Idea For Even Further Conservation In Comps

[TomBettle]

Following my inane ramblings and thoughts in a previous post about the open competition (which I thought went excellently) I have thought about further enhancing the conservation idea of open competitions.

 

The idea is to cut down on bringing relatively small fish that may not normally be eaten (eg: Conger, Smoothound etc) to the scales.

 

For example:

The Wessex specimen size for Conger is 40lb.

The 75% rule would mean you would not even be elligible to enter a fish of less than 30lb.

 

This poll isn't official in anyway and just stems from me having a great Conger session yesterday with medium sized Eels, but not personally wanting to weigh in a fish that wasn't going to have a real chance of winning.

 

If I have filled in this "Poll" correctly, you should have a number of choices as to whether or not you agree with my idea.

 

I would be really interested if you let me know your views.

 

Tom

[Sam]

hi tom i agree with you about the smoothhound and conger and we brought both to the weigh in i feel the same about fish conservation the only reason they both didnt go back because when put in the livebait tank they were both bleeding heavily and we didnt think they would survive.

 

i think this could be a good idea but the problem is i won a prize yesterday and my fish was only about 60%.

 

sam

[TomBettle]

hi tom i agree with you about the smoothhound and conger and we brought both to the weigh in i feel the same about fish conservation the only reason they both didnt go back because when put in the livebait tank they were both bleeding heavily and we didnt think they would survive.

 

i think this could be a good idea but the problem is i won a prize yesterday and my fish was only about 60%.

 

sam

Hi Sam

 

I understand that there would be a number of issues and a few complications with a rule like this.

Firstly 75% is an arbitrary figure and not based on anything in particular apart from yesterday I T-barred a number of fish of my own that I didn't want to harm (and don't know how to keep alive) that were easily over the 75%, but certainly not 100%.

 

Personally I agree with Duncan's comment in the "Chilly Day Post" that I am loath to bring a fish in that I or someone I know is not going to eat and so Conger may not be a prime example as not many of us eat them (I know that some of you do).

 

I only used the example and raised the idea as I saw a number of fairly small eels and other fish not normally for the table weighed in. Maybe I am a bit too much of a greeny and should take the "each to his own" approach?

 

Anyway, I want to stress that I thought the comp was fantastically run, great fun and by far the most enjoyable of the fairly few I have fished in the past.

The idea may be a bit tough to implement or not well received by competitors, but it would certainly help further with conservation...

 

...it is just a thought.

 

Tom

[great white]

Hi all

 

Please look at the other thread from yesterdays comp for my long post on this one

 

In a nutshell may I state that 60% would be a more workable percentage

 

Charlie

 

 

[Coddy]

Hi Tom

 

My only thoughts are that it is a shame that some winners were on a toss of a coin, I accept that there is little can be done on a draw in weight/specimin size.

Also how many entries would you get if the target is set too high and conditions were poor?

Lastly, if you weigh a fish at the start of the comp it may be acceptable at that time but come the weigh in it may have lost quite a lot, also there is a question over scales and reading on a rocking boat.

 

Just my two pennies worth but I can see where you are comming from.

 

Coddy

[Swainiac]

Tom, I voted no on this one, purely becuase the committe spent so much time and effort getting sponsors, that to roll "lesser" prizes over to another comp, I feel, would not send the right messages to our generous sponsors. Im sure that if they wanted to sponser a flattie comp, they would. The club open gets a fairly good press coverage, and its this that sways their respective decisions to donate.

 

Also, if a higher standard is set, then some of of own club anglers, who dont get the oppertunity to fish as often as others, may lose out, and I feel that the once a year comp allowing any sizeable fish to be returned to scales, is acceptable. Our general concensus on returning fish is more than acceptable to conservationists, and you only have to look through the club fish recorders book to see what has been landed and returned alive., to see this.Charlie wil be able to give the best and most accurate view on this aspect, as he sees all!!

 

Overall, I was very happy with the amount of fish brought to scales, it showed that all anglers took personal responsibilty for what was actually killed, and this reflects very well, not only on the club, but to non memebers who weighed in.

 

Rich

[Adam F]

Well said Rich.

 

This subject was raised a few months back and makes interesting reading.

 

Whilst contrivesal I feel that this is the only comp of the year where we require a fish to be bought to the scales - the rest of the year I feel I am extreemely conservation minded (the generally attitide int he club has taught me this) and only take fish that will be eaten FRESH, not frozen for later...anyway....I made the decision to return 20 odd eels on Sunday as they were all under 35lb...having fished previous years and listening to the banter on the radio it was clear that at least 75% was needed to figure - when the 38lber came along I made the decision to take this fish - yes it was a conger, and no I dont eat them. We tried to keep him alive, but alas he died as we got back to the harbour.

 

Bottom line is that the fish was worth over

[alun j.]

My sympathies also went to those results separated on the toss of a coin.

 

As these were with the smaller fish, on scales designed for bigger weights than the 2 lb. calibre of flatties, pout etc., could the club invest in scales to descriminate to a finer tolerance than 1 or 2 ounces?.......... perhaps a set of those pan-type digital scales in shops [ like those for ragworm].......... I,m sure those to separate 5 - 10 grams, or 1/4 oz. would have sorted the prizes fairly .

 

The wegh in could have two queues.......

 

BUT......... congrats. to Charlie and the other weighers/ recorders working to be fair ........ in the cold, under lights and wobbling spring scales. WELL DONE on the day.

 

Alun.

[TomBettle]

Well said Rich.

 

This subject was raised a few months back and makes interesting reading.

 

Whilst contrivesal I feel that this is the only comp of the year where we require a fish to be bought to the scales - the rest of the year I feel I am extreemely conservation minded (the generally attitide int he club has taught me this) and only take fish that will be eaten FRESH, not frozen for later...anyway....I made the decision to return 20 odd eels on Sunday as they were all under 35lb...having fished previous years and listening to the banter on the radio it was clear that at least 75% was needed to figure - when the 38lber came along I made the decision to take this fish - yes it was a conger, and no I dont eat them. We tried to keep him alive, but alas he died as we got back to the harbour.

 

Bottom line is that the fish was worth over

[duncan]

Tom

 

Don't crawl anywhere - walk head held high.

 

You weren't 'defeated' as you state - your underlying views are those of the club (as I understand them)...full stop.

 

I would happy to join a comp where only 100% fish could be weighed in

is possible a little unrealistic and, dare I say, potentially inconsistent with the objectives too. Obvious targets would be wrasse, spurdogs, huss (doggies with dentures) and conger as well as undulates. Only the last is realistically a table fish. As things stand most target whiting, cod etc on the basis that if it isn't a specimen it's edible!

 

Anyway - I suspect the huss I put back at 0845h would have beaten the conger you put back so nah!!!!!! - the fact that we both choose to put them back is to me more important.

[Maverick Martin]

Hi all

 

The thing I find satisfying about the clubs stance on conservation is that there is no set policy in place to cover this issue. The driving force behind the clubs conservation attitude is you the members. Yes we have a conservation officer appointed by the committee who is representing not only the club but the Poole Sea Angling Association and has sat on NFSA conservation committee meetings so in a sense we are proactive on this issue but as stated above its the members choice and I for one applaud that.

 

Tom

 

All views are welcome, we need ideas from the floor this is how the club has been formed. Without input from members the committee would struggle to keep the club moving forward. Your suggestion will be looked at bye the competition sub committee and if found to have merit may be adopted

 

 

Martin

[TomBettle]

Tom

 

I would happy to join a comp where only 100% fish could be weighed in

is possible a little unrealistic and, dare I say, potentially inconsistent with the objectives too. Obvious targets would be wrasse, spurdogs, huss (doggies with dentures) and conger as well as undulates. Only the last is realistically a table fish. As things stand most target whiting, cod etc on the basis that if it isn't a specimen it's edible!

 

OK Duncan

 

Maybe 100% is just a tad unrealistic and I have to say it was said more than a little tongue in cheek!

 

The competition was extremely well planned and being on a specimen only basis alone is a superb step forward from yesteryear as I am sure we all remember trips when we went out and lterally swamped the boat deck with dozens of fish.

When I was a younger (even younger than I am now!!! )I was as guilty as anyone of bringing in a fish just to hold it up fo a "bloody" picture, but I wholeheartedly support any way we can stop bringing in fish that will end up in the dustbin and the club clearly is a long way ahead of me on that one.

 

Nowadays I simply keep what I know I am going to eat and maybe a fillet or two for the old dears that live in my apartment block.

... I have been known to even eat a British Record without even realising it!!! (cough cough herring cough cough)

 

Looking forward to tomorrow's meeting where I will sit quietly in a corner sipping my weak lager shandy!

 

Tom

[great white]

Great thread everyone

 

all the views seem to have conservation as the main priority with an underlying view that it is still down to the individual or his skipper as to wether the fish is retained.

 

Its nice to see that where possible anglers were trying to keep even the biggest fish alive and attempted to return them.

 

I am sure will will get time chatting this over after the meeting tomorrow.

Charlie

[Sam]

i have never been one for keeping lots of fish i just dont like the idea, up in burnham i even put back a thornie that could have been close to a prize just to see it swim away.

 

the only fish i have ever brought bucket loads of them in is mackeral because there is just so many of them and they are my favourite tasting fish.

 

i am also a great shark lover and wouldnt even give the time of day to someone who kills sharks all the time its sick!!!!

 

sam

[jack]

Conservation ...conservation...Such dreams...Oh to have to decide which to keep and which to put back !! how shall I ever cope with it all... ..jack