Quote:
Originally Posted by riverrat2
I got my numbers from real life experience not some equation that is used to boost C&R advocates ego's. I've weighed fish and used that equation, its always on the heavy side. The only numbers that truely don't like are the ones on the scale.
|
Agreed, riverrat, real life/feel is often the best way to "guage" the weight of our catches. Pretty much all of my first 30 keepers were in the 32"- 37" avg OA length. So, i know a 20# - 28# striper when I pick it up to unhook it and eyeball the length before I release it. But this season, using eeeeeels, has put some significantly bigger beeeotches on the end of my line. Since I believe so strongly in C&R, this seems to be the best way to account for the girth to length ratio.
Just a couple of questions.....................
Don't fish LOSE weight the longer they are out of the water?
Unless you had yer scale on the rocks wit ya, that may account for some of the discrepency. That is, iffin ya used the C&R Formula hours earlier at the rocks and then thru yer catch on a scale much later.
Secondly,
What kind of scale are you using? Many of the spring loaded hand held scales are less accurate the closer they get to their max. It's kinda like the difference between triple beams and digital. I learned back in the 70's that if you ain't usin' digitals when it comes to "weight", then somebody's getting ripped off ~dude
!
Doan so much think that it is about ego, bro, as it is about calculating a general formula that provides the quickest way to approximate weight ~within a reasonably acceptable proximity of true weight~ that accounts for variance of girth as it relates to overall length in the real and earnest effort to release a catch in a safe and timely manner.
Think about it....................a 25" girth on a 43" feesh!! She was FAT and she was every bit of 30#, me bruddah. Also, I just use the formula because most of us agree that it is fair and "accurate" enough.