How do you properly post fish measurements?

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
Wolf3101;1241481; said:
I refuse to be dragged kicking and screaming into the metric world thank you very much. they will bury me in a PINE box thats measured in inches and feet.... LOL

I've had to learn the imperial system through fish. But I do find it MUCH easier to talk fish in imperial. I mean, a 678L tank is 180G. Litres is just more numbers and more confusing.
I've even had to learnn farenheight which was a bit of a step. But I spose, after practice, you do get it. I even hate to use my home grown centigrade when using fish jargon.
 
The way I find out how long they are is by watching them from the side, I know my tank is 2' wide so I have a rough estimate. If they are half as long as the tank they are 1' then add or take an inch accordingly.
 
Mystix212;1242407; said:
I've had to learn the imperial system through fish. But I do find it MUCH easier to talk fish in imperial. I mean, a 678L tank is 180G. Litres is just more numbers and more confusing.
I've even had to learnn farenheight which was a bit of a step. But I spose, after practice, you do get it. I even hate to use my home grown centigrade when using fish jargon.

*F is wack, I wont use it, I refuse. The only reason you find ", ' and gallons easier is cause your use to it. But what about in real life, could you imagine 0measureing 1/8th of an inch, 1/12th or 1/15th, what do you use with glass thickness, is it 12mm or 1/2 an inch, how thick is 15mm or 19mm glass? Its just so hard, give me mm, cm and m anyday.
 
We measure by total length - since I look at it as the WHOLE fish. I don't tell people I'm 4'9" with a 9" head. If shipping a fish that is 4 feet, it would suck to find out it really has a 2 foot tail tagged on the end of it.
 
Alistriwen;1242345; said:
Well, the caudal peduncle does the actual swimming, the fin is like flippers on a diver, they merely provide surface area. It would be like measuring the diver in the water including his flippers.

but the diver can remove his flippers.LOL
anyway it matters not some people do TL some do SL.
 
Sounds like it's usually from tip to tip. Thanks for clearing that up for me.

I wanted to know so that when I'm reading or writing, I'm following the majority of what people are perceiving to be the length of the fish. Don't want to misrepresent anything. :)
 
From what I understand researchers in the field always use SL. I still think it is a better method since for example I have 2 male rosy barbs one of which has a larger body and the other has longer fins. The one with the bigger body is the healthier larger one really, but the one with the long fins would be measured bigger by TL. That said, if you aren't doing scientific research, just state what your measurement is in.
 
Here in Aus it is total length.Here is a pic from our fisheries.They go by total length and will fine us accordingly if is is undersize or oversize.The standard length system doesn't make any sense to me.:screwy:

FishMeasuringBoard-lindr-500_rdax_500x399.gif
 
balton777;1241118; said:
I always give TL. I don't get why you wouldn't include tail length...after all it's part of the fish right? Whether it has a naturally long caudal or not when I view my fish, I see the total length of it...the tail doesn't disappear.

Agreed. TL is the standard by which fishing regs. are made.
Nose to compressed tail is the only legal way to keep them, no matter the species.
It is also the method to measure state/world record catches.
Why should we (fish keepers) be different ?
 
MonsterFishKeepers.com