The sizing of carfully returned salmon

marty31

Well-known member
Messages
2,104
Reaction score
413
Location
work, pub or where big salmon lurk
Recently one of our very experienced syndicate members with a hell of a lot of salmon under his belt, reported a biggish fish measured, then carefully returned! he was reluctant to enter it into our book until a second opinion, was given, I sought advice from a experienced tweed gillie, who sized it at 25lb from a general national weight to size gauge, in fairness to the captor, he immediately expressed that he didn't think it had been that big, so it was booked in at 22lb, the photo on tweedfisher was heavily laughed at and disputed by one particular member of this forum! but my gut feeling felt that, not seeing the fish myself, but also knowing that depending on how the photo has been taken, it generally can be deceiving, but again my gut feeling was that it hadn't been that size! however yesterday, rummaging around our hut with time to spare regarding fishing a rapidly rising river, hi ho I came across a RTC tweed weight to size scale, and giving the size reported (38 inches) using the scale it worked out to be 20.5 pound? allowing for the length maybe being a little shorter but the fish being also very fresh, we have amended our book accordingly and altered it to 19lb do members think that this is reasonable conduct, or not? and in general a fair assessment? oversizing salmon or keeping a incorrect book has never been a option as far as I have ever been concerned, and the continual criticism, can really be done without!
regards M31
 

Petekd

Active member
Messages
220
Reaction score
214
Location
Munster
There’s no one can accurately tell the weight of a fish from a picture and there’s very few pictures ever do justice to a large fish. When I’ve a decent fish I won’t nail my colours to the mast on a big fish in public, in private I know what my estimate would be and it would be based on previous caught and weighed and that’s what I’d enter in my own log. Fishery can enter whatever it likes.
 

lefthandup

Well-known member
Messages
1,316
Reaction score
1,309
The biggest fish I've probably ever caught was given a mere 16lbs by the ghillie.....in reality it was an easy 20 plus fish...and in prime condition early spring.

We never weighed it as we wanted to return it without any fuss and as quickly as possible.

I was a bit gutted with his estimate mind ?
IMG_0907.jpg
 

marty31

Well-known member
Messages
2,104
Reaction score
413
Location
work, pub or where big salmon lurk
There’s no one can accurately tell the weight of a fish from a picture and there’s very few pictures ever do justice to a large fish. When I’ve a decent fish I won’t nail my colours to the mast on a big fish in public, in private I know what my estimate would be and it would be based on previous caught and weighed and that’s what I’d enter in my own log. Fishery can enter whatever it likes.
that's fair assessment! but publicised pics on a so called private information based group page is open to unwanted troll interference! unfortunately, I also know the moral of the story is "don't post photos of nothing" but it would be a dim world without any, even if they are thrown to the wolves, to size up a mans waders, take his hight! x it by his inside leg measurement! scale his landing net diameter! even though the photo is not to scale! it still can be worked out assuming a given size! then eventually after great effort, and thought, supposedly prove the poster as being a fraud and a exaggerating liar! "inspector clouseau" wouldn't have had a look in.
 

marty31

Well-known member
Messages
2,104
Reaction score
413
Location
work, pub or where big salmon lurk
The biggest fish I've probably ever caught was given a mere 16lbs by the ghillie.....in reality it was an easy 20 plus fish...and in prime condition early spring.

We never weighed it as we wanted to return it without any fuss and as quickly as possible.

I was a bit gutted with his estimate mind ?View attachment 49067
that cracker of a specimen is all of a 20lb fish LHU look at the depth of it!
 

lefthandup

Well-known member
Messages
1,316
Reaction score
1,309
that cracker of a specimen is all of a 20lb fish LHU look at the depth of it!
I guess it's difficult to tell unless any fish is weighed, however a guess within a couple of pounds here and there is fine by me.
 

Roag Fisher

Well-known member
Messages
2,126
Reaction score
582
Location
Isle of Lewis
Recently one of our very experienced syndicate members with a hell of a lot of salmon under his belt, reported a biggish fish measured, then carefully returned! he was reluctant to enter it into our book until a second opinion, was given, I sought advice from a experienced tweed gillie, who sized it at 25lb from a general national weight to size gauge, in fairness to the captor, he immediately expressed that he didn't think it had been that big, so it was booked in at 22lb, the photo on tweedfisher was heavily laughed at and disputed by one particular member of this forum! but my gut feeling felt that, not seeing the fish myself, but also knowing that depending on how the photo has been taken, it generally can be deceiving, but again my gut feeling was that it hadn't been that size! however yesterday, rummaging around our hut with time to spare regarding fishing a rapidly rising river, hi ho I came across a RTC tweed weight to size scale, and giving the size reported (38 inches) using the scale it worked out to be 20.5 pound? allowing for the length maybe being a little shorter but the fish being also very fresh, we have amended our book accordingly and altered it to 19lb do members think that this is reasonable conduct, or not? and in general a fair assessment? oversizing salmon or keeping a incorrect book has never been a option as far as I have ever been concerned, and the continual criticism, can really be done without!
regards M31
When I looked at the fish, 19 is about what I reckoned it was. Short of having the fish dead on the slab, "around 20" is always a sensible way of describing a fish rather than actually giving a weight. ( I would have been happy with it whatever it was).
 

MCXFisher

Well-known member
Messages
4,695
Reaction score
1,088
Location
North Yorks
As most photos of fish are taken at close range with camera lenses of very short focal length and wide field of view, there are very substantial dimensional distortions that make estimating weight extremely difficult. A 'good' photo can make a fish look a lot bigger, a technically 'bad' (but honest) photo can make it look small.

The only trustworthy photo that you could rely on for scaling and measurement would be taken with a lens focal length of around 80mm from a distance greater than 3.5 metres, at right angles to the fish.

When I caught my best ever salmon the person taking the photo was not accustomed to small digital cameras. Indeed, the first 2 photos were of himself! Once he'd got the camera the right way round and managed to get a snap that contained both the salmon and me, perspective came into play, because he was stood on the bank and I was down in the water, with the line of sight downwards at almost 45 degrees. You couldn't measure anything from that photo (I look about 4 feet tall).
 

Chicharito

Well-known member
Messages
2,532
Reaction score
465
Location
HUDDERSFIELD
Recently one of our very experienced syndicate members with a hell of a lot of salmon under his belt, reported a biggish fish measured, then carefully returned! he was reluctant to enter it into our book until a second opinion, was given, I sought advice from a experienced tweed gillie, who sized it at 25lb from a general national weight to size gauge, in fairness to the captor, he immediately expressed that he didn't think it had been that big, so it was booked in at 22lb, the photo on tweedfisher was heavily laughed at and disputed by one particular member of this forum! but my gut feeling felt that, not seeing the fish myself, but also knowing that depending on how the photo has been taken, it generally can be deceiving, but again my gut feeling was that it hadn't been that size! however yesterday, rummaging around our hut with time to spare regarding fishing a rapidly rising river, hi ho I came across a RTC tweed weight to size scale, and giving the size reported (38 inches) using the scale it worked out to be 20.5 pound? allowing for the length maybe being a little shorter but the fish being also very fresh, we have amended our book accordingly and altered it to 19lb do members think that this is reasonable conduct, or not? and in general a fair assessment? oversizing salmon or keeping a incorrect book has never been a option as far as I have ever been concerned, and the continual criticism, can really be done without!
regards M31

I have always been told ( mostly by my other half) that size doesn't matter!
It must have been around 20lb, but it doesn't matter. It was obviously a good fish. The main thing is to get it back as quickly as possible. I only weigh the fish that I keep. I don't even take photos especially when fishing alone. I don't get all this arguing if it was 19lb or 22lb. It was a cracking fish, now just get it back in the water quickly and safely!
 

happy days

Well-known member
Messages
4,686
Reaction score
799
Location
Liverpool
i am usually alone when I land a fish and take a pic with my phone so I am not accused of being a Tom Pepper by my pss taking mates, I caught number twelve for this season yesterday and none of the photos do the fish justice as I release everything, I measure nose to tail and let people put their own weight on them, this season I have caught some fat uns that would have weighed less last year at the same length :)
 
Last edited:

The flying Scotsman

Well-known member
Messages
1,499
Reaction score
2,258
Location
Dundee
The biggest fish I've probably ever caught was given a mere 16lbs by the ghillie.....in reality it was an easy 20 plus fish...and in prime condition early spring.

We never weighed it as we wanted to return it without any fuss and as quickly as possible.

I was a bit gutted with his estimate mind ?View attachment 49067
Looks a lot closer to 20lb than 16lb to me.
 

Coneheads

Active member
Messages
455
Reaction score
142
The biggest fish I've probably ever caught was given a mere 16lbs by the ghillie.....in reality it was an easy 20 plus fish...and in prime condition early spring.

We never weighed it as we wanted to return it without any fuss and as quickly as possible.

I was a bit gutted with his estimate mind ?View attachment 49067
Cracking fish that , I take no notice of ghillies estimates, shocking at times ,
But never had a ghillie under estimate a fish, as they always over estimate ?A one off this ghillie ? which beat /river may I ask ?
 

Coneheads

Active member
Messages
455
Reaction score
142
Post the fish up here and give us a look then Marty, your safe I’m not Geordie Doull (y)
We all still waiting for the photo's ,
Geordie would be happy to see a decent fish as the Thurso is having a lean August similar to 2018 ?
If no pics then go to Tweed Fisher on Facebook
 

Markymac

Active member
Messages
117
Reaction score
29
The biggest fish I've probably ever caught was given a mere 16lbs by the ghillie.....in reality it was an easy 20 plus fish...and in prime condition early spring.

We never weighed it as we wanted to return it without any fuss and as quickly as possible.

I was a bit gutted with his estimate mind ?View attachment 49067
Cracker of a fish mate an your right easily over 20lb
 

lefthandup

Well-known member
Messages
1,316
Reaction score
1,309
Cracking fish that , I take no notice of ghillies estimates, shocking at times ,
But never had a ghillie under estimate a fish, as they always over estimate ?A one off this ghillie ? which beat /river may I ask ?
Dryburgh Upper
 

Coneheads

Active member
Messages
455
Reaction score
142
No...few year back
Dryburgh Upper beat was sold a few years back, . The Duke wanted the rotation off with his Dryburgh Lower Beat . So he bought Upper and sold it shortly after, Is the Upper Ghillie now on the Lower beat after the sale ?
 

marty31

Well-known member
Messages
2,104
Reaction score
413
Location
work, pub or where big salmon lurk
We all still waiting for the photo's ,
Geordie would be happy to see a decent fish as the Thurso is having a lean August similar to 2018 ?
If no pics then go to Tweed Fisher on Facebook
you have seen the photo! basically I didn't take it ! or post it! I have seen it! spoken to the captor! but don't know how to copy it either from TF or the W&D group page! but I am more than sure you do! be my guest CH and I am pleased the thurso is lean after the "Geordie" un wanted attack and un wanted abuse on our group page, that has absolutely nothing to do with him, it took up a good part of my sunday answering him and as a result, stopped my progress on my classic motorcycle rebuild! the reason for the crappy season could well be KARMA
 

marty31

Well-known member
Messages
2,104
Reaction score
413
Location
work, pub or where big salmon lurk
Dryburgh Upper beat was sold a few years back, . The Duke wanted the rotation off with his Dryburgh Lower Beat . So he bought Upper and sold it shortly after, Is the Upper Ghillie now on the Lower beat after the sale ?
The duke sold it because apparently it gets overlooked from the bridge, resulting in lack of privacy, resulting in spoiling his own fishing, which he likes to be private.
 

Mattytree

Well-known member
Messages
862
Reaction score
425
Location
North Tyne
Thing is with tweed fish is they don’t seem as deep as other rivers so would judge on the lighter side , last salmon I took was off the tweed and myself i estimated it at 9lb going by Tyne fish I’ve caught the same length , ghillie weighed in just on 7lb ... it was pointed out that Tyne fish of the same size are broader just to save myself complete humiliation.. not sure he agreed but I weigh all my Tyne fish for record keeping , does not take 5 seconds with a mcleans net.
 

marty31

Well-known member
Messages
2,104
Reaction score
413
Location
work, pub or where big salmon lurk
I have always been told ( mostly by my other half) that size doesn't matter!
It must have been around 20lb, but it doesn't matter. It was obviously a good fish. The main thing is to get it back as quickly as possible. I only weigh the fish that I keep. I don't even take photos especially when fishing alone. I don't get all this arguing if it was 19lb or 22lb. It was a cracking fish, now just get it back in the water quickly and safely!
I think your other half maybe is just being kind paul
 
Top