Weighing your catch?

[NCLaker]

What is the safest way to weigh a Muskie? I have a Berkley digital scale ... I assume, you would just hook it to the hoop of the net and weigh it while in the net. Then subtact the approx weight of the net.

Would hate to do this cause I wouldn't want to do any damage with it thrashing around in a net out of the water. Don't think I would weigh any catch unless it were a new PB or very large ski (e.g. 48+ maybe).

[Muskiefool]

Here is a pic of how a buddy in CA does it, good luck on the PB; Good fishing.

[JimBuck]

Just clamp on that boca grip to the lower jaw and give her a lift.

Only kidding. If you really wanted weight keeping her in the net is probably the best idea. I've certainly thought about the idea before but length and girth is really all I would like to deal with.

[Shawn Kellett]

Why do you want to weight it? Nobody cares first of all. Length is the quantifiable measurement for muskies in the fishing world.

Otherwise just get a calculator and a seamstresses tape and do some math.

[nater]

I've thought about weighing some fish to see how accurate the calculations area, but haven't yet. I'd say weighing a fish in a cradle would be the best for them.

[smeese]

Aparrently he does. Not uncommon to want to know what your catch weighs. I go for length too but somettimes wonder

Why do you want to weight it? Nobody cares first of all.

[RK]

Hiya -

I don't weigh or even girth fish (a rarely measure any even), because I just don't care personally, but if you're into it, a decent girth with a seamstress tape and some number crunching will get you very, very close.

The formula looks simple on the surface but the way in which the formula was created is pretty sophisticated. The main background calculations involve the volume of two cones, and the specific gravity of water - so it's a lot more than a SWAG calculation. There are a number of calculations for fish of different body types, most developed in the saltwater world by - I think - Stu Apte among others. For muskies the lxgxg/800 seems to be the most accurate. It differs for other species - lots of salmon/steelheaders use lxgxg/690...

At any rate - personally if I were to worry about weight, the formula would do for me. Hard to go too far wrong when it's an equation based on Euclidean geometry and the specific weight of water...

Cheers,

Rob Kimm

[NCLaker]

Why do you want to weight it? Nobody cares first of all. Length is the quantifiable measurement for muskies in the fishing world.

Otherwise just get a calculator and a seamstresses tape and do some math.

Thanks for your feedback Shawn. I guess I have seen various posts/comments on weight (so I think some do . I was assuming that doing a quick weight of a fish would be quicker, easier, and more accurate than wrapping a tape measure around it and trying to find the thickest part of the fish (btw what is the formula for calculating this?). Looking for the best method to figure weight that will have the least negative impact to the fish since everything I catch is CPR.

Again, not really interested in doing this on every catch, probably only personal bests (talking couple fish per year if I'm lucky . If I fished and caught as many fish as some do on this site, than probably wouldn't care as much. But since I don't, catching anything worthy is worth knowing this additional detail for my own personal info.

[NCLaker]

Thanks RK. Why are their two "g"s in the calculation? Are they both girth?

Pretty new to muskie fishing so it is nice to know the info on PB's. I rarely do any sort of measurement (weight/length) of any other type of fish, cause I catch enought don't really care. But if I do catch something I think is PB than do try to try to get length, and weight if convinient.

[RK]

Hi NCLaker -

Yeah - another way to say it would be LxG2/800. The girth squared is because the formula uses the volume of two cones...

They said there'd be no math in this job...

Cheers,

Rob Kimm

[DHanson]

I do the same as RK and have the same thoughts as Shawn. I would never weigh a fish as it increases the risk of hurting that fish. People don't realize that it's not good for any species of fish. As the fish get bigger like a muskie, there is a greater risk to the survival of that fish. I use length and girth formula if I have the slightest interest in weight. Girth is measured while the fish is in the water, no harm in that. As far as weight goes for fish in general, not interested, so it's not just a muskie thing. Unless it's a for sure state record fish.

[john skarie]

Netting any fish can cause fin damage, but suspending them out of water in a net has the potential to do more than if they are in the water. A cradle would be much better to use than a net.

Don't measure many any more, never girthed a muskie.

Just not really that big of a deal to me.

JS

[DHanson]

I agree cradle would probably be the best if one wants to weigh one.

[Cooter]

If you weigh them, how can you exaggerate then?

[Shawn Kellett]

LMAO Cooter!!!!!!

What would fishing be if it weren't for the lies....ahhhhhmmmmm, exaggerations????

[cjac]

I catch "ish" fish...... 42ish or 46ish or 48ish by using a float stick when I'm curious. Most of the time I'm fairly close, sometimes a thick fish will be longer than I guessed so I'm underestimating instead of growing the fish into legendary status in my own mind!

[JRedig]

I catch "ish" fish...... 42ish or 46ish or 48ish by using a float stick when I'm curious. Most of the time I'm fairly close, sometimes a thick fish will be longer than I guessed so I'm underestimating instead of growing the fish into legendary status in my own mind!

I can vouch for this, he got one last week that he thought was mid to low 40's...turned out to be a fat 48 incher! When a 12-13 inch long bait looks small, it's a big fish dude!

[Cooter]

Yep, all a scale is gonna do is turn you into a lier!

[Muskiefool]

I think JD is getting all the L&G = what weight so we'll have a chart someday for those that care how much they tip the scale; for me I could care less especially after touching the Crooms Massiff, anything else will be below the benchmark.

[NCLaker]

Great stuff guys! Thanks for all your entertaining insight.