Weighing Fish

[dalthegooner 1,242]

 

Whats the difference between a fish that weighs 19lbs 12oz and one that weighs 20lb 4oz?

 

.

 

half a pound, mate

 

[salokcinnodrog 3,557]

 

Whats the difference between a fish that weighs 19lbs 12oz and one that weighs 20lb 4oz?

 

.

 

half a pound, mate

 

 

You know what I mean though, its just a figure that a fish may reach at times, yet be under at others.

[severnslayer 1]

Re the batteries for digi scales.... Good question !! As I have only just got them I haven't changed battery but I have heard stories of them becoming inaccurate when the battery life starts to go?? I will keep a close eye and keep my dial scales handy until I have full confidence in the digi ones!!

[severnslayer 1]

Re weights..... Yes of course fish can go up several pounds easily!! However my reference was to fish that at their top weights were only just over 19 lb ( mostly 18lb actually) but said individual would claim 20lb plus for fish that in some cases were caught the week before at 18+ and the week after him at 18+ ..... So the point I was eluding to was he obviously for what ever reason exaggerated the weight ( and the numbers but that's another story lol)

[salokcinnodrog 3,557]

Re weights..... Yes of course fish can go up several pounds easily!! However my reference was to fish that at their top weights were only just over 19 lb ( mostly 18lb actually) but said individual would claim 20lb plus for fish that in some cases were caught the week before at 18+ and the week after him at 18+ ..... So the point I was eluding to was he obviously for what ever reason exaggerated the weight ( and the numbers but that's another story lol)

 

I know exactly what you mean, as a well known angler has been suspected (more than suspected but won't say any more), of adding a few pounds on capture of a fish that usually weighs around 36-38lb, but when he caught it was weighed at 40lb+.

 

A week later when it was caught again, the angler concerned used a set of dial scales held up on a proper tripod and the fish was weighed at 38lb and a little bit.

[severnslayer 1]

Lol.... Yes some sad people about!

[grangemilky 335]

 

I know exactly what you mean, as a well known angler has been suspected (more than suspected but won't say any more), of adding a few pounds on capture of a fish that usually weighs around 36-38lb, but when he caught it was weighed at 40lb+.

 

A week later when it was caught again, the angler concerned used a set of dial scales held up on a proper tripod and the fish was weighed at 38lb and a little bit.

 

 

I wonder if he mentions that in his new book

[newmarket 2,078]

I thought it was him

[welder 1,145]

Who?

 

Ian

[newmarket 2,078]

Lets put it this way ian , im not mentioning his name on here in case he "sends the boys round"....

 

Hows that for a clue ?

[salokcinnodrog 3,557]

I know that this is an old topic, but after reading a post on Facebook thought I would bring it back up again.

 

This may be of interest to some, a guide to weighing fish, and also reasons for weighing them

 

Have Fun

 

http://www.anglersmail.co.uk/uncategorized/pleasure-blog-sun-12/

[emmcee 1,534]

the thing is fish do invaribly lose weight after a capture. ive seen many times fish get caught at one weight then get caught again in a week or two and they are nearly always down in weight. normally the fish go and sulk somewhere and dont eat. on my old lake a fsh that had beem recently caught would go and sulk in the snags and be witnessed there for a good 3-5 days. more sometimes. i once saw a mate catch a fish at 26lb( weighed on two sets of ruben heatons) and then another mate catch the same fish exactly a week later at 31lb + and that got weighed on 5 sets of scales as none of us could believe the weight gain. so its possible,infact its fact that a fish's weight fluctuates with captures

[grangemilky 335]

Firstly, I don't sack fish anymore, but some time ago I weighed a fish at night, and in the the morning after it had been sacked up all night, lost over a pound in weight! And I had a sack full of pidgeon conditioner!

In the morning it wasn't a 20 anymore

[liamclose 224]

I personally find it very hard to beleive that a fish flutates 5lb in a week and if that happend its very strange and rare. Fair enough if the fish was 60 pound plus. I find it funny how its always the same people who catch the fish up in weight , and if you challenge them about the weight there reply is always we use 2 sets of scales why not just use one decent ser. Its very true people only fooling themselvs but its nice to no how well the fish are doing and with people miss weighing fish its difficult to no.

As for fish sulking and not feeding for a few days I dony beleive that. Imo most fish are back on the feed and back to there same old habits with in hours if capture. Some fish may react differently to been captured but I dont beleive that there effected enough to make them loose several lbs. The only time ive ever seen fuctuation of lbs is at spawning time.

Last year a guy claimed a 30 from a local lake it even made it in the local paper I caught it couple months later at 22lb. On anouther occasion couple years ago a lad claimed a 30lb mirror out a canal I caught it the the following winter at 23lb thats just 2 examples I have many more examples . loads of people around my area are on different planet when it comes to fish weights.lol. Funny thing is they never weigh them below there true weight its always over.

[norfolkpiker 1]

I know exactly what you mean, as a well known angler has been suspected (more than suspected but won't say any more), of adding a few pounds on capture of a fish that usually weighs around 36-38lb, but when he caught it was weighed at 40lb+.

 

A week later when it was caught again, the angler concerned used a set of dial scales held up on a proper tripod and the fish was weighed at 38lb and a little bit.

SWP? 

Been thinking of replacing my ancient Avons (never a problem, just count the needle round), think I'll avoid digital & go for another dial scale.

[Gaz 42]

tbh i have no idea how to zero my digtal scales in, tried but never feel safe. because of that i know my sling weighs 2lb 10ox wet so i just weigh the fish and take off the 2ib 10 after. rather that than fool myself lol

[emmcee 1,534]

I personally find it very hard to beleive that a fish flutates 5lb in a week and if that happend its very strange and rare. Fair enough if the fish was 60 pound plus. I find it funny how its always the same people who catch the fish up in weight , and if you challenge them about the weight there reply is always we use 2 sets of scales why not just use one decent ser. Its very true people only fooling themselvs but its nice to no how well the fish are doing and with people miss weighing fish its difficult to no.

As for fish sulking and not feeding for a few days I dony beleive that. Imo most fish are back on the feed and back to there same old habits with in hours if capture. Some fish may react differently to been captured but I dont beleive that there effected enough to make them loose several lbs. The only time ive ever seen fuctuation of lbs is at spawning time.

Last year a guy claimed a 30 from a local lake it even made it in the local paper I caught it couple months later at 22lb. On anouther occasion couple years ago a lad claimed a 30lb mirror out a canal I caught it the the following winter at 23lb thats just 2 examples I have many more examples . loads of people around my area are on different planet when it comes to fish weights.lol. Funny thing is they never weigh them below there true weight its always over.          i found it hard to believe the fish gained 5lb in a week but it did and thats it. weighed on 2 sets of reuben heaton scales  at 26lb by myself and the captor( we are not idiots, sling zeroed both times etc) and then weighed 5 times when caught at 31lb on reuben heatonsx3, nash dial scales and 1 digi set. Fact that fish put on 5lb in one week. and i seen loads of fish on waters that have been caught and then gone and sulked for a while. ok now and again a fish may come out very quickly after a capture, a day later or less sometimes but how often is that the case? they definately sulk and definately lose weight. as milky has said just being in a sack a while a fish he caught lost a pound. so why cant it put that weight on in the same time , and more over the coarse of a week.

Edited March 25, 2014 by emmcee

[liamclose 224]

Just because a fish doesnt get caught soon after capture doesnt mean its sulking The main reason that carp dont useally get caught soon after capture isnt because there eating less.Imo carp dnt useally get caught for a while after capture not because there sulking but because they are being completely normal going round haveing easy meals sussing rigs and getting away with it constantly. Going off topic here but personally I think your example is very rare. The majority of time when a fish puts 5lb on in a wk is because its been weighed wrong not because its attually happend.

[grangemilky 335]

I've seen fish sulking on more than one occasion. Like clock work in some cases, always in the same spots. You could tell if they had been caught recently if they were under a certain bush.

[liamclose 224]

So this certain bush ware the fish sulked must have been a place ware the fish felt safe snd offerd the fish safety therefore they proberly freaquanted this bush regularly weather they had recently been caught or not so the fish useing the bush could well have been normal behaviour. Im not saying fish dont sulk but I dont beleive a capture of a fish effects there weight in a big way. Imo majority of fish are feeding again after capture much sooner than alot of people think.

[grangemilky 335]

No....I mean there was a sulking bush. Known as Humpys bush. Humpy could always be found under it after being caught, and you would rarely find him (her) under there if it wasn't following a recent (known) capture.

[theobeeus 19]

makes me laugh people always trying to rubbish digitals as they have 'heard' they are rubbish.. (this is directly from negative marketing by so called superior dial scale manufacturers taking offence at all the cheap digis out there).

But personally I don't use either as I simply don't like bulky expensive and flashy gear, or having too many little electronic gadgets to keep out of the wet, and replace the batteries in etc

 

Digis are perfectly good and in my experience more accurate than bulky and extremely expensive dial scales, but like I said they need to be wrapped in (dry) cotton wool

 

To give you an example my club's carp record has just been broken and the captors NEW top of the range dial scales were nearly TWO POUNDS OUT

 

That is laughable and makes me realise that I did the right thing in resisting the urge to replace my trusty accurate plastic Salter SPRING BALANCE scales that I got for a tenner on ebay and are extremely light, tough, weigh to 50lbs, and accurately

[grangemilky 335]

I think digital scales are mostly effected when you don't hold them correctly. Scales need to be held by the handle, when held by the body they are all over the place, and digitals seem to suffer badly.

[salokcinnodrog 3,557]

Some fish do sulk, and don't get caught for long periods between captures, and others get caught within a very short space of time.

 

 

I know that Zenon Bojkos capture of one of his forties came the day after it had been caught previously. He cast to the edge of a snaggy area, and the fish that had been hiding in the snags then came and took his bait.

 

 

 

Big Scale from Waveney Valley was known to have been caught a number of times in a week, mention of two of its captures in one week are in Tim Paisley's Big Carp. He caught it just a day or so after another angler.

 

Another one I know of is 4.3 from Suffolk water Park. this fish has been known to have come out twice in a week, but strangely enough at 2 rather different weights. Once apparently at 40 (not made that weight since though), and a couple of days later at 37 or 38lb.

 

I know that on the second capture the angler who caught it weighed it with a set of scales set up on a tripod, so I am positive that the weight is correct.

 

 

 

It is very easy for scales to misread, and anglers should check them regularly, and getting them tested. I used to have a very big advantage in that respect as at work I had the testing equipment as we had to weigh fire extinguishers which could weigh up to 20kilos. So my scales got tested and checked via work. Now though I have to resort to weighing known weights, bags of sugar etc to check them. Or even fire extinguishers which I have in my shared house  

 

Gaz mentions something, he can't zero his digital scales, and I know other anglers who have the same problem, but even dial scales are easy to incorrectly zero, and checking the weight of a sling and deducting the sling after returning the fish may lead to a few inaccuracies. If you return the fish in the weigh sling, you are going to pick up extra water. This will lead to your sling being heavier when you then re-weigh it to check what you need to deduct.

 

If it is zeroed wet before you put the fish in it, then you will be more accurate, although you have to be careful not to be picking up water from your mat and net.

[grangemilky 335]

Upper Tamar has a lake record of 47lb, a fish that came out less than a month later at 27lb. By all accounts was weighed properly, but the fish was retaining a lot of water. Its an controversial topic, but seemingly anything can happen, I wonder when we will stop weighing, and measure instead?