Dates for the ban on fishing for Bass

I'm not too sure if this subject has come up for debate before, but this is my view on the matter.
The dates set out for the Bass ban have for some years made me curious as to how and why these dates in particular were actually picked.
Did the people who know their bass fishing (renowned Bass anglers) have any input into the legislation itself?
How were these dates actually arrived at?
How old is the data on which the Bass ban is based?

Clearly there's anecdotal evidence surfacing from the Bass angling community that these dates are not accurate; to say the least. Experienced Bass anglers are reporting spent fish from as early as April and possibly even March in some areas. I saw a Bass caught from a beach in the North county Dublin area caught a week or so ago and when the angler gut the fish, the roe inside was still immature and the fish would have probably spawned in the next couple of weeks or so; clearly the Bass have not yet spawned at higher latitudes along our East coast.

When the above observations are taken into account it seems the dates for the Bass ban are inaccurate and obsolete. On the South coast fish are coming to spawn far earlier than May 15th, and you can bet your tripod on it the netters and poachers know it too.
Are local fisheries officers aware of the early influx of these spawning fish and the consequent early activities of the netters?
Are anglers aware they could be inadvertently damaging breeding stocks by taking fish that are actually spawning before the ban commences?
The more one thinks about the current dates in effect for the Bass ban the clearer it becomes; this issue warrants serious reconsideration.

If the fish spawn earlier in the South and South West of the country than they do anywhere else, well clearly the dates for the ban should reflect that. Its easy to draw a geographical line from one beach on the East coast to another on the West and set new dates for the area below it; the current dates would probably suffice for the rest of the country (simples).

Could dates be implemented on a reactionary basis? (monitoring of females in spawning stocks to determine optimum time for commencement of ban), coupled with solid information gathered from Bass anglers on the grounds.

There is definitely scope for improvement on how legislation and relevant Government departments deal with the issue of the Bass ban and its timing and i really hope they do.
The Bass is a truly beautiful fish, highly prized by anglers the world over.
Are we doing enough to protect this amazing animal? or are we actually contributing to its demise?

Last edited by Deleted User 3488 on Sat May 10, 2014 2:47 pm, edited 2 times in total.

iv always wondered about this myself..i personally think its away off the mark,id be inclined to say they spawn sometime in march/april...iv had 20plus bass in the last 2 weeks and most were spent.
do we even know where they spawn,is it out in deep water or in the shallows,i know of fishermen who catch bass in there trawls(by-catch) 40/50 miles off during the early months of the year,but never any other time of the year,so that leads me to believe that bass spawn off-shore rather then onshore.
these are just my observation on bass and i personally think the ban is out of date and needs some kind of changeing

I would think the spawning time varies from year to year depending on the weather.

This year we had a mild winter and relatively warm spring so the spawning appears to have taken place in April. In 2011 we had a very warm spring and spawning seemed to have taken place in April too (I caught a 79 cm bass at the end of the month which was exceptionally thin, 8.5 lbs and was obviously spent after spawning. An average bass of that length should have been about 11 lbs).

However, last year I think the 25th May- 15th June interval was about right after a very cold spring. On the June bank holiday while fishing a deep water mark for pollock I caught a 5 lb male bass that was squirting milt.

But on balance it might be better to shift the closed season to 7th April - 7th May.

I'd say the general feeling/view amongst the angling community is that this law needs reviewing! I agree along the same lines as Frank, weather/water temp plays a big roll on spawning times, and bringing the ban forward a month earlier would definitely be beneficial to the fish and their preservation.

go here http://www.scribd.com/collections/37347 ... -Data-Bass

Download the draft National Bass Policy plan and go to page three - here you will see a recommendation regarding dates for the spawning season, along with many others!

Bass are ready to spawn from as early as February - when they spawn(if they do) is based largely on environmental influences, light levels, water temps, presence of forage, etc, thus this can happen at any time in a reasonable window, they are also fractional.

It is my opinion that a closed, strictly C+R period should exist between the first full moon in March to the first full moon in June.
It is also my opinion that a slot size should be introduced for the species in reference to retention - fish between 44 Cm's and 80 Cm's should always be returned. NEVER retained.

Ten fish limit per person per season limit >= 40 <= 44 YELLOW tag and three fish limit > 80Cm's with RED tag would be helpful
Similar should apply to spearfishing

But most of all this would be symbolic and a demonstration of a continued willingness of anglers towards conservation - what we really need is the willingness and strength of belief to END for once the damage to stocks by the continued illegal fishing.

it's clear from reading through your remarks lads that we all seem to know a little bit about the mysterious Bass, yet still we know so little, As a wise man once said "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing".
It's also apparent from the literature that Jim has posted, the data is totally out of date and can only be used as a reference point at best.

One common thread that runs through all your replies is the fact that the timing of the Bass ban is obsolete, very likely inaccurate and does need reviewing/changing.

I am not an avid Bass angler but i do have enormous respect for this particular species of fish and I try to do my part with regard to conserving and protecting Bass stocks.
It will be interesting to see if one of the official bodies, associations or federations attached to Bass angling; will pick up this particular flag and run with it.

At this juncture, the Atlantic Bass does not have time and circumstance on its side and in fact the future for our stocks of silver beauties looks quite bleak.

Everything we can do as anglers to protect these fish, is not being done. Attitudes need to change if The Atlantic Bass is to survive. Regulation and legislation will never be enough. Anglers need to shoulder more responsibility and be proactive in their mindset when it comes to the survival of our Bass stocks.

As Jim rightly said in his post, "most of all this would be symbolic and a demonstration of a continued willingness of anglers towards conservation - what we really need is the willingness and strength of belief to END for once the damage to stocks by the continued illegal fishing".

fish between 44 Cm's and 80 Cm's should always be returned. NEVER retained.

Why allow fish over 80 cm to be retained? That's crazy. Fish of that size should always be released and give somebody else the opportunity to catch a fish of a lifetime.
I agree that a slot for retention should be adopted but would think a more sensible retention slot would be something of the order of 45-60 cm.
If anglers were only allowed to retain bass of 40-44 cm it would result in mass law breaking. The bass laws would become a joke.
In general it not anglers that are the problem with bass stocks it is illegal netting.

Before it gets too serious and just to make myself a little clearer

These are only my opinions but I'm not joking in any way.

These notes represent one possible seasonal re-interpretation / total, nothing more
I would never encourage any 'law breaking' under any circumstances

At the moment all fish greater than 40 cms can be retained - this includes fish of 80cms.

The option to return always exists nobody is forcing anybody to retain 80 cm fish - nothing changes

There is a natural tendency to retain larger fish
By encouraging a slot size it means more fish can/could possibly survive into the next slot, simply by protecting breeding stock (larger fish)
The slot size could indeed be a topic for discussion based on data/scientific debate perhaps

These Regulations also prescribe a minimum size of 40 centimetres for bass within the State. The Regulations came into effect from 9 May 2006. - nothing changes on the above in terms of a re-interpretation except a decrease in numbers retained

Thanks

I would love a complete CnR from January until end of June. No closed season as such but no fish allowed to be kept in this period. Even reading about the roe in the gutted fish in the first post saddens me. Ask yourself do you really need to keep a fish in this period..?
Think about how old that fish is, what it has had to do to survive until that point, and that potentially it could be just about to spawn.
Such a pitty female bass arent easily identifiable.

Again this is just my opinion and my wish. These discussions tend to get very heated very quickly as Jim has pointed out.
We all know what trawlers and illegal netters do so we dont need to drag that up again, its what we can do starting with ourselves.

I would love a complete CnR from January until end of June. No closed season as such but no fish allowed to be kept in this period. Even reading about the roe in the gutted fish in the first post saddens me. Ask yourself do you really need to keep a fish in this period..?
Think about how old that fish is, what it has had to do to survive until that point, and that potentially it could be just about to spawn.
Such a pitty female Bass arent easily identifiable.

Again this is just my opinion and my wish. These discussions tend to get very heated very quickly as Jim has pointed out.
We all know what trawlers and illegal netters do so we don't need to drag that up again, its what we can do starting with ourselves.

Would a scenario where anglers are allowed to catch Bass but must release them; work?
I would imagine, highly unlikely.
It's sad to say , but no amount of bans or restrictions will ever change the mindset of people with no regard for conservation. You either care or you don't.
There will always be the people that want that trophy fish, or love the taste of Bass, or just want to impress the woman back in the cave with his hunter skills; and they call themselves anglers.

There will always be the people that want that trophy fish, or love the taste of Bass, or just want to impress the woman back in the cave with his hunter skills; and they call themselves anglers.

Holy Mackerel Mr. MonkeyWrasse have you lost your marbles all together? Forgive me if I'm wrong but this line really implies that people who take a Bass home to eat do not deserve to call themselves anglers! Normally I don't get involved in the conservation debates. Not because I don't care. Because its been done to death but this is the height of hypocrisy. Im sorry to call ya on it but I cant stand hypocrites. I'm not gonna go into specifics here but all I'll say is "Free the BallyB Three"

Again forgive me if I'm wrong. Perhaps you have been converted into a conservationist in the small time we haven't spoken. If this is the case I offer you my upmost respect. At least now I know you wont be humping my leg the next time I keep a Bass saying "Give us the tail off that will ya?"

The laws are flawed lads but they are in place and cant be changed unless the powers that be get involved, open up discussions and go from there.
Any discussions that may happen will have ALL parties involved, not just anglers.
The commercial sector would be grinning like cheshire cats at the thoughts of our unique bass laws being changed and would have a big say in things. This wouldnt be good for stocks. Just look at the damage being done by netters at the moment. How bad would it be if they were legally allowed target them?
As flawed as they are, our bass laws are in place and are better than nothing.

There will always be the people that want that trophy fish, or love the taste of Bass, or just want to impress the woman back in the cave with his hunter skills; and they call themselves anglers.

Holy Mackerel Mr. MonkeyWrasse have you lost your marbles all together? Forgive me if I'm wrong but this line really implies that people who take a Bass home to eat do not deserve to call themselves anglers! Normally I don't get involved in the conservation debates. Not because I don't care. Because its been done to death but this is the height of hypocrisy. Im sorry to call ya on it but I cant stand hypocrites. I'm not gonna go into specifics here but all I'll say is "Free the BallyB Three"

Again forgive me if I'm wrong. Perhaps you have been converted into a conservationist in the small time we haven't spoken. If this is the case I offer you my upmost respect. At least now I know you wont be humping my leg the next time I keep a Bass saying "Give us the tail off that will ya?"

''

You might be a tad mixed up there, you might have seen me keep one bass in all the times you've been fishing with me. As for conservation, It has always been my approach to fishing, and as for asking you for anything, well that's just funny. If you want to discuss the matter further you have me number.

you might have seen me keep one Bass

And you call yourself an angler!