Most people report fish caught in inches.. I think because just about everyone carries a measuring tape with them. I've never seen any one whip out a heavy brass scale they been hauling with them and weigh a fish . To give an accurate weight you must keep the fish bring it in and get it weighed.. Or if you have fished for some time ,(years) kept and weighed a bunch of fish ,you have some refference to guess the weight . I really don't care how fish are reported pounds or inches, I get the picture . Some people take great offense.. I don't know why . You know a newbe is going to measure and give report in inches.. Must suc everyone yelling "pounds" at you . :scream:

I always have a Manly scale and a tape with me, take a pic and send it back to grow to a 50

I added this as my sig on another site ;) I do pounds. I don't mind people who report bass in inches, but bluefish? What's next, people reporting 20" tautog?

I like to know the weight in pounds but usually report in inches because I only carry a measuring tape.

I find it annoying when someone gets huffy because a fish's size is reported in inches. I'm also not all that fond of weighing and releasing on larger fish. I'm not stating this as fact but I don't think it can be very good for a fish over 30#'s to dangle from a boga grip considering they spend most of their life horizontal.

with fish being on the skinny side these days....a 40" fish sounds better then a 17lber.or racer as us old farts call them.I've caught 36" fish as low as 11 lb's...sad indeed.

see fish laws (man laws)

Majority of my fish aren't worthy of getting weighed. Length is good by me, at least until the state changes regs to pounds.... That said, I see more racers, but have enough to know a 30#, and be pretty good to guessimate if a fish is a forty. Just don't have enough slobs compared to the racers the past few years. Would rather keep a 30 inch fish for the table anyway.

I usually carry a scale (chatillion 50 calibrated). It weighs a lot and I rarely use it, but I can't see killing a fish (nevermind carrying it out) just to weigh it, and I don't catch enough fish over 30lbs to accurately judge their weight at night.

see fish laws (man laws)

Damm ... missed that .. was that made "man law" ? nightfighter makes a good point.. State regs are inches .. Capesams makes a good point for pounds and inches so we have a better idea whats going on (starving) with the fish . Competing for food with seals..

I looked at my record book and here are some weights and sizes of fishes I have caught over the years
29": 8.5
30": 9.1, 9.2
33": 11.5
34": 11, 11.1, 12, 12.3, 12.5, 13.5
34 1/2": 13.75
35": 12.5, 13, 13.25, 13.4, 14.5, 15, 16.5
35 1/2": 13, 14.5
36": 15.0, 15.75, 16, 16.25, 16.5
37": 16.5, 17.25, 20.5
38": 18, 21, 22
39": 24.3
40": 19.2, 21, 23, 24.3
40 1/2": 23, 24.3, 24.6
41": 23
41 1/2": 24.3
43 3/4": 26
44": 30.4, 32.6
47": 37 (my biggest to date)

All these weights come from a few of the canal fish I've taken home for supper over the years.

Truly large fish have always "alluded" me (got away) on the rocky ledges and drop offs in the canal. Someday I'll get one of those huge ones that I've hooked many times, stripped my reel and make me cry and babble to myself

Hope someone finds this useful.

Measuring in inches doesn't do the harm that hanging it by its jaw will do. Fish aren't made to support their weight by the jaw, it harms their gills. Research shows that it kills large fish. If people think it's more manly to describe their fish in pounds, I think they're selfish to risk killing those fish. I fish for sport, not to substitute for gonads. A nice bass is too valuable to be caught only once. Even releasing a nice fish without measuring it doesn't lower your testosterone production.

Geeze, Tagger, I have one or two of those heavy brass scales. Nut nothin' to hang it on....I guess my poundage by length and size of gut. I get within 10-12 pounds everytime.:confused: :bo: :bo:

Measuring in inches doesn't do the harm that hanging it by its jaw will do. Fish aren't made to support their weight by the jaw, it harms their gills. Research shows that it kills large fish.

Do you have a link for this? I've seen it eluded to but have never seen the original source. I don't weigh that many fish, but I often lift big fish into a boat with a lip gaff and frequently hang medium fish by the lip while I unhook them standing on a rock. Thanks.

Do you have a link for this? I've seen it eluded to but have never seen the original source. I don't weigh that many fish, but I often lift big fish into a boat with a lip gaff and frequently hang medium fish by the lip while I unhook them standing on a rock. Thanks.

I think MakoMike wrote an article on this. Can't remember what magazine though.

I looked at my record book and here are some weights and sizes of fishes I have caught over the years
29": 8.5
30": 9.1, 9.2
33": 11.5
34": 11, 11.1, 12, 12.3, 12.5, 13.5
34 1/2": 13.75
35": 12.5, 13, 13.25, 13.4, 14.5, 15, 16.5
35 1/2": 13, 14.5
36": 15.0, 15.75, 16, 16.25, 16.5
37": 16.5, 17.25, 20.5
38": 18, 21, 22
39": 24.3
40": 19.2, 21, 23, 24.3
40 1/2": 23, 24.3, 24.6
41": 23
41 1/2": 24.3
43 3/4": 26
44": 30.4, 32.6
47": 37 (my biggest to date)

All these weights come from a few of the canal fish I've taken home for supper over the years.

Truly large fish have always "alluded" me (got away) on the rocky ledges and drop offs in the canal. Someday I'll get one of those huge ones that I've hooked many times, stripped my reel and make me cry and babble to myself

Hope someone finds this useful.

Looks like highly accurate data, SM. I'll add you to the list of credible sources I know.:uhuh: Anyone who knows me will get the joke. I do like accurate documentation of fish sizes, almost to a fault. Its derived from the way I learned to fish. Everything was measured, weighed and documented due to the fact that I grew up selling everything I caught and could tell you within an ounce how much each fish weighed without using a scale after a while. Pounds is the true measure of size.There are weight and length variations, obviously, but the above length and weight info is dead on IMO.

I simply don't keep and weigh enough fish to be able to tell, to within a pound, how heavy a fish is. So I usually report fish in inches to avoid over estimating the size. Just seams easier and it works for me. If I had been fishing longer and during the commercial days pounds would be what was engrained in my head. I really think its just a generation thing.

with fish being on the skinny side these days....a 40" fish sounds better then a 17lber.or racer as us old farts call them.I've caught 36" fish as low as 11 lb's...sad indeed.

I think that's a big part of it. If people don't press the issue, that 36" fish would be assumed to be 36# if a guy just says, "I got a 36".

Actual conversation I had on the Canal this summer:

"Hi xxxx, you guys do anything?"

"I got some shorts, but xxx got two nice fish".

"Really? How big?"

"Oh, 31, 32"

Stop the conversation right here, and who wouldn't believe the guy was talking pounds?

"He got a 32 pounder?"

"No, no, 32 inches".

That was the day I started asking when a 32" bass became a "nice fish".

It's def. an age thing.. I cant' get over it, no matter how hard I try.. I hear the same thing Mike..
some guy will come in the shop and say,
"I got a 32 last night"..
I assume pounds right off..
the younger fellow (early 30's) that works part time with me, who is a serious fisherman,
he assumes inches..
Another "generational" issue... :)

I still think a 32" fish is a nice fish for table fare...... but not when trophy hunting. Some schoolies I've caught this year had more game during the fight than most mid twenty pound fish, so seeing those testosterone loaded schoolies swim away makes me think, nice fish, nice fight.
And wouldn't inches be a better measurement to gauge the age of a fish? While a fifty inch fish would definitely get my attention, a fifty pounder would be a lifetime accomplishment, which is why the weight measurement gets a lot of attention when it comes to records, I think, for what that's worth..... Worth noting is if you fish surf or boat on this subject too. I'm 90% surf.
Funny, can you imagine if we were debating inches vs. weight in 'measuring' up our female companions?????? If those numbers are right, I could care less about the weight!:D

good to know I'm not an old fart yet.....

It's def. an age thing.. I cant' get over it, no matter how hard I try.. I hear the same thing Mike..
some guy will come in the shop and say,
"I got a 32 last night"..
I assume pounds right off..
the younger fellow (early 30's) that works part time with me, who is a serious fisherman,
he assumes inches..
Another "generational" issue... :)

That's why I will always ask "are we talking pounds or inches" that thats the mystery away

To guys who don't always catch 30 pound fish on their outings, a 34 inch fish may be a nice fish to them...why ruin their day by saying..."oh, inches"? After catching some 30 pound fish, their mind-set will change and they will classify them differently. I always say "nice job" to someone proud of their catch, whatever size (legal).
People fish for different reasons, I'll leave it at that.

On a different note - I side with nightfighter
I fish for FOOD along with enjoyment. I LOVE eating fish. I have NEVER taken a bass home that didn't end up getting eaten. I have NEVER wasted fish...To this day, my father will NOT fillet a fish, he believes too much gets wasted. He scales them, guts them, and chops em up. The head goes into a large pot for stewing...he claims the cheeks on a bass's head are "to die for". One shouldn't judge another based on what they think is a nice fish. IMO -

bloo...I'll agree that a fish in the hand will always be a nice fish reguardless of it's size....But what is happening more and more these day's is the fact that history is being changed day by day...what once was alway's lb's is slowly going over to inches,why?.Plug shapes that always were called XX are being called something intirely different why?I havn't seen grass-trees-water getting a name change, why not?....If one doesn't correct a new person to the name game,,how are they going to learn what is and has always been??...I don't go to the lumberyard looking for scratch paper?[sandpaper]...does history mean nothing to the younger folks? who knows,,someday fish may be called scalers:hihi: wtfit?

I abhor the word "keepah" in describing fish, in my little group it's small legal or legal and legal ain't no "keepah" in my book, 28 inches is a minnow, plain and straight.

I still use the terms we used when we sold everything over 16 inches, smalls, mediums, large..

36 inch fish would to 15 pounds for a fatty and average 20 back when ( and to all of you that are going to post about me bringing up the old days, put a sock in it. Most of you weren't there and aren't worthy enough to talk of those times.) 30 pounders were the norm and spring fish were called racers not cause they were skinny but because of the way they would rip the rod almost out of your hands when they nailed your plug in the first wave and take off like a frieght train from the Monomoy and Nauset shores. By the time they reached P-Town in force around July4th they were getting a little lethargic with all the food and warm water.

Best fishing ever though was not the good old 70s it was in the late 80's early nineties when the limit was 36 inches, the 70's had big fish and you could go anywhere by buggy or boat without a lot of restriction but for more 36 inch fish in areas they were not used to being seen in, like the B-Harbor flats. We could go there in the skiff and take several with surety each trip on the fly that would top 20 pounds in a tide while drifting the bars.

Ah, twas only like that again........(sigh)

In July & Aug all I want to see is 34" then they go to market!

After that its just for fun and I could careless.

I might eat 2 fish a year, Bass isn't on top of the food chain here, I rather have some nice Fluke or Sea Bass even Scup :drool:

inches are tough to get a read on weight with todays fish. In June I landed 2 fish 1 week a part each 45" long. The first fish was 21 lbs and the 2nd was 35 lbs. I was astonished at the weight difference.

( and to all of you that are going to post about me bringing up the old days, put a sock in it. Most of you weren't there and aren't worthy enough to talk of those times.)

:yawn:

"Back in the day" anthem is an old war cry and often looked back on. I prefer to look ahead. I have no complaints about size of Striped Bass or a shortage. Does it make me a less of a fisherman if I talk in inches? lol
Did a miracle take place in the olden days and bass became big mac over eaters? I would hope bass eat the same now as they did back then. Theres plenty of bait to eat. I have never fished the late seventies and early 80's. Mid 80's and on is my time.

The bottom line? Bass don't change....we do...or not. lol

I am from the old farts school on inches to weight, but seeing as I mostly release fish caught I do not weigh them as I feel they are harmed more by hanging them from the lip. I have been using the attached chart to estimate the weight of a fish caught. Note that it gives the min and max weights of a particular sized fish. It is a useful guide only. :spin: NS - is this the chart you were looking for?:lasso:

bloo...I'll agree that a fish in the hand will always be a nice fish reguardless of it's size....But what is happening more and more these day's is the fact that history is being changed day by day...what once was alway's lb's is slowly going over to inches,why?.Plug shapes that always were called XX are being called something intirely different why?I havn't seen grass-trees-water getting a name change, why not?....If one doesn't correct a new person to the name game,,how are they going to learn what is and has always been??...I don't go to the lumberyard looking for scratch paper?[sandpaper]...does history mean nothing to the younger folks? who knows,,someday fish may be called scalers:hihi: wtfit?you hit it on the head with this statement as a "younger" angler bruoght into the game by older anglers I feel a need to keep some things the way they are RESPECT THE PAST learn from those who came before us. that being said I always carry a scale and only weigh afew fish that may be hard to guess their wieght.if its not #'s then it is a schoolie and a schoolie is a schoolie.

I like people reporting in inches rather than pounds b/c I think it removes some of the Bull Sh*t factor. I'm kind of tired of seeing pics of fish with inflated weights and then the stupid debate that ensues. It takes a real ass to lie when they see the tape measure, a little less to make a generous estimate. Unless its a really good fish, that warrants the scale, inches is fine.

This kind of goes against my own point, but I think the scale dissappoints people too. I work charters for my dad on weekends, and I've seen more people with nice fish (40+ inches) get really dissappointed when they get the real weight. I had one guy in particular this summer, nice guy, owns a boat but doesn't catch much, take his family out. Kids all got their first keepers, and at the end of the day he hooks up with a ripper (way down into the backing on the first fun). Gaff the fish, he's estatic - 43" fish. Kids are jumping around and he even emails the pic to the guys in his office. Then the question comes, "hey Jay, do you guys have a scale?" Fish was a bit of a racer, so I know whats coming. 26lbs on the scale, and the poor guy is so dissappointed - felt like I ruined his triumphant moment. Had to explain to him just how much b.s. there is with alot of "40lb" fish you see in fishing mags. Net result, he shook it off, and it was a great day, but I wish he only knew he caught a 43" bass.

I am from the old farts school on inches to weight, but seeing as I mostly release fish caught I do not weigh them as I feel they are harmed more by hanging them from the lip. I have been using the attached chart to estimate the weight of a fish caught. Note that it gives the min and max weights of a particular sized fish. It is a useful guide only. :spin: NS - is this the chart you were looking for?:lasso:

That's a great chart the only thing is are the talking fork length or total length, there is a huge difference, by looking the chart over I think it is fork length.

:yawn:

Second that. I was around Flap, and 36" fish never averaged 20#'s, ever. Not even if you are talking fork length. They were always 15-18#'s, unless you were stuffing them with sand. Occasionally you might get a new moon freak at chatham light that weighed 20, but not many.No how, no "weigh". Even Daignault's records from the 70's prove this clearly if you look at any of his data collected over the years when he was weighmaster. T.C wil tell you the same thing.

once you get over 40" you need a scale I'v seen 42" fish from 22# to 30# thats a big differance theres more room for era or inflated gussaments with a tape.

yup, 2 years ago i got a 41" pig that weighed 30.6 #

This posting reminds me of the ad that was recently on TV. Guys getting our of a Cadilac at the golf course asks one of the other guys getting out of the Cadi, "Hey how did you do yesterday?. Reply, "oh I shot about a 70! He got called on that. :chatter In front of everyone in the area, the guy who said he shot about a 70 was asked how you shoot in golf about a 70. Either or but not about a 70.

One thing about fishing is that we are allowed to offer that conjecture and it is accepted. Most of us though when we hear someone say he caught a 43" fish yesterday automatically deduct at least five inches off that 43" answer and we tell everyone that so ad so caught a 38" fish. And some of us more cynical people here would probably ay the 43" fish was probably barely a keeper.

I can't find a link to the study, but I think it was originally done by a couple of Australians. Just a knowledge of fish biology (I teach it), leads me to believe that their study has merit. Fish are adapted to a neutral-buoyancy habitat, and their bodys aren't designed to support a large amount of weight from their jaws. I think the study was done with snook, but the same could also apply to any larger fish.

once you get over 40" you need a scale I'v seen 42" fish from 22# to 30# thats a big differance theres more room for era or inflated gussaments with a tape.

Agree with you 100%.

"Back in the day" anthem is an old war cry and often looked back on. I prefer to look ahead. I have no complaints about size of Striped Bass or a shortage. Does it make me a less of a fisherman if I talk in inches? lol
Did a miracle take place in the olden days and bass became big mac over eaters? I would hope bass eat the same now as they did back then. Theres plenty of bait to eat. I have never fished the late seventies and early 80's. Mid 80's and on is my time.

The bottom line? Bass don't change....we do...or not. lol

Another thing that has stayed true over the years is the old saying "Not all fishermen are liars, but a lot of liars fish" :devil:
The fish haven't changed size at all, probably not since the inception of time.:angel:

A tape measure is easiest to carry and needs no maintainence. I do carry a scale , have always but seldom feel a need to use it anymore. Maybe for a tourney fish but not for my own ego anymore as I once did.

I've seen grown men with thousands of fish in their carreers argue with teenagers who just caught their first bigger fish about whether it was as big as the teenager said. To them I say get a life.


Its your fish , weigh it , measure it or just let it go. I don't care. :)

What I was most struck with when republishing The Call Of The Surf was that Heilner was in his early twenties when he co-wrote it along with Stick who was only in his early thirties. Interesting that a man so young as Heilner was (at the time) is now universally cast as a "giant in the sport."

There is a tendency in our sport to equate age, experience, and the era in which we fished with sportsmanship and skill. I have not found the three to be mutually inclusive. There are great fishermen and great sportsmen walking among the living - and some of them are quite young.

I am from the old farts school on inches to weight, but seeing as I mostly release fish caught I do not weigh them as I feel they are harmed more by hanging them from the lip. I have been using the attached chart to estimate the weight of a fish caught. Note that it gives the min and max weights of a particular sized fish. It is a useful guide only. :spin: NS - is this the chart you were looking for?:lasso:


This is very useful. I don't have a scale and being on the younger side of this thread(37) report in inches because I only carry a tape. This is a very interesting thread with a lot of good points by all. Thanks Striprman for your conversions as well!

My girlfriend is always trying to measure me.
I think she said is was six lbs...:hihi:

My girlfriend is always trying to measure me.
I think she said is was six lbs...:hihi:

You wish