bass size

cought 30 bass 2 over the size limit which i kept 4/5lb
would it not have been better th keep say 2 2lbers and release the 2 bigger spawners as the smaller ones may never live to breed
as in
abird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush
i would have preferred the smaller ones to eat as we dont eat a lot oy fish
Art/

i think the argument is that if they reach a certain size they will have spawned and if all fish have spawned at least once then it has to b better than every immature tiddler being hammered

Good question Art. This was answered by an article in the 'New Scientist' journal a few weeks back.
The essence of their advice is that the larger fish should be returned to the ocean. They will offload a greater amount of spawn than the smaller ones.
They went on to speculate that the practise of net sizing to just catch the larger fish may be wrong. Just think about that one.



Peter

There's a school of thought that if you keep killing the big fish that this is giving an advantage to smaller fish to survive, breed and pass on their genes. Since these fish are genetically predisposed to being small, it might be supposed that 'smallness' is an advantage to survival. So the smaller individuals become the bulk of the population, leading eventually to a small sized population norm.

Sounds logical. We've seen with various species that they adapt to their environment fairly quickly - most people are under the impression that evolution of this sort takes millenia. However, the best known cases are some species of moths, which since the industrial revolution have gradually changed their colour from light to dark, the lighter ones having stood out for predators to pick off, the darker ones blending with the darkening colour of tree trunks, buildings etc - stained by soot and smoke from factories.

So, selection pressure, be it on size, colour or any other physical attribute can affect the characteristics of any animal/bird/fish/etc within a couple of hundred years, if not a few decades.

Given that we now try to avoid catching (commercially) the smaller fish, we're probably driving the overall size of fish down by taking the bigger ones.

Leon Roskilly has a factually good article on this at:

http://www.anglers-net.co.uk/sacn/article23.htm

He also explains it better than I do....

There's a school of thought that if you keep killing the big fish that this is giving an advantage to smaller fish to survive, breed and pass on their genes. Since these fish are genetically predisposed to being small, it might be supposed that 'smallness' is an advantage to survival. So the smaller individuals become the bulk of the population, leading eventually to a small sized population norm.

Sounds logical. We've seen with various species that they adapt to their environment fairly quickly - most people are under the impression that evolution of this sort takes millenia. However, the best known cases are some species of moths, which since the industrial revolution have gradually changed their colour from light to dark, the lighter ones having stood out for predators to pick off, the darker ones blending with the darkening colour of tree trunks, buildings etc - stained by soot and smoke from factories.

So, selection pressure, be it on size, colour or any other physical attribute can affect the characteristics of any animal/bird/fish/etc within a couple of hundred years, if not a few decades.

Given that we now try to avoid catching (commercially) the smaller fish, we're probably driving the overall size of fish down by taking the bigger ones.

Leon Roskilly has a factually good article on this at:

http://www.anglers-net.co.uk/sacn/article23.htm

He also explains it better than I do....

hi sandman
most large bass cought around are sold
most small ones relesaed
this will continue unless the powers that be put a stop to it
example;
in the last week+ about 50 large bass cought at quanns in dungarvan
mostly by youths all sold to local chinees res. this has being on for years
same in many other areas its supposed to be illigal??????????
nets also to catch same bass to sell to same people
poaching sea/ rivers wide spread in waterford
i think we shoud look closley as USA striped bass fisheryit works
also the S. .F.R.B. do littel to stop it dont seem to know where to look/when. they seem to be liveing in a bygone age lots of ps.
poached succesfullyfor 20 years (gave it up 2001) have done goodthings since
stopped some others from poaching
got large polloution stopped
helped got restoration work done on river
joined angling club
ialso help many anglers helped about 10 this year to catch there first bass
also show how to flyfish/ty fly ect. ect.
this is as more thah the f.b.?
they make no attempt to stop polloution????????seam anti angler most anglers fear them good or bad
what have they ever done to improve fish habitat/angling???????
around dungarvan every stream/river in the county has polloution entering it the; finnisk 6 farms along 3 mile stretch farmyard runoff can be sickening???
the river tay raw sewerage?
the colligan landfill run off?
could go on all night
we could and shoud have the best fisheries in europe.
insted we have the above makes me wonder am i wasting my time around fish/fishing can t see any
solloution;
any ideas welcome
art/

Hi art/,

I know it seems hopeless to try and get anything changed as regards protecting fisheries but there are a few things you can do.

As regards youths selling large bass to the restaurant, if any of the youths in question are in possesion of more than 2 bass within a 24 hour period, they are in breach of the law. Anyone who fishes by rod and line to sell their catch are not recreational anglers - that's commercial fishing.

Try calling or e-mailing your local fisheries board - you are not obliged to give your name - but make it clear that your next call is to the law and local paper - neither of whom may reveal your name either. I'd also drop a line to the editor of the Marine Times (marinetimes@eircom.net) as well - they won't publish your name if you ask them not to.

The RFB will be loth to ignore your complaint if they know that another agency and in particular the press is watching the issue. It truly sucks that we have to resort to these sorts of tactics, but until fish get a vote, live with it.

Pollution can be reported in the same way. If you have a look through the Conservation forum, all the contact info you need will be in stickies at the top. If in doubt, stick on another post and I'll post links to all you need. Drop a post and let us know what response you get from the powers that be.

If necessary, those of us who are serious about conservation can start writing - we can make a difference that way. It's just a matter of kicking up enough of a stink - the threat to start a commercial tope fishery that we got highlighted and stopped is a good example of how it can work.