:


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

Highly skeptical with no actual proof, sorry Rick. :roll:

I've seen and shot some real heavyweights and they are not as flat as that bird, not a slam on the mount because it is a fine job, just saying it would have a much larger, fuller body. 
The bird in the left hand of tall dewfuss weighed in @ 15.4 lbs., the rest were between 12.5 and 13+ for what it is worth.


----------



## bandman (Feb 13, 2006)

I really don't think a taxidermist would weigh a goose on a digital fish scale and then proceed to come on here and lie about it....

Here we go again. :homer:


----------



## Dak (Feb 28, 2005)

Nope don't have a picture with a scale. Don't even hunt waterfowl that much any more. Heck, who am I kidding I don't hunt waterfowl down here at all. However, the last goose I shot was while pheasant hunting along the north side of Sakakawea. Had a chance to to pass shoot some honkers. Got one. My French Brittany, who was in her first year of hunting, ran out to it looked back at me...looked at the goose...looked at me and just put a paw on the dead goose's back until I got there. It weighed in at 18 pounds even. I've never seen a goose that big...it had to be big to fly into my shot pattern.


----------



## northerngoosehunter (Mar 22, 2006)

I saw two 18lb honkers get shot last year. There is no doubt they are out there.


----------



## Rick Acker (Sep 26, 2002)

When a bird is in flight, he is not fluffy and fat...He is sleek with the wind shear...We use special bodies made for flying birds to achieve that look! No proof??? It's not my bird...I have nothing to gain by attaching my name to this post. I'm sure my digital fish scale would not qualify as an official whopper station weigh in, but it's at least in the ball park. It's impossible to fully see how big this bird is with no point of reference. If I would've stuck another bird next to it like Chris said maybe, but I can tell you from looking at your picture 4 curl, he is bigger than your birds. Stop by the Warcken's in LaMoure sometime...I'm sure they would love show it to you.


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

Sorry Rick, but if you've ever seen a heavyweight in flight they are not sleek and built for windsheer, they are just plain big and there azz does hang from the barley fats. Just like beer bellies, no matter how far you pull your pants up you still have a dickydoo.

I'm just sayin'............until I see one or it is confirmed I'll be skeptical.

Regardless Rick it is a fine mount, job well done.


----------



## Leo Porcello (Jul 10, 2003)

Sooo sheak la freak freak out dooot doot

I am sure I just tore that disco song up but as soon as I read "sleek" it popped in my head.


----------



## bandman (Feb 13, 2006)

4curl:
With all due respect, how hard is it to take that goose in your hand and add a couple pounds to it. It's like not believing someone shot a 180-190" buck in ND. The goose I shot in the last picture in this same controversy was quite awhile ago (long before I became a member of this site) and if I were to know now how big of a deal it was to shoot a big'en like that; I would've been a lot more prompt about it. Stupidly enough, I let it sit in the freezer too long at my grandpa's farm in the freezer in his shop and it ended up getting thrown away because I kept putting it aside. The college life was draining the wallet way too rapidly to think about paying a taxidermist around here $300-450 for a dang goose. (no pun intended Rick; and yes, I called and called around.)

Beforehand:
My buddy went to taxidermist school in Montana and took my 14 lber there to mount it for free. No lie, the goose that got thrown away puts it to shame by a *LONG *shot! Anyone can say all they want, but I wish so badly that I could I dig that goose up and bring it back to this day.


----------



## dukegoose (Jul 17, 2006)

I'm getting a scale this year. I know some of the late season geese that we have shoot had to be 18 plus. I would also think some of those corn feed park geese in the twin cities would be 18 plus. We shoot a 10 year old last year during the Nodak early season that was a monster. Had no scale. And if I'm wrong so be it, but at least I will know the answer. 
Why is this such a hot topic. I have heard of geese in the 20 plus range before. Does anyone know if there an record of some kind? By the way nice looking bird Rick!! Just found this DNR web page with some info.

http://www.in.gov/dnr/fishwild/hunt/gee ... facts.html


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I don't goose hunt that much, but I have some experience with Canada Geese. I notice many are skeptical about the size of Canada Geese. Biologists still argue about how many subspecies there are. There are those who want to group into nine subspecies, and a fellow by the name of Hanson , in Iowa, that thinks there are 63 subspecies. However, all agree that the Giant Canada Goose (Branta canadensis maxima) that Audubon described is a distinct subspecies. 
I suggest looking for the book Homegrown Honker, by Forrest B. Lee. He was the lead biologist for the restoration of Giant Canadas in North Dakota. He worked for the U. S. Fish and Wildlife service and obtained geese from Carl Struts of Jamestown. Biologist looked at these birds and thought they had been in captivity and inbred to long so did not represent the wild birds. Carl had one gander that hit 26.5 pounds on a scientific balance scale. Biologist decided to use some of his birds and cross them with birds they captured from the wild at Rochester, Minnesota. From that cross they kept females 14 pounds and greater, and ganders 16 pounds and greater. 60 pair were held as breeding stock at Jamestown, and 60 pair at Sand Lake National Wildlife Refuge. All were incubated at Jamestown and released in flocks of 250 around the state in the early and mid 1970's. If every hunter weighed their birds somewhere even in the wild there is a 20 pound bird out there. 
Carl Struts birds were worth about $1000 a pair until someone dug up the original diaries of Audubon. Audubon described the white eyebrow patch, and the hook at the back of the white chin strap. When Audubon so accurately described Carl's birds the value of his pairs jumped to about $3000. Carl waterfowl from around the world, some worth $10,000 for a pair. The Giant Canadas that he had were obtained as eggs by his father, I think in the 1920's when the last ones nested in North Dakota. I'm not sure about the year, it's been 30 years since Carl passed away.


----------



## Leo Porcello (Jul 10, 2003)

Very interesting post Plainsman! Thank you as that some interesting stuff!!!


----------



## Trapperjack (Feb 25, 2007)

Why doesn't just one of you big goose shooters claim your $700 dropzones on the refuge since nobody there can even shoot a 16 pounder. The contest has been running for 4 years now dropping a pound each year until it is won. This year all it takes is just a 15 pounder! With some of you guys claiming multiple 18 pounders :withstupid: a 15 pounder will be no problem!

Most of the biologists place the Giants in the 9-14 lb. range with 15 being the max. After weighing thousands of birds while banding and hunting all across the midwest and Sask. I have yet to see one break the 15 lb. mark. Maybe I need a different scale. :wink:


----------



## HATCHETMAN (Mar 15, 2007)

Gurney "father goose" Crawford was famous for raising a population of purported "giant" Canada geese along the front range of Colorado (fort collins) in the 50's. These geese all have the tell-tale white slash on the top of the head, and the more pronounced larger head / beak. Having shot hundreds of these geese myself I am convinced they were either smaller birds to begin with, or they have cross-bred with other sub-species. I have never seen or weighed a "colorado giant" goose over 14.7 pounds. Most research suggests the average giant canada weighs an average of 12 pounds and *"can"* reach 24 pounds. They "can" be geographically larger in some parts of the country, and I've "heard" of these huge geese on the eastern shore. These geese should be regarded as the exception rather than the rule.

By looking at the bird that Rick Mounted, you can tell that it is a very big, old bird. Gnarly arthritic feet /legs, long bill, and worn tail and wingtips. I think you are all fooled by the scale of the bird. You could make a lesser look big if you had nothing to compare scale. I applaud the mount, because typically even a great taxidermist can't make one of these beat up old geese to look worth a chit at any price...this is just the reason I don't have one in my collection. Any goose over 10 pounds in my estimation is a BIG GOOSE, and you should be proud because you've got 5 pounds of greasy, smelly jerky meat there!!
http://mdc.mo.gov/landown/wild/nuisance ... /giant.htm


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Trapperjack said:


> Why doesn't just one of you big goose shooters claim your $700 dropzones on the refuge since nobody there can even shoot a 16 pounder. The contest has been running for 4 years now dropping a pound each year until it is won. This year all it takes is just a 15 pounder! With some of you guys claiming multiple 18 pounders :withstupid: a 15 pounder will be no problem!
> 
> Most of the biologists place the Giants in the 9-14 lb. range with 15 being the max. After weighing thousands of birds while banding and hunting all across the midwest and Sask. I have yet to see one break the 15 lb. mark. Maybe I need a different scale. :wink:


You don't need a new scale, you just need to get your hands on a true _Branta canadensis maxima_. To get one of those you will have to trace the decendents of Carl Strut's birds as those in North Dakota I don't consider pure strain. However, they will hit 18 pounds at times. 
The biologists that put them in the 9 to 14 pound range is old school. Also, there are years of lag between what you learn in college, and research biologists. To get information on this you may want to check a library for professional peer reviewed literature such as the Journal of Wildlife Management, or other scientific publications. This should help:

Item Information Reprint Number: NPWRC 0089 Reprint Availability: Not Available Record Type: Monograph, Whole Peer Reviewed: No Names Author(s): Dill, H. H.; Lee, F. B. Titles Monograph Title: Home grown honkers Publishing Publisher: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Publication Place: Twin Cities, MN Year: 1970 Location in Work: 154 Links Internet Link: Full-text not available on NPWRC web site Keywords Subjects: aviculture Taxonomy: giant Canada goose Notes Notes: No notes for this product Abstract Abstract: No Abstract Available

Although this is no longer available, I have a hard cover copy from Forrest. I think I have a couple of soft cover also if anyone ever wants to read it when you pass through Jamestown.


----------



## HATCHETMAN (Mar 15, 2007)

Plainsman....I'm trying to clarify what you're saying here brother...

Correct my math if I'm wrong here, but 1970 biology = old school

What WAS taxonomically correct from a true B.c. _maxima/i]
in 1970 would certainly need to be re-examined geographically due to hybridization with other species. Hybridization frequently returns progeny exhibiting hybrid vigor (larger size and more agressive territorial breeding and feeding behavior). Perhaps there are still places where pure strain geese this big show up frequently, however it is very strange that you hear of these huge birds all the time, yet little or no repeatable proof ever shows up to back up these claims (i.e. a hunter actually weighing a wild harvested maxima in front of witnesses).

Volunteering with the CDOW to band geese from the parks here in the Front Range from Rawhide power plant south to Metro Denver (hundreds and hundreds), even with a few giants (so says state biologist) rarely does one turn up a single bird over 13 pounds.

I would easily believe that Mr. Strut's birds were hybrids to the geese much like the jumbo and melanistic ringnecks are to the pheasant world. Most of the bigger geese I've ever shot or seen shot over 13 pounds don't exhibit any characteristic of the maxima, and many of the geese that do aren't even close to 12 pounds. These could be geographically smaller purer strains, or more likely hybrids between maxima and moffitti.

It's very important to remember that geese are a very dynamic species with the tendency to crossbreed due to the fact that we've provided the perfect environment for them to do so. Many current wildlife biologists (including myself) would tend to believe that there are few if any distinct species of Canada goose anymore save the aleutian subspecies, and a few geographically isolated patches of maxima east of the mississippi. Almost all other subspecies have interbred into countless yet un-named subspecies.

_


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

If you look into it you will see that Forrest Lee was also the biologist that worked with the restoration of the Aleutian subspecies. He asked me to go with him to Amchitka (sp???) for three months to work with them, but with my bad back I was afraid I would spend two months on my back.
Forrest was very interested in species that he considered overlooked. When he moved to North Dakota and became acquainted with Carl Strutz they were off on a restoration project. If you delve into Audubon's diaries North Dakota I believe is the only region where he considered the giant to exist. There are biologists in other states who believe they have them, but I doubt they are true maximas. I also disagree with the biologists who think they became semi domesticated from 1920 to 1965 when the breeding flock was established. I don't think domestication and morphological characteristics change that fast. 
1970 = old school. I graduated before then, but I think education lags research by ten years if not more. I should perhaps call it old news, not old school. For example when I was in wildlife management classes they considered eliminating all predators best for waterfowl. Now we find refuges not allowing coyote hunting because coyotes displace fox. Nesting success is as low as 4% with fox present, but rises significantly if coyotes displace fox. 
The taxonomy of Canada subspecies will perhaps always stay in flux. However, I have personally handled over 1000 birds and had my hands on many live birds over 18 lbs. That is with a certified scientific scale.


----------



## HATCHETMAN (Mar 15, 2007)

Fair enough plainsman...just wanted to clarify where you were coming from. If it hadn't been for Gurney Crawford, there probably wouldn't be many if any geese here in Colorado like they are today. My father (70 years old) can recall the days in the '70's when you were allowed less than a dozen "carcass tags" for geese per year and the bag limit was 1 per day. Now the resident and migrating populations are bordering on uncontrollable. Kind of a catch 22 situation when captive geese are raised because we can skip hundreds, and perhaps thousands of years of natural selection to get that bigger bird. My only point is that it would be difficult if not impossible to tell what a true giant Canada goose is without having some form of genetic benchmark to compare today's geese to.

Just sayin' it would be great to get one of the major waterfowl companies to film a hunt for these "true giants" no matter what species they are to see where they are coming from. I think it would be nice to have a better understanding of their locations and behaviors to better understand what most currently resembles a mythological creature in the waterfowl hunting world!


----------



## Leo Porcello (Jul 10, 2003)

This is great stuff! Thank you guys keep it coming!!! I would love to sit down with you both, drink some coffee and just listen and learn!


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Hatchetman, I understand.
It's sad, but I think the only true full blood giants are those propagated from Carl's original flock. They were majestic birds, and what I remember most about them is the knobs they could put on your shins when you took their eggs. They successfully incubated their eggs at about 55% while if we wet with distilled water and turned them twice a day in the incubator we could get over 90%. We would steal their eggs and replace them with dummy eggs. They can tell one from two, but they can't tell two from ten so we only replaced two eggs. You could then cover the nest and after a week remove the cover and get a second clutch. When birds are this valuable you try get every egg you can out of the old hens. Feed them a 20% protein diet and steal their eggs. The high protein allows for a second clutch, and larger yolks in both clutches increasing gosling survival (reproductive energetic).


----------



## Trapperjack (Feb 25, 2007)

I'm sorry but there might be a freak goose out there that will weigh 16lbs. but for some to consistently see these birds I will call BS each and every time.

I'm just curious Plainsman, just what sub-species are we shooting here in the Midwest that range from 9-14 if they are not the maxima? Also, are you taking DNA samples from your birds and tracing them back to this Super Race? Point me too one of these mutants, I would like to see one since it would be bigger than the vast majority of any tundra swan!


----------



## HATCHETMAN (Mar 15, 2007)

Majestic indeed plainsman. 2 years ago we had a juvie swan staying at our lakes that was rather close to the body size of our bigfoot decoys. I would love to see a Canada that big coming in for a landing, let alone having the opportunity that you had to work with them!! Do you know the status of that population from Carl's original today? It would be interesting to know how well the original lines did!! Please keep us updated.

HM


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Trapperjack said:


> I'm sorry but there might be a freak goose out there that will weigh 16lbs. but for some to consistently see these birds I will call BS each and every time.
> 
> I'm just curious Plainsman, just what sub-species are we shooting here in the Midwest that range from 9-14 if they are not the maxima? Also, are you taking DNA samples from your birds and tracing them back to this Super Race? Point me too one of these mutants, I would like to see one since it would be bigger than the vast majority of any tundra swan!


It's been a lot of years since I paid much attention to the Canada goose taxonomy. If memory serves me we are to far east for moffitti, and that leaves only the interiors. I left Hanson's monograph of the Canada geese behind when I retired so now only have Scott's Waterfowl of the World as a reference. He lists moffitti as breeding in British Columbia to Saskatchewan and down to South Dakota, so we may have some. The interior often called Todd's or Central Canada Goose is what I think we are shooting around here. That is within the weight you were talking about.


----------



## Trapperjack (Feb 25, 2007)

Plainsman,

No, the interiors such as the EPP and the MVP range in weight of 6-9 lbs. There is a little overlap in weight between the adult interiors and the juvy local giants. Not only that but the interiors are not nesting in the Midwest. :roll: The early nusiance seasons are set up to kill Branta canadensis maxima, the seasons must be closed before the migrant interiors show up in force.


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

Plainsman said:


> However, I have personally handled over 1000 birds and had my hands on many live birds over 18 lbs.


Same here, most of them dead but a couple hundred alive during banding operations in the eighties. I've had a handful of birds from 14 to16 in my hands but never 18 to 20. I raised what I thought were giants for seven years from 1978 to 1985 and the largest gander weighed in at 14.5 lbs. These birds had the chacteristics described in Home Grown Honkers all but the 20lbers. There was a small network of folks that "I" knew of who raised them and in that time period and there wasn't one that tipped the scales over 15. I've spent 30+ years studying, raising and hunting these majestic birds and have never hoisted one much over 16lbs. 
A highschool bud of mine shot a 16.2 in the Riverdale area in 1977 or 1978, that was the largest honker I have seen to date.

Another great publication is Rearing and Restoring Giant Canada Geese in the Dakotas, which I believe is still avaailable thru the G&F dept.

Not declaring anyone to be false, but will remain a skeptic until it is proven in this modern day.


----------



## HATCHETMAN (Mar 15, 2007)

You are right Trapper....our average weight of the geese we took 30 sept-Oct 8 was 9.6 pounds (early season locals). Our migrants seem to be getting smaller and smaller each year....can't figure out if it's a better population of lessers, or cross-breeding with the smaller strains towards a smaller goose. We've noticed some large geese cross-breeding with smaller geese as well too in our local nesting boxes we monitor. It's interesting to see how things have changed over the years since I've been hunting them!
Distributions of many species of Canadas that were accurate even in the late 90's no longer are due to the re-distribution and population overlap of migrating and local geese. We've made things too good for them, which makes the problem of species separation even worse. Migrants are less likely to go anywhere as long as you provide them with water, safety, and food. Look at New Zealands introduced population of NON MIGRANT Canada's....that population is exploding with no end in sight....just one example of what can happen when someone decides to introduce a new adaptable species to an area. Good stuff.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> Same here, most of them dead but a couple hundred alive during banding operations in the eighties.


I'm not talking about banding, I am talking about feeding them every day, and weighing the young on different diets once a week. To much protein and their weight gain taxed their skeletal system and the wings tipped out. These birds would never fly. The optimal diet was 18% protein. Working with them for years and watching their weight gains, their egg production, rearing and releasing about 12,000. Unless you were there in the early days you never had your hands on a true giant.

I think people who think they are working with giants are working with the birds that were a cross from Carl Strut's birds and the birds from the Rochester, Minnesota flock. The hybrid was created because it was thought Carl's birds would have a problem in migration. You looked at them and wondered how they could get off the ground. That cross we always referred to as giant canadas. Today people think they are working with giants, but they are not.

I agree the birds I am shooting around here these days are not as large as the geese I released in the mid 1970's. In the last couple years that I have hunted geese my largest is 14 pounds. I think there is hybridization occurring, but some areas of the state are retaining the giant characteristics better than others.

I think the argument occurs with taxonomists so often because so much hybridization is occurring. There are lumpers and splitters in taxonomy and this argument will continue into the next millennium.

For those of you who think you are working with giants, I am certain you are not. We simply have a different perspective because of the history behind the development of today's giants that many are unaware of.


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

Plainsman said:


> Unless you were there in the early days you never had your hands on a true giant.
> 
> Today people think they are working with giants, but they are not.
> 
> For those of you who think you are working with giants, I am certain you are not.


I think you got your point across. :roll: I claimed they had characteristics, never said they were definitvely. I am going on "my" experiences and those who also were involved in breeding and rearing honkers in that era.

Also, I too believe that the gene pool is so watered down that the "true" giants have bred out of the picture.

Here I'll give you the expert on Canada goose award Plainsman, but until you crap me an 18lber in this modern day I'll call bullshiat everytime. OK?


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Today I think you will have to go to France if you want to see the big one. Carl sold a large portion of his flock to some nobleman who owned his own castle, his own game keeper, and his own wildlife biologist. Carl stayed with them for a month and tought them the proper care of his birds. I don't know where the rest of that flock was dispersed.

I'm not a canada goose expert, far from it. Please forgive me if I have been snooty about this. I just happened to be around when things were happening, and took care of Carl's geese whenever he was out of town. Waterfowl is not my expertise. Overall there are perhaps many people on here who know more about waterfowl. I don't hunt waterfowl much, but I do know the behavior of the big ones well enough to be very successful when I do. Although the genetics are watered down some of their distinct behavior remains.


----------



## dukegoose (Jul 17, 2006)

Grab a scale this fall and see what is what. I will be taking length too. No cheating!! If there's no monsters out there, then that is that. I know there's areas like Chippewa County WI, where the greaters were reintroduced by a couple in the 1960's. You will not see any small geese in that area. I'm just saying that there is probebly areas of the country that have stronger genes in the breeding flocks then other areas of the country.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Plainsman have you ever seen my father's mount when it hung at Gun and Reel?

He still has it hanging on his wall in the garage, though it has shrunk significantly in 20 years. You should take a trip over there... it's just around the "block" from you.

We've discussed this topic before, and my friend Rick who is serving with the Marines in Iraq wrote an article about it. I expanded on it here:

http://www.nodakoutdoors.com/forums/vie ... 4&start=40

http://www.nodakoutdoors.com/forums/alb ... ic_id=1500

I really doubt if we'll ever see a goose like this again.. as others have said, too much inbreeding/cross breeding, too much pressure, and the elimination of the "No Canada Goose" zones will make it unlikely to see one of these in the wild.

Here is the pic:

[siteimg]1500[/siteimg]

p.s is it no longer possible to link to pics in the gallery? Need to go find out..

Ryan


----------



## wateroutfitter (May 3, 2007)

sorry guys seen lots at 18 lb but up here we got one on record 22lb caught on the st lawrence river near Cornwall ont where I hunt .Got some with wing span excedding the tailgate of my f150 ford by 6 inches on both side we get lots of the big bird they are our resident flock great to have


----------



## HATCHETMAN (Mar 15, 2007)

Fellas....nobody is saying that an 18 pound goose doesn't exist, or has never been taken because they have; however those of us who are science minded need "proof" as it were of one these days. I'll guarantee you If an 18 pound goose was even a 1 in a thousand chance, someone would have cashed in on those dropzones....at the very least you would see such a monster on the forum(s). Back in the day (late 60's-80's) where most of the "giant" re-introductions occured people did kill big geese frequently, because they were isolated populations of big geese with no cross-breeding....even then an 18 pound goose was a treasure. Now these are non-captive wild populations I am talking about...those that have had a chance to survive atleast one breeding season without human aid, care and feeding. Nobody is telling you guys that you are full of bullchit forever, you're just full of bullchit for now until you produce an 18 pounder.

Wateroutfitter....PICS??


----------



## Trapperjack (Feb 25, 2007)

Giant Canadas were here before we arrived as well as all the other sup-species. Where is the real proof that there is actual cross-breeding occurring that is diluting the giant bloodlines? The interiors and lessors have maintained their natural weight yet the giants are somehow loosing their average size? Talking with actual biologists no time in history has there ever been more local Giant Canada Geese.

I find it hard to believe that a *WILD* Canada could reach the 18 lb. mark and yet still fly let alone migrate. There always can be a freak of nature in the population which IMO would be a 16 pounder. Some of you boys need to join the refuge and claim them Dropzones since it only will take a little ol 15 pounder this year. Keep in mind, a few years ago, guys shooting an 18-20 pound goose on the refuge was a dime a dozen until this contest was started. Now the only ones you hear about are the ones shot by a friend's neighbor who has a cousin that used to know a big time goose killer! :beer:


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Trapperjack said:


> I find it hard to believe that a *WILD* Canada could reach the 18 lb. mark and yet still fly let alone migrate. There always can be a freak of nature in the population which IMO would be a 16 pounder.


Glad to see you find it hard to believe. Are you a wildlife biologist? Let me introduce you to Plainsman. You might have heard of him on here?...



Trapperjack said:


> Now the only ones you hear about are the ones shot by a friend's neighbor who has a cousin that used to know a big time goose killer


Did you read my last post? That was my father.. we still have the mounted bird hanging. It was verified on a couple different scales, and hung for public display for a year. It's too bad the RefugeForums didn't exist back in those days with that bet...

It is definitely possible that those birds used to exist. Whether or not in today's world you could still find one that big remains to be seen.

:eyeroll:

Ryan


----------



## HATCHETMAN (Mar 15, 2007)

Trapper... Yes there are more "local" Canada geese, and most of them are larger geese. Many of them DO NOT fit the ORIGINAL morphological and biological descriptions of the TRUE Giant Canada as originally described. The original descriptions also noted geese of much larger size as well, which Make no mistake atleast in the central flyway that true giant bloodlines are/ have been diluted. Here's a good read from the USGS that everyone here should take a look at. This article pretty much tells you that there isn't a genetic benchmark set for Giant Canadas...atleast not with the USGS.

*http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/birds/gcanada/central.htm*


----------



## Rick Acker (Sep 26, 2002)

Damn, look what happens when I go to a softball tourney for the weekend. I think the reason why nobody claims those decoys, because believe it or not...Most hunters don't live on the these chat forums...And probably don't even know about the offer. I know I didn't. Most don't give a Sh#t about bands, how big a bird is, and other things to stroke their ego's..WISH I would've took & posted a picture with the hook of the fish scale in the carcus of that bird...I had no IDEA this was such a big deal...I know I shot a 14 or 15 pounder myself a few years ago...Not that far off...Probably similiar to 4 Curls pic...Oh, is it the Refuge that's offering the decoys? If it is...That's why nobody is cashing in...I have been a member waiting for my activation for about TWO YEARS!


----------



## CrashNX (May 7, 2004)

Copied this from a post I made on the Refuge Forums. Its nice to see some on here who have had first hand experience with these birds and I get the sense that what I have to offer is not falling on deaf ears.

That being said, Ill go ahead and throw in my two cent from studies, research and first hand accounts relating to these big birds. As far as any documented credible studies/data relating to the existence of the high weights on geese so many have been discussing for so long...I wrote a research paper for a Biology class having to do with human response to population expansion and coexistence with wildlife species and focused my report on canada geese in MN. I visited several libraries in the state of Mn, among them the MN Dept of Natural Resources reference library, for research and information. I came across harvest data from Minnesota hunting seasons in the 60s that included biologist recorded weights of canada geese harvested on specific wildlife areas within the state. If memory serves me correctly, this data included DNR documented photos and weights of canada geese harvested by hunters up to 17 or perhaps 18 pounds and several birds in the 14-16 pound range each season. This data is listed in a book located in the St Cloud State University library as well as the MN DNR reference library if anyone is interested in searching it out and verifying my memory of everything as I dont have time to do so currently...but will do my best to make it there sometime soon. Was able to find this blurb on the US fish and wildlife website though from a news release dated April of 1963,

"A 22-pound world's record goose killed in Canada in the late 1930's was
undoubtedly one of the giant subspecies. Although the giant Canada goose was well
known to a past generation of hunters in the Northern Prairie States, present-day
biologists considered it a myth until James Moffitt, America's foremost student
of geese, was convinced of its existence. Mr. Moffitt's death in World War II
delayed the publishing of his findings. In 1951, Jean Delacour, the internationally
known waterfowl authority, supported Mr. Moffitt's findings by describing
and naming the giant Canada goose after it was thought to be extinct."

Granted this data is 40 years old, but if these verified reports do exist (again not sure on the exact weights) it does credibly prove IMO that these very large birds were around at one time or another. The maximum weight of giants ranges from 12 all the way up to 25 pounds in published reports from biologists. Why there arent as many of these large birds now...who knows?...The theory of genetic contamination among subspecies would be my best guess as well. Evidence of the Bc moffitti subspecies intro/reintroduction from the western US have an interesting overlap with Bc maxima efforts in northwest MN during the 30s and 40s and would seem to corroborate theories of possible interbreeding between the two subspecies even then, thus canceling out a genetic drift explanation for the smaller sizes of the maxima subspecies thereafter. Also consider the longer lifecycle of not only geese but most every other species as well before the popularity of sport hunting/fishing took off. How many world record fish popular to American anglers were caught in the last 20 years?? These creatures simply had longer to live and grow IMO because they werent harvested as quickly due to the lack of hunters/fisherman during those time periods. The average age of 70% of all the geese harvested during fall hunting seasons is less than one year old. Sure there was much more subsistence hunting taking place, but harvest numbers arent anywhere near what they currently are for most every animal 40 years ago...and most can agree there were far, far more waterfowl back then. The giant canadas may well have been close to extinction, however, and one does have to take this into consideration when focusing on these harvest numbers, seeing as those circumstances would seem to ensure a lessor age of the individual birds included in the data simply because they were most likely a reintroduced population that probably did not have much time to mature...again...who knows.

And finally, I know Ill catch hell for this, but I have seen a 17 pound bird with my own eyes shot my by next door neighbor about 10 years ago and weighed on a certified butchers scale...he has a pic, but no idea where it is...if it should ever surface again, Ill be sure to post it. Also a 19 pound Three Rivers Park District (right outside the Twin Cities metro) bird shot by a very close friend's little brother this past season. I did not see the bird myself, but many others did. Although not weighed on a certified scale, several digital fishing scales were used to verify the incredible weight all within a few ounces of each other. By the time I heard about it, the bird was cleaned and on the 'yote pile as they did not know about the big goose contest...or even that the 'fuge existed for that matter. Nothing for anyone of the people, including my brother, who saw the bird to gain by lying and I believe them 100%.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Rick Acker said:


> =Oh, is it the Refuge that's offering the decoys? If it is...That's why nobody is cashing in...I have been a member waiting for my activation for about TWO YEARS!


Ditto


----------



## dukegoose (Jul 17, 2006)

The Refuge?


----------



## HATCHETMAN (Mar 15, 2007)

Maybe some of us think differently about hunting and the resource I guess than others do. I've hunted waterfowl for over 20 years, and even those folks who have hunted....even seldomly would have no more thrown a 17....or 19 pound goose carcass in the 'yote pile than the skull plates of a 200" class whitetail or 330" bull elk without as much as a second glance without considering that bird significant. 
Come on now....you just look at the difference between a 9 pounder, and 11 pounder, and a 12 pounder...there are huge differences in anatomy and body build in that small amount of weight difference. Then you want to add another lesser/cackler goose to that figure with another 4-6 pounds? Even if you haven't even killed a half-dozen geese in your whole life, you know you're looking at something significant there even if you "don't / couldn't give two chits". 
As far as the geese being too young at the time of harvest to reach full weight...I don't buy it. There are big geese in the parks in the Denver and Fort Collins areas that have lived longer than a decade, and surprisingly enough haven't gained an ounce despite their diets of grain, wonderbread, and sod...they never leave town, they don't have to, and such is the case in many municipalities.
My only points are that nobody really seems to know what a true giant Canada goose is these days. A true _B.C. maxima_, a _maxima moffitti cross, or large strain moffitti??_ Maybe next time before you throw all of those huge geese in the chitcan, call your area biologist; throw the carcass in the freezer whole & unbutchered, contact the USGS, and be a steward for the resource. Believe me your kill will look more significant to a biologist than it looks in a steaming pile in the cattails.


----------



## Trapperjack (Feb 25, 2007)

Am I a biologist? NO. After graduating with a degree in Natural Resources I chose a different career path after working for several years in the field and not enjoying it. I do however keep in contact with many biologists and still volunteer for many projects including banding of the local Giant Canada Geese. One of the biologist that I know very well has been a big part of my state's reintroduction of Giants from the get go. After thousands upon thousands of birds handled each year he has still not weighed one over 15lbs! IA's program started back in the early 70's when some have said all the big geese were fairly common.

Crasnx,

There are more Geese now then there ever was 40 years ago! In the majority of the states, killing a goose was rare feat and the whole town talked about it. Now, you have a lot of guys country wide that kill many more geese than ducks each year. The numbers aren't even close! Also, most birds harvested each and every year are the young and dumb, this is nothing new. Birds are not reptiles which continue to grow each and every year, these birds will reach their peak size in only a couple of years if that.

There are many old reports that describe the weights commonly in the 20's but there are even more that are just as old that describe the Giant in the same weight class as we see today. Who do we believe? I'm going with what is believable and that is the 9-14 lb class with a few freaks mixed in.

The contest at the duckhunter.net is being put on by Paul Sulivan the owner of Dropzone decoys. The winner must send him the bird to verify weight and to make sure the bird was wild. Surely the majority of goose hunters are not aware of the contest but the refuge is huge with a cross section of some of the most dedicated goose hunters in the country and still the contest has not been won. The refuge is also the number 1 waterfowl site for number of members and hits. As said before, there were all kinds of guys claiming monster geese until Paul started this contest. Who would've thought that with so many big goose killers that the contest is now on it's 4th year! Join up and claim your decoys!!! Keep in mind that pictures of so-called big geese will only get you laughed off the site!


----------



## northerngoosehunter (Mar 22, 2006)

I agree that someone who has banded a thousand geese is a good resource when it comes to goose knowledge. However, one thing I would say is that many of these biologists are banding geese in the summer months during or after the molt when the geese are not concerned with eating corn every day and are probably trying to loose some insulation instead of putting on fat. I think everyone would agree that a goose in August or September is going to weigh a few pounds more come November. In my opinion this could be PART of the reason for discrepancies between biologists and hunters.

Just my two cents, now bring on the criticism.


----------



## Heavy Hitter (Dec 10, 2004)

northerngoosehunter said:


> I agree that someone who has banded a thousand geese is a good resource when it comes to goose knowledge. However, one thing I would say is that many of these biologists are banding geese in the summer months during or after the molt when the geese are not concerned with eating corn every day and are probably trying to loose some insulation instead of putting on fat. I think everyone would agree that a goose in August or September is going to weigh a few pounds more come November. In my opinion this could be PART of the reason for discrepancies between biologists and hunters.
> 
> Just my two cents, now bring on the criticism.


That makes too much sense.... next!?!?!?


----------



## HATCHETMAN (Mar 15, 2007)

Northern&#8230;the studies done on the subject are "vague" as to exactly what happens, but one study on interior Canadas found that geese fed unlimited rations of pre-determined protein and fat gained weight gradually (up to 10 or 12%), and were their heaviest peak weight being attained by late March / Early April. You could probably realistically expect a goose shot during hunting season to be less than a pound difference under these conditions. The speculation is that their weight gain was due to an internal breeding response. Generally the molt is the most taxing on the birds, but at the tune of even 10% we're talking an 18 pound goose being 16.2 pounds at the time of banding if it were part of this rationale. Keep in mind that most of these studies took place from the late 60's to the late 80's. Twenty plus years have passed, and we now have many short-migrating flocks, or non migrant flocks of big geese that live in completely different environments with completely different food sources available to them where this food never used to be available. This puts another variable into the equation, because the foraging efficiency of a goose is typically much higher on greens than grains (meaning it can get more, faster). This combined with the likelihood that different species of geese have different energetic requirements and forage efficiencies it would take FIELD STUDIES on statistically significant numbers to get accurate results. This same study also supports data that geese can lose significant amounts of weight when food is sparse along the migratory path, much like occurred this year with the nasty blizzards through the central flyway. The answer here is not as simple as as you may like it to be.... the real discrepancy here is not the lack of information between hunters and biologists, but rather the lack of categorical proof that 18 pound geese are *commonly* harvested by hunters in the U.S. or any other country. Criticism?


----------



## Trapperjack (Feb 25, 2007)

As stated, fat content could factor in a little but they are not going to tack on 4 or 5 lbs of fat and still expect to fly! The biologists that I'm getting my info from have handled thousands of geese each and every year starting back to when they were first introduced as pen raised birds with many many years of no hunting. These birds continued to be the brood stock for local Canadas throughout the East and Midwest. They have now become a nuisance in most areas. These birds are the Giant sub-species that range in weight from 9-14lbs. With that said a 14lb. goose is extremely rare and should be considered a trophy!


----------



## HATCHETMAN (Mar 15, 2007)

:beer:


----------



## lesserlover1 (Nov 28, 2006)

i have a book it is called Rearing and restoring GAINT CANADA geese in the Dakotas. PG-11 says Breeding stock - males 30 months or older 14 pounds to 9 1/2lbs..... females 12lbs to 8 1/2lbs. . they were measured and weighted in the winter of 1969. so were you people shoot your 18lbs plus i would love to see it. i think sum of you are full of [email protected]#.


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

:lol: Reality is setting in!! :beer:

Trapperjack, spot on. The rest of you 18lber experts, show me the money.
8) 
Certainly shooting an 18lb goose made the local fishwrap somewhere boys, not?


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

4CurlRedleg said:


> The rest of you 18lber experts, show me the money.
> 8)
> Certainly shooting an 18lb goose made the local fishwrap somewhere boys, not?


Yes Darin. I take it you still don't believe my example?

See my post on previous page with link/picture. I think I've made my point. The mount still exists. It was hung for public display. For the rest of you naysayers... "nuff said.

Ryan


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

lesserlover1 said:


> i have a book it is called Rearing and restoring GAINT CANADA geese in the Dakotas. PG-11 says Breeding stock - males 30 months or older 14 pounds to 9 1/2lbs..... females 12lbs to 8 1/2lbs. . they were measured and weighted in the winter of 1969. so were you people shoot your 18lbs plus i would love to see it. i think sum of you are full of [email protected]#.


I have been looking for my copy. Could you tell me the author? I am afraid I may have inadvertently given away my last copy.
Did you notice the fellow with the net weighing geese? Did you notice that fellow washing eggs? You didn't happen to see the guy with the incubator open holding all the Giant eggs did you? Say hello.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Plainsman said:


> lesserlover1 said:
> 
> 
> > i have a book it is called Rearing and restoring GAINT CANADA geese in the Dakotas. PG-11 says Breeding stock - males 30 months or older 14 pounds to 9 1/2lbs..... females 12lbs to 8 1/2lbs. . they were measured and weighted in the winter of 1969. so were you people shoot your 18lbs plus i would love to see it. i think sum of you are full of [email protected]#.
> ...


LMAO! Get the point lesserlover1 and some of you other armchair "experts" ? Like I said... I'd like to introduce some of you to....

Plainsman.

:rollin: :rollin: :rollin: :rollin: :rollin:


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

That is funny, especially the part you quoted with the weights of the geese. 

Plainsman no one is trying to impune your integrity with the work you did for the restoration, without that work who knows where they would be today.
The next time I visit with Mike Johnson I will be having a discussion about Giants and some of the things he has come across.

Ryan, anyone can claim whatever they want on the internet. Showing a pic of a dusty short necked goose doesn't make it so. Certainly there must be an article from your hometown newspaper to back up the claim?

When my highschool buddy shot the large goose back in the late seventies it was in the McLean County Independent on the following Tuesday. 18lb proof is all I need.


----------



## PJ (Oct 1, 2002)

All I know is that when I shot my Swan a few years back I threw that on a scale, (at the Kenmare Goose Fest) and the Swan weighed 17 lbs. I have shot a ton of geese and none of them were even close to being as large as the Swan was. My :2cents:


----------



## HATCHETMAN (Mar 15, 2007)

RYAN... THANK YOU!
As a current day wildlife biologist working independently & currently as a private lands wildlife & fisheries biologist I can now add "armchair expert" to my resume!!

Most of us are aware of Plainsmans credentials, and nobody disputes his knowledge of the geese he worked with in the era he worked with them. Where exactly in this discussion was it that I attacked those credentials? As a biologist I rather enjoyed hearing his stories about the geese he worked with. I am not disputing the mount you have pictures of, I am not disputing the existence *somewhere* of an 18 pound goose but from a scientific point of view in the current decade we have little or no proof of geese this big being as common as stated by the real "armchair experts". Those that would readily spew forth claims of MODERN DAY multiple kills on 18 pound geese without documenting their kills to biologists so that we may gain knowledge of the larger races of geese. Really the only reason this discussion is so great is that perhaps maybe some of the folks on here will learn something about geese that they didn't know. They will learn that geese are dynamic creatures. They will be aware of the differences in goose populations as told by many of us on here who have had hands on experience with them. It's like I said before, the next time you kill a big goose; even larger than 16 pounds, you should make damned sure to give your area waterfowl biologist a call, because this is a significant individual among the population, and something productive (genetically, morphologically, etc.) could be learned from it.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

4curl

Old age is a sucker, I did get the two books mixed up. I had not looked at either one for 30 years. I found my Homegrown Honker, but Raising and Restoring Giant Canadas I am still looking for. I kept about a dozen around and must have given the last one away thinking I had plenty. 
I have never seen birds imprint more than those young giants, but then I guess I imprinted on them also. I just started hunting geese again after 34 years. I think those I raised should all be dead now. On the first release of 250 birds I went 100 miles every day to see how they were doing. I was sick one day when a farmer who had a permit to mow a Waterfowl Production Area had mowed right through the flock cutting the legs of 30 or 40 birds. Seeing the dead ones laying around in the mowed hay was bad enough, but the ones with only one leg still alive trying to swim ----what can I say.
I thought we had a lot of Carl Strutz's birds, but my memory was bad again. There were many aviculturists and as I mentioned many of the biologists thought Carl's birds were to large to be typical of the Giant Canada Goose. Carl's birds were not the most expensive until the records of Audubon were discovered. Then many looked at Carl's birds as the genotype of the Giant Canada. 
Aviculturists who are should be given credit for the preservation of the subspecies would include Gullickson, Jager, Hoffmeister, Strutz (spelled his name right that time) Boswell, Wallace, and Kern.
Some of these birds come from Minnesota, and some From North Dakota. Many of the Minnesota birds can be traced historically back to Wallace's flock at Seney National Wildlife Refuge in Michigan. From there many were transported to Mud Lake in Minnesota. Before that flock disappeared a fellow by the name of Matin Gullickson took two eggs from a nest and reared the birds. He built a large flock, but his favorite bird was "Ole". Ole was a gander that tipped the butcher's scale at 18 pounds. Page 4, Homegrown Honker.
Although the birds released in North Dakota were slightly smaller I think the genetics are there for a few birds to be over 18 pounds. They are not plentiful, and may be rare, but the possibility is nearly inevitable.

My only point is this is like the deer that scores over 225 and everyone starts screaming pen hunt, or some other comments to detract from it because the are jealous they didn't get it. I should never have gotten into this little whizz match, but the comments that these birds don't or can't exist was just wrong.
Please understand that I am not attacking any people. I was just trying to defend others, and it was also my feeble attempt to try end some of the negativity. A big elk comes on and someone says it's a high fence hunt. Someone reports a large walleye and someone "calls bs", a large deer is pictured and someone "calls bs", a taxidermist reports a large goose (thank you Rick for sharing that) and someone "calls bs". I just thought there are some people out there that don't know it all and should be informed as such. Negativity in itself doesn't need to be offensive to the original poster.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Plainsman said:


> Please understand that I am not attacking any people. I was just trying to defend others, and it was also my feeble attempt to try end some of the negativity. A big elk comes on and someone says it's a high fence hunt. Someone reports a large walleye and someone "calls bs", a large deer is pictured and someone "calls bs", a taxidermist reports a large goose (thank you Rick for sharing that) and someone "calls bs". I just thought there are some people out there that don't know it all and should be informed as such. Negativity in itself doesn't need to be offensive to the original poster.


I agree. I too am saddened that some summarily dismiss someone's else's account based on "gut feeling" and heresay. I could truly care less if anyone knew of a goose from 20 years ago shot by so and so, mounted here, weighed there etc.. it goes more towards the fact they DID used to exist, and some were weighed and verified for authenticity.

FYI Darin.. many people in Jamestown saw that goose both right after it was shot, and for a year hanging in Jamestown's only sporting good store. If you would have seen the mount in it's prime, it was the size of a small swan, and the measurements taken proved that out. The picture you are referring to was taken a year or so ago, fully 20 years later. I've no idea if there was an article in the newspaper back then. I was in 5th? Grade at the time, and I don't believe the internet existed the way it does now back then, and even if it did, I doubt the Jamestown Sun was progressive enough to have an online forum. I guess you'll have to ask someone from the area who was around then.

I've been told that mounts shrink over time. That is why I placed the Redhead behind it for a size comparison. The style of the mount, the "cupped" wings etc.. were all intentionally done so we could fit the mount into our staircase hallway. Imagine the size of the goose from 20 years ago at it's full size, seeing as how it dwarfs the redhead in that picture now.

~R


----------



## nodakoutdoors.com (Feb 27, 2002)

Good post Plainsman. I find it kind of funny that people get so worked up for a weight of a goose. This wasn't the first time and I'm sure it won't be the last.

I have never seen an 18 lb goose. I have shot one just 5 ounces shy of 16 lbs and I had it weighed in many goose contests. The funny thing is, this wasn't the largest bird of that flock either. I shot at the largest and with the strong wind that day the goose behind it came down.  These were geese that came down at the VERY end of the migration on the east side of the state, probably from way up north.

Just like there is some freak fish, freak deer, etc. there has to be a couple of freakishly large geese. Personally I think a couple of these monsters exist, just probably don't fall for any decoy spreads. 

Gotta love urban legends!!


----------



## Trapperjack (Feb 25, 2007)

Plainsman,

I would have truly liked to have seen what you did over the years. However, some of your posts do not add up especially when you said that the interior's weight fell into the 9-14 lb. range and those geese are probably our local geese that we now have nuisance seasons set up for. That was a big error in basic goose biology IMO which puts a big question mark on your other posts. Force feeding tame birds is one thing but having wild birds at that weight is a whole different ball game.

Ryan,

Hearsay and gut feelings????? You were 10 and now have your father's goose mount that is 20 years old. I was killing geese for many years at that time and the geese were no bigger or smaller than they are now! Taxidermists can do a lot of things to a mount but one thing they can't do is keep it's original weight. That mount isn't going to shrink assuming the hide was dry when mounted. At age 10 I'm sure you thought it looked bigger. A picture of a mount proves absolutely nothing anyway. Sorry but that is the facts.

Funny story but my father and I were hunting just south of Rochester, MN one Dec. day back in the early 80's. We were lucky that day and harvested a couple of monsters. My father told me that we just shot a couple of 20 pounders after picking them up. They were huge especially one of them which ranks right up there still as one of the biggest geese I've ever seen. However, we took the birds into the local supermarket and the biggest weighed 14.6. To reach 18lbs that bird would've had to have been close to 25% bigger! I've never seen one in a park or flying that is that much bigger than an extremely large Giant except for swans.

I'm sure this post will piss a few people off!


----------



## HATCHETMAN (Mar 15, 2007)

This has been a very interesting and dynamic discussion! It's amazing to see how our poor 18 pound honker has morphed from a "we shot several last season" type of argument to an "urban legend". It was great to hear all of the viewpoints! I'm still hopeful somebody will re-open the books with a giant-sized honker one of these days. I would enjoy a specialists point of view on the status of these birds! :beer:


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Trapper

I know most of the geese around here, that the season is for, are descendants of geese I released, and yes we call them giants. When you asked what it was you were shooting in the 9 poun range I simply guessed at what it could be other than giants. If your not shooting giants and they are 9 pounds I really have no idea what they are. Put one in my hand, let me measure the tarsus, culmen, and wing and I will take a guess. Like I said I am not a Canada goose taxonomist. If you want to talk aquatic macro invertebrate taxonomy, wetland ecology, or botany then your in my game. I'm not going to claim to be something I am not. For heaven sake, don't judge my biological abilities on Canada geese. I just happened to be around as a young just getting started technician, when the core of this work was done. It was my first job out of college.

I didn't get into this to have a whiz match with you. I got into it because of all the negativity that is created by self proclaimed experts. Try to enjoy the site. Some of that is lost when people would rather baffle us with bs than dazzle us with brilliance. People tell others that they couldn't have seen an 18 pound goose, because they haven't. People with that attitude need to get over themselves. If you have not held a goose over 20 pounds live in your hand how can you judge others? 
If people want to brag about themselves go ahead, but please try to do it without insinuating people like Ryan and Rick are stupid, liars, or both. If your to impressed with yourself to respect others the thread will get locked. I can't believe people get this worked up over the weight of a goose. 
This is childish, and none productive. I would guess it will lead to stricter rules to eliminate the trouble makers. To bad, but it is one of those things that detracts from the site.
I have not read many of Rick's posts, but I give people the benefit of the doubt, and if he says he weighed the bird I am confident he did. Many of the posts I have read look to me like a sneak attack on his credibility, and not very sneaky at that. Ryan I don't know personally, but through his posts I have learned he is a credible person. As for those who demand proof, there is no one here who owes you proof because your are a "science minded person", and I don't think you will get it from an already mounted bird. You're a scientist, so was I, but this is a place for sportsmen and women to enjoy themselves. If you want to get deeper into the science get into the professional journals. I come on here as an outdoorsman to enjoy myself with other outdoor people, not to judge their integrity. This thread and some people have really disappointed me.


----------



## Leo Porcello (Jul 10, 2003)

I know I have never shot one that I felt was over 14lbs. HOWEVER one time here in this great state it was stoeger, my father in law and myself. We had a small flock coming right at us. I stated something along the lines of it being kind of late for swans to still be around. Big birds, the slowest wing beat I have seen on a flapping geese. I was still shooting my SP10. The flock slid off about 45 to 50 yards. It was cold, at this point we were skunked, I had my father in law in town, so normally I would have called that shot. I did not because of the birds sheer size. So I don't know how big they were and I won't guess. However I know they were and to date still are the biggest freaking honkers I have ever seen in my life. I mean they just looked like freaks that nothing has ever come close too. Also they were never more than 15 to 20 yards off the ground. I have no regrets not calling the shot but I still wonder... My personal records refer to it as the ghost flock. I feel better knowing that someday I may meet up with that flock again.

Once again this has truely been an educational thread. A little emototion here and there but I commend Plainsman for keeping his cool as he is letting us in on some ND Goose history that a lot of us don't know about.

Speaking of ND geese. I find it odd, strange, upsetting that so much was done to restore them and now it seems like when these birds are getting offed by farmers with out permits, harassed at parks and so on a lot of people are looking the other way. I know that was off subject but...


----------



## HATCHETMAN (Mar 15, 2007)

Plainsman,
I apologize that I offended you with my "science minded" and biological approach to this discussion on the 18 pound goose (of which I believe you were the first one in the thread to start this discussion). Rest assured that my attempts were the same as yours, to share information with like minded outdoorsman from a scientific point of view, a point of view that the average joe rarely gets to see. I had no idea that offering a different viewpoint from a different time and place would be so offensive to you and the rest of the community. I'm not implying that you or anyone else "owes" me proof of the existence of such birds, rather I was trying to "discuss" what exactly a Giant Canada is these days, and what the real world chances are of harvesting them. And for the rest of you that I have offended, please accept my apologies for trying to broaden your horizons.


----------



## Trapperjack (Feb 25, 2007)

Plainsman,,

I'm sorry that I got your panties in a bind but I've read these "stories" for years and until one is shot and verified to win this contest I'm going to continue to claim BS. Prove me wrong with an 18 pounder, If it ever happens I will gladly congratulate the hunter and admit I'm wrong. However, I'm not going accept a bird from a mount or a picture. There are many pictures of Bigfoot and UFO's do you believe the people telling those stories as well? Believe what you want, that is completely in your right.

If I shoot a juvenile goose weighing in around 9 lbs. I know it's not an interior but your very common giant local Canada. You were way off base by suggesting Interiors in the 9-14 lb. range.


----------



## lesserlover1 (Nov 28, 2006)

Plainsman... all that it says is Published by North Dakota game and fish bismarck, N.D in 1984.


----------



## GW (May 31, 2007)

I participate in several online outdoors websites, and this has been one of the most interesting and informative threads I've read.
Some good info here.
Greg


----------



## Rick Acker (Sep 26, 2002)

I caught a 19 inch smallie that is pictured in the bass section here on nodak over the weekend...Anybody want to dispute that as well? Maybe it's only 18 inches and I fudged a little? When it comes down to it, I really don't care if you believe me or not? Could it be that my fish scale was off a pound or 2? Maybe, but I did weigh it...18.3 is what I remember, when I skinned out over a year ago. Wasn't that big of a deal to me...I didn't write it down...I didn't look to see if I could win some crappy decoys over it. I just knew it was big and didn't realize there is a whopper club for Canada's. The guys who shot it said it was over 18!
I myself don't get worked up over the weight of a fish, let alone a bird...My dad claims he shot a mallard so big once it was dragging on the ground when he carried it by the feet. (He was probably stretching the truth a bit? J/k pops) Everybody is entitled to their opinion, but I guess that makes me a LIAR? I know what I saw on the digital scale. Let me stress again for you neysayers...Next time you are in Lamoure, stop by the Warckens...Real nice people and I'm sure they would be glad to show it to you!


----------



## HATCHETMAN (Mar 15, 2007)

Thanks for your input GW... I had hoped this is the way most people would feel about this information!

:beer:


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Hatchetman, I did enjoy most of yours. It's good to hear what birds are like in your neck of the woods. Now we know the weight, it would be interesting to hear about behavior and breeding age, some information on known physiological differences etc., but that might just start another flurry of "I Call bs". It was interesting that you called one fellow father goose. That's what everyone around here called Forrest Lee. Even a few Japanese visitors referred to him as father goose. We may have to pm each other if this thread can't stay civilized. 
I just didn't like some of the nose in the air I don't believe Rick, because no one has as much experience as me attitude coming from some people. I think I am allergic to poor manners. I respect everyone automatically, until they do something to destroy that respect. I also don't reserve respect for the rich or the brilliant. 
I am very pleased you understand my frustration with this thread. To those who don't understand it buy some more bands from Cabela's for your call lanyard and you will feel better.


----------



## HATCHETMAN (Mar 15, 2007)

Fair enough Plainsman....just wanted to clear the air on that one! Rick handled that goose in person, and he knows what he saw, and just as long as he's satisfied with it, well, that's all that should really matter! Right???

:beer: HM


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

HATCHETMAN said:


> Fair enough Plainsman....just wanted to clear the air on that one! Rick handled that goose in person, and he knows what he saw, and just as long as he's satisfied with it, well, that's all that should really matter! Right???
> 
> :beer: HM


Well ---- close, but it would be better if people forgot the "call bs" it's really getting old. We can each decide if Rick is right or not, but questioning his integrity in public is extremely poor manners. I know you didn't do that, but it needs to be pointed out to others. I don't frequent many other outdoor sites, and don't care how people talk to one another on them. I do care about this one, and my personal opinion is don't let one person chase away a dozen.

Thanks you for the understanding response hatchetman.


----------



## Ridge Nelson (Jan 19, 2006)

Is there a link to the thread on the refuge about the big goose dropzone contest?


----------



## GWar19 (Jun 29, 2007)

I would have never thought that shooting an 18 lb Honker would be such a touchy subject. I shot the goose in late November of 2005. An amazing morning, and I have the mount to remember it, always. I hear it looks great, Rick. I can't wait to see it. My brother says he can't even fit it in his basement. The picture is take the morning after the hunt. The goose is on the left. It's just simply huge. They *DO* exist.
Greg


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

Plainsman, HATCHETMAN, is that a true 18lb giant canada??


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Heck, I can't tell from a picture. However, I would guess it is simply because why else would anyone stick their finger into this buzz saw. The length of culmen, tarsus, and wing would still tell you what it was, but not how much it weighed.


----------



## Old Hunter (Mar 8, 2002)

I have followed this same debate for several years on different sites. The outcome is always the same.Does any one know if Brenans sporting goods is still operating in Pelican Rapids ? They had a big goose contest for many years. If central Minnesota was the area where the big ones come from this may be the place to look. I am going to make some calls and see if I can get any information on their records. One the other hand do you really want to know? If we find that there are none you cant dream of of an 18 lb'er coming into the decoys.


----------



## Trapperjack (Feb 25, 2007)

If the goose on the left is 18 then the goose on the right is 20 and the one in the middle is 17.

Sorry couldn't resist, but I would expect an 18lb bird to be 20-25% larger than any goose I've ever seen and those birds don't appear to be any different than your common big Midwestern Giants.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Really? I can't tell that much from pictures.

Trapper, I don't think you have gotten my hint. Your new here, try to respect others. A new fellow comes on with their first post and you insinuate they are liars. It's easy to see your a young pup that knows everything, but try to respect others. They enjoy respect as much as you. I think I will lock this thread as it appears you just can't get a hint. 
This isn't a scientific publication that needs your editing. It is an outdoor site where a 15 year old farm boy, a teacher, a policeman, a ditch digger, or a world class research biologist are all valued. At least that is the way I look at it. I can't make everyone follow my values, but I can keep them from putting people down.


----------



## nodakoutdoors.com (Feb 27, 2002)

Well said Plainsman.

IT'S A GOOSE PEOPLE! I get so tired of people playing Internet bullies all the time, makes you wonder how they get that way? Or just another case of an armchair biologist?

It was a really good thread too, it's too bad it had to get ruined.


----------

