Weighing fish

  • Thread starter Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA)
  • Start date
R

Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA)

Guest
For myself I don't bother weighing fish these days unless they look exceptional, for example a pike must look as if it goes 15 lbs, a barbel 10 lbs, a roach 1 1/2 lbs etc.

Of course what generally happens is that the pike which looks 15 weighs 13 1/2, the barbel which looks 10 weighs 91/4 and the roach which looks 1 1/2 weighs 1lb 5oz!!!

/forum/smilies/sad_smiley.gif

But when I weigh a fish I do it in the frame of the landing net, deducting the weight of the frame after weighing. Some electronic scales make it possible to zero the weight of the landing net.

One thing I don't do is to transfer the fish from the landing net into a weigh sling. This is totally unnecessary and results in the fish getting handled overmuch as well as the loss of more slime. Those unhooking mats which double as weigh slings are fine of course. What I am against are seperate weigh slings.

What say you?
 
I

Ian Cloke

Guest
Weighing fish is unnecessary, in my opinion, if you weigh a fish, and it turns out to be a record or near record, and then report the weight, then you can expect the circus to come to town making the water inaccessible for months.
 
F

Frothey

Guest
got to admit i'm the same with carp, normally dont weigh them unless they look 20+.

how would you weigh a 40+ fish ron? i wouldn't trust a landing net......

out of interest, if weigh slings make fish lose slime, what about the unhooking mat?
 
Peter Jacobs

Peter Jacobs

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 21, 2001
Messages
31,031
Reaction score
12,203
Location
In God's County: Wiltshire
Personally I think that providing that both the unhooking mat and the weigh are properly wetted before moving the fish then any slime 'loss' is absolutely minimal.

Also, take a look at the more modern weigh slings Ron, they provide far better support for the fish than any landing net, as well as holding the fish a lot 'quieter' so it doesn't flap around and give a false reading.

I would prefer to see a proper weigh sling used than those white plastic supermarket carrier bags that some (Wilson, Hayes) have been seen to use.
 
R

Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA)

Guest
It's the process of tranferring the fish to another holding device - the weigh sling -that I think is wrong Peter. We must keep these holding devices to a minimum.

If a landing net frame is designed properly it shouldnot affect the weight of a fish one little bit. Mechanically I can't see how it can.If it could, we are going against the laws of physics.
 
J

john conway (CSG - ACA)

Guest
Ian, weighing fish depends on what you want the information for and the circus will only come if you tell them where you're catching and if the fish you are weighing are big enough for the circus. I'm not sure if the circus is as much a problem on syndicated watersor club waters with a long waiting list?

I'm assuming most specimen groups require you to put in catch returns of fish above a given weight which means you have to weigh them. I take it Ian you are not against such groups?

Anyhow, back to the original question about weighing fish. I use a weigh sling and zero my scales witha wettedweigh sling attached. I also measure the length and girth of any Chub over 4lb. However, I also do as Ron dose with the landing net, again weighing the net and zeroing my scales. The whole job takes less thanminuteand is significantly less stress full than sticking a hook in its mouth in the first place then playing it for several more minutes. BTW I don't have a problem with anglers who like to see their pictures in the fishing mags.
 
F

Frothey

Guest
my sling is laid out on top of the mat, so i only get one "transfer". most landing nets just wont support a big fish properly for weighing, and the sling I use is much safer for carrying the fish back to the water.

Review

wouldn't be much good for a 20oz roach though /forum/smilies/big_smile_smiley.gif
 
R

Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA)

Guest
I can see that for carp the Greys net could be a good idea.

For pike, the triangular fine mesh nets can be a headache. I would like to see a system where the bottom of the landingnet could be unzipped and used as the weigh sling.
 
F

Frothey

Guest
didn't Ray Clay do a similar thing with his landing net for the Billing carp?

apparently the patent on the Greys landing net quick release is a south african one....
 
Derek Gibson

Derek Gibson

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 8, 2008
Messages
3,669
Reaction score
5
Location
shefield, south yorkshire
Accepting that unhooking pike is a tad different from most species (lure fishing), I tend to unhook in the water whilst still in the net ''where possible''. This is where the weighing would take place as Ron describes. Except, that these days I tend not to bother with the weighing process unless the fish is obviously a biggie. Much prefering to unhook and release as speedily as possible- in fact Ron, how many pike do you estimate we have unhooked and released without weighing in the last year or so?
 
Graham Whatmore

Graham Whatmore

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2003
Messages
9,147
Reaction score
9
Location
Lydney, in the Forest of Dean
Wow! £130 for a landing net, no wonder they were a limited edition! It would be interesting to know how many they sold wouldn't it?I'll have Dave's when he has got fed up of it hehehe!

I too weigh fish in the landing net, made easier because I have one of the quick release gadgets so the net is seperated in 2 secs, I also unhook my fish in the landing net as well so minimal handling.
 
R

Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA)

Guest
Dave, it wasn't Ray Clay it was Bob Reynolds.

Now I came to think of it, I have seen that quick release device somewhere before.

Dozens Derek Dozens. Most were done before my illness. I seem to remember weighing only one fish, that was a 14 youtook on the River T.

As regards lists by specimen groups. Except for very big fish, this doesn't get done as often as it was years ago. In the NSG we had aspecimen fishbook where fish over a certain weight were duly recorded.

The minimum weights read like this:

Roach...................1lb

Perch.....................2lbs

Bream....................4 lbs

Tench.....................4 lbs

Pike........................10 lbs

Dace........................8 oz

Rudd.......................1 1/4 lbs

Carp........................10 lbs

Chub.........................3 lbs

Eel.............................2 lbs

Trout..........................2 lbs

Grayling.....................1 1/2 lbs

Barbel.........................5 lbs
 
F

Frothey

Guest
Thanks Ron, I know it didn't sound right when I wrote it, and was too far from the library to check!
 
M

Maggie

Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2007
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Location
Hertfordshire
DoGreys not market the spreader block on it's own for anglers that already have good nets andcan't affordto spend £130 for a net? or do they do this already?

I could then buy ones forboth ofmy existing landing nets (36" and 44"). I'm sure that many others would do the sameas well.

Or is such a thing already marketed by someone else somewhere? If so where?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top