speicmen bass??

Message

#1 Post by **cortaz** » Sat Oct 21, 2006 12:12 am

shoud bass be taken of the speicman list seems lots of 10lb+ FISH ARE KILLED BECAUSE OF IT "for a peice of paper"
killing the best/biggest breeding stock doesent make sence
or raise it to 25lb.

teacher · #2 Post by **teacher** » Sat Oct 21, 2006 11:42 am

I think bass can be certified without a carcass, or even a photo. I assume scales (of both kinds!) would be useful.

However, lots of folks (including me until recently) didn't realise this, and may take bass unnecessarily.

Be interesting to see what others think.

#3 Post by **fenitbob** » Sat Oct 21, 2006 1:23 pm

check this out
[url]http://www.shannon-fishery-board.ie/guides/coarse/reports2005/ISFCreport2005.pdf[/url]

list of reports here
[url]http://www.shannon-fishery-board.ie/guides/game/specimen.htm[/url]
a whole pile of species seem to be from waterford and cork :o

They should try to state it as clearly as possible that Fish do not need to be killed. and provide examples of what is required if you do not want to kill the fish.

there was only 15 reported for the whole country in 2005.

#4 Post by **MAC** » Mon Oct 23, 2006 12:09 pm

You will also need a certified scales for weighing a fish. Most good makes of weighing scales will certify. Just remember to keep it in a protective cover and it should last you for years.

Kev

#5 Post by **Tanglerat** » Tue Oct 24, 2006 11:01 am

Don't you need to re-certify the scales every year?

Something in the back of my head tickling me about that.....might be wrong though. Could easily be wrong, mind you. :D

#6 Post by **MAC** » Tue Oct 24, 2006 11:42 am

You do. :? I think the service is free however so you just post it in during the off season. I'll do a little digging.

Kevin

x · #7 Post by x » Tue Oct 24, 2006 1:11 pm

http://www.irish-trophy-fish.com/notice ... asures.htm

Plenty of places to get your scales certified in the above link.

#8 Post by **MAC** » Tue Oct 24, 2006 3:15 pm

Nice one Pat. I'll be sending the Rapala digital in. I hear they are 50 / 50 for certification but I'll give it a go.

Kev

#9 Post by **BigPhil** » Tue Oct 24, 2006 6:13 pm

i believe that you have to pay to get them done here in the north though.....

x · #10 Post by x » Tue Oct 24, 2006 8:48 pm

It wouldn't be rocket science to build a scale for anglers that would auto-zero and auto-calibrate. Makes you wonder....many bathroom scales do, so why isn't there one for anglers.

In fact, I wonder why we don't do records by length. Whoever heard of a ruler that needed calibrating.....

#11 Post by **corbyeire** » Tue Oct 24, 2006 10:35 pm

yes but then you have different species with different weight distributions and this is the way its always been done etc. etc. etc.

#12 Post by **MAC** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 10:15 am

I would hate to see records by lenght. I have caught many Lean fish that if a little fatter would have been a good weight and possibly specimens. That said I wish there was a no kill policy for all specimin and record claims, but I understand the difficulty with some species. Take lots of good quality digit phots plus weight it on a certified scales and hopefully you will be able to release the fish and still get your specimen.

Kev

#13 Post by **burgers** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 1:03 pm

Just thinking there,would there be any place in sea angling or fishing in general that a specimen can only be applied for on the basis of catch and release (well its up to the person to release it, but the specimen people dont accept the actual fish, just evidence) I.e a photo of the length of the fish,maybe a scale sample, and a picture of the weighing scales to show the weight. Ok this may not be appliciable for some fish and there will probably be people out there with their weighing scales not calibrated (not for one second implying anyone part of this organisation) to try claim a few ounces or whatever, but you get them "heroes" everywhere! But is there any sense at all in what im saying?

Tell me if im talking cake jumpers and ill go back into my cage for another few days!

#14 Post by **JimC** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 1:27 pm

A look at the IFSC rules shows you that now no body needs to be submitted. However, the photos would really want to be good in order for the claim to be ratified.

In fairness to the IFSC the fish that needed to be returned would be fish that could be confused with similar species:
Big Doggie= Small Huss
Big Brill = Small Turbot
Big Red Gurnard = Small Tub

The new rule is:

The actual body must be forwarded for identification in the case of the following species:

Dace
Rudd
Rudd/Bream hybrid
Roach
Roach/Bream hybrid
Mackerel
Scad
Herring
Shad
Flounder
Dab
Brill
Megrim
Gurnards
Grey mullet
Angler fish
Lesser spotted dogfish
Three bearded rockling
Smooth hound
Rays bream
Cuckcoo wrasse
Torsk
"River" eels taken in tidal waters
Garfish (head and gills only).

Claims may be ratified where a photograph is of sufficient quality to provide conclusive evidence (i.e. key identification features clearly visible) to identify a fish, to the satisfaction of the Committee. However, the onus to provide suitable evidence rests solely with the angler.

The bottom line is: a shore angler armed with a certified scales and a good camera can catch and release all the specimen fish hes is able to.
But be aware: I know of claims being rejected because of inconclusive photos.

I'm sure the committee are bracing themselves for a huge increase in claims.

RobertMcClean · #15 Post by **RobertMcClean** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:17 pm

I have heard of two such rejections recently as there were not enough photos taken of various features of the fish.

Clear, Sharp, Close-up Photographs, showing the entire fish with its fins and other features easily seen, and not fore-shortened or obscured by shadows or bystanders must be provided in the case of:

Tope
Sharks
Skates
Rays
Monkfish
Pollack
Coalfish
Ballan wrasse
Trigger fish
Albacore tuna
Bluemouth
TUB GURNARD (pectoral fins of gurnard must be fully expanded)
GILTHEAD BREAM. (whole body and head shot showing mouth and eyes).
If necessary, the fish should be hung up.

In the case of skates and rays, photographs of both back and belly surfaces should be provided and particulars of the coloration given (with particular reference to the presence of dark or grey spots, or streaks or patches on the belly side).

Samples of the teeth should be furnished in the case of:

Porbeagle
Mako
In addition, there should be a clear close-up photograph showing the jaws and teeth exposed.

#16 Post by **MAC** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:19 pm

Use a reasonable digital camera that will render nice sharp pictures. Take loads of photos with a few angles and each side of the fish. That way you will should get enough for the specimen claim.

Kev

#17 Post by **Adam S** » Wed Nov 15, 2006 12:05 pm

digi = dodgy kev :D

(for scales, not cameras)

#18 Post by **Bradan** » Wed Nov 15, 2006 1:10 pm

Clear, Sharp, Close-up Photographs, showing the entire fish with its fins and other features easily seen, and not fore-shortened or obscured by shadows or bystanders must be provided in the case of:

Tope
Sharks
Skates
Rays
Monkfish
Pollack
Coalfish
Ballan wrasse
Trigger fish
Albacore tuna
Bluemouth
TUB GURNARD (pectoral fins of gurnard must be fully expanded)
GILTHEAD BREAM. (whole body and head shot showing mouth and eyes).
If necessary, the fish should be hung up.

In the case of skates and rays, photographs of both back and belly surfaces should be provided and particulars of the coloration given (with particular reference to the presence of dark or grey spots, or streaks or patches on the belly side).

Samples of the teeth should be furnished in the case of:

Porbeagle
Mako
In addition, there should be a clear close-up photograph showing the jaws and teeth exposed.

Don't know about the rest of ye, but I don't really fancy pulling a mako's tooth before releasing it?? :shock: :shock: :P [/i]

#19 Post by **Davy Murdoch** » Thu Nov 16, 2006 8:17 pm

BigPhil wrote:i believe that you have to pay to get them done here in the north though.....

it costs £20 each year up here to get them done at the trading standards offices in Belfast,its not that much to pay if you are a serious specimen hunter,the freshwater guys have been doing it for years.i think its worth it but for someone not willing to pay £20 just post the scales off down south to one of the verification centres that sandman posted a link to.

Kev Lewis · #20 Post by **Kev Lewis** » Thu Nov 16, 2006 10:00 pm

Hi Troops,
Comment:
1. The UK shore record smoothhound is generally broken every year in waters near me. My old club decided the UK National Federation of Sea Anglers existed for us, not the other way round, and no more smoothies would be killed in search of a member's name in the NFSA diaries for just a year. Henceforth, it was witness, weigh, photo's and release, and prepare to challenge the NFSA, if neccessary by mass vote. That said, nobody got within 2lbs of the shore record after that!
2. IGFA (Game) accepts the skipper's estimate in the Caribbean, etc: these are professional people and their word is law on the boat.
3. The UK shark/tope formula for catch and release is photo's, witness, then Max girth x Max girth x Max length, all divided by 800. Use inches and pounds for this, accepted as plus or minus a pound in accuracy.

Sea Angling Ireland

speicmen bass??

speicmen bass??

ISFC

specimen kills