FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

When is a snapper too big?

Page  12>
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote Far Quirk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: When is a snapper too big?
    Posted: 11 Jun 2019 at 4:06pm
Far Quirk View Drop Down
Moderator - Brown Belt
Moderator - Brown Belt
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2003
Location: Ellerslie
Status: Offline
Points: 2947
Western Australia

They have a minimum size of 500mm and a bag limit of 2 snapper per angler per day.  They measure the fish from the nose to the tip of the tail (not the V).  I'm guessing a 470mm snapper measured to the V would be big enough in WA.
Far Quirk - I'm goin' fishn!
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote Grunta Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Jun 2019 at 2:14pm
Grunta View Drop Down
Admin
Admin
Avatar

Joined: 17 Jul 2002
Location: Paradise
Status: Offline
Points: 8565
Originally posted by Got-ya Got-ya wrote:

.........If you want an upper size limit as well, with even more regulation and disconnect between commercial and recreation keep talking.
Not sure how this thread could drive that conclusion or any reasonable rationale for it. There's some solid points and good evidence to support what many anglers currently do, and that's where they can, they release larger fish in good condition. I think most of us would like to less regulation, more common sense and individuals making good choices based on the circumstances at the time.
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (1) Likes(1)   Quote Far Quirk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Jun 2019 at 1:44pm
Far Quirk View Drop Down
Moderator - Brown Belt
Moderator - Brown Belt
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2003
Location: Ellerslie
Status: Offline
Points: 2947
Some thoughts.

The graph posted by Waynorth is truly amazing and shows how diverse the size range is at any age.  Waynorth points out that a 12 year old snapper can measure between 28 to 90cms!  Even more gobsmacking is that a 3 year old snapper can be 23 to 70cms!!  Now this is wandering off into cloud cuckoo land, but if it was possible to tell a precocious big fish (for example a 3 year old 70cm one) from a slow-growing one (35 years old and 70cm), then it's my opinion that its better to release the young one.  But that's just hypothetical BS.

It could be that our commercial friends are actually targeting young fish.  For the Asian markets 25 to 30cm snapper are very sought after.  By selecting these fish they are removing small fish and helping to counteract the recreational fishos?  (I'm hearing howls or rage at this idea, but just putting it out there.)

Thru self interest, commercial fishos don't target shallow reefy areas, otherwise they would lose too much gear and waste time.  Not saying commercial fishos don't catch big fish, but maybe the recreational fishos targeting the shallow reefy areas are catching more big fish as a proportion of their catch?  Once again, a bit controversial.

I like fishing shallow reefy structure in winter, because there's always a chance I'll catch a big fish.  But it's only a small chance, and my lack of skill means the bigger ones mainly elude me.  But if I ever catch one over 65cms, I would be inclined to put it back after a quick photo.  Using big circle/recurve hooks and wet towels for handling the fish should improve their survival prospects.
Far Quirk - I'm goin' fishn!
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote smudge Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Jun 2019 at 6:21am
smudge View Drop Down
Moderator - Ninja
Moderator - Ninja
Avatar

Joined: 17 Jul 2002
Location: Te Toro
Status: Offline
Points: 22966
Originally posted by Muppet Muppet wrote:

Yeah I agree actually Got-ya. I think when they reduced limits to 7 per day a few years back with the threat of 3 per day mooted first I actually think that the 3 number will be banded again in the not distant future now. A long term ploy but I think I have wised up to the tactics in play here.

  

Me too


Best gurnard fisherman in my street
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote Muppet Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Jun 2019 at 5:40am
Muppet View Drop Down
Titanium
Titanium
Avatar

Joined: 26 May 2004
Location: North Shore
Status: Offline
Points: 14352
Yeah I agree actually Got-ya. I think when they reduced limits to 7 per day a few years back with the threat of 3 per day mooted first I actually think that the 3 number will be banded again in the not distant future now. A long term ploy but I think I have wised up to the tactics in play here.

  
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote Got-ya Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Jun 2019 at 5:18am
Got-ya View Drop Down
Silver
Silver
Avatar

Joined: 06 Apr 2008
Location: Waiuku
Status: Offline
Points: 352
They told us to 'limit our catch not catch our limit', which we bought into then they turned around and reduced it. We all started to have a voluntary 30cm minimum size limit and they who shall not be named found out and raised the size limit.
 
See a theme here? anyone? Learn from past mistakes before your best intentions return to shaft you. I for one will take any legal size I decide I have a use for and no amount of good meaning but poorly thought out pressure or looking down the nose snobbery will change my mind.
That 55cm fish you are all happy to take is probably in excess of ten years old but I bet the same crew would be the first to look down their noses at an angler who hangs up a fast growing stripy of 90kg which is probably about 5 years old.
 
If you want an upper size limit as well, with even more regulation and disconnect between commercial and recreation keep talking.
THERE ARE TWO KINDS OF FISHERMAN, THOSE WHO FISH FOR SPORT AND THOSE THAT CATCH SOMETHING.
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (1) Likes(1)   Quote Grunta Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Jun 2019 at 1:07pm
Grunta View Drop Down
Admin
Admin
Avatar

Joined: 17 Jul 2002
Location: Paradise
Status: Offline
Points: 8565
Here's some more research on size/breeding which concludes bigger female fish invest disproportionately more in making eggs than smaller females. The conclusion is, taking a single big fish has a bigger impact on the fish population than taking multiple small ones.

Ref: Science Daily covers recent Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute research. "Big fish produce disproportionately more and bigger eggs: A big deal for fisheries". link

What difference does it make whether an angler catches one big fish or two smaller fish, each half its weight? Experts assumed that big and small fish invest the same proportion of their energy to make eggs. But a new report in Science by a Smithsonian biologist and colleagues shows that plus-sized females invest disproportionately more in the number of eggs and the size of individual eggs. Therefore, taking a single big fish has a bigger impact on the fish population than taking multiple small ones.

"Our results are critical for fisheries management: They tell us to reduce fishing pressure on large fish rather than smaller ones in order to maintain and replenish stocks," said staff scientist D. Ross Robertson at the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute (STRI) in Panama. "We need to focus on reducing fishing pressure on large fish rather than exploiting them more heavily than small fish."

Led by Diego R. Barneche at Monash University's Centre for Geometric Biology and the University of Sydney, Robertson, along with evolutionary biologists Craig White and Dustin Marshall, also from Monash University, surveyed egg number, egg volume and energy invested in eggs by 342 different marine species, based on publications in Google Scholar about wild fish, as well as data on egg-quality of a range of species collected by Robertson.

The number of eggs laid by a single mother ranged from 11 to almost 58 million eggs per clutch. Egg volume ranged from a hundredth of a cubic millimeter to 0.345 cubic centimeters.

The energy content of eggs from fish collected at sites around the world from Japan to Corsica ranged from seven hundredths of a Joule to almost 300 Joules. Larger eggs have slightly less energy per unit volume than small eggs but a much higher energy content overall. Rather than finding a straight linear relationship: more weight implies more egg production, they found a power-function relationship: as weight goes up, the effort put into reproduction rises exponentially.

"There have always been two quite different explanations of the relationship between size and fecundity," Robertson said. "We collected enough data to identify what we think is generally the correct relationship."

From river systems, to trees, to genes, scientists are discovering that the properties of biological systems are often governed by power laws, rather than linear relationships. For example, scaling up the effective dosage of a drug in a mouse to the weight of a human resulted in overdoses, because the relationship was not linear. Also, ecologists working in Africa found that bigger species of savannah animals require disproportionately more space to live in than smaller animals.

"The realization that fecundity in marine fish is non-linear is important not only for managing commercial fish stocks to maintain and enhance their productivity, but also for understanding evolution and for managing invasive species such as lionfish, in which the big females seem to be concentrated in deep water," said Robertson.

Content Acknowledgement:
Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute via Science Daily.

Journal Reference:
Diego R. Barneche, D. Ross Robertson, Craig R. White, Dustin J. Marshall. Fish reproductive-energy output increases disproportionately with body size. Science, 2018; 360 (6389): 642 DOI: 10.1126/science.aao6868
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote cirrus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Jun 2019 at 10:12am
cirrus View Drop Down
Titanium
Titanium


Joined: 07 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 8384
but if you release all snapper over 2 meters in length there will be days you come home with nothing.
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote Steps Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Jun 2019 at 9:58am
Steps View Drop Down
Titanium
Titanium


Joined: 14 Oct 2013
Location: Sth Auckland
Status: Offline
Points: 8157
.the enemy of ruining fish is over cooking it ...not its age or size........If you know what you are doing.....most fish can be cooked nicely.

Now thats the secret...and applies to everything, lambs fry to broccoli.
 With thick fillets, or what ever you cook the outside layers get over cooked even if the middle is perfect (unless rare).. thats also the reason cooking pieces .. including veggies and fish in a wok are added at different times and cut to size.
 Why thick lambs fry is sliced thru the middle so the outside doesnt go like leather...Wienerschnitzel same

When it won't fit in your boat?
 Nah tow it home Thumbs Up
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (1) Likes(1)   Quote widerange Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Jun 2019 at 7:44am
widerange View Drop Down
Platinum
Platinum


Joined: 17 Jan 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 1711
When it won't fit in your boat?

Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (2) Likes(2)   Quote laidbackdood Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Jun 2019 at 10:13pm
laidbackdood View Drop Down
Titanium
Titanium
Avatar

Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 4902
As far as cook ability goes....a snapper is never too big to cook.....it has the added bonus of extra fat most of the time and the flesh segments tend to hold together really well.......excellent for curry and tender cooked in curry too.....have cooked a few biggies that way.......big kingfish no probs too and puka and bass but a nice feeling to release a big fish !.......the enemy of ruining fish is over cooking it ...not its age or size........If you know what you are doing.....most fish can be cooked nicely.
Once the idiots turn up..Im outta here...No time for Drama Queens.
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (1) Likes(1)   Quote cirrus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Jun 2019 at 12:41pm
cirrus View Drop Down
Titanium
Titanium


Joined: 07 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 8384
A well researched and very accurate article . 
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (1) Likes(1)   Quote Grunta Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Jun 2019 at 11:59am
Grunta View Drop Down
Admin
Admin
Avatar

Joined: 17 Jul 2002
Location: Paradise
Status: Offline
Points: 8565
Do what's right for all parties (ie: the angler and the fish) at the time. To me, that means if a snapper has been bought up from >20m and/or is blown, it's prognosis is probably not that great, and you should probably keep it.  That scenario gets worse the deeper you're fishing too.

Having said that however, it's all over if it's been spiked and in the bin.

As someone has already pointed out, the bigger snapper smoke up really well and if you cut the fillets up across the grain into appropriate-sized slices, are just fine to cook.

Again it comes down to doing what you believe is right at the time in my view. If you've caught enough for a decent feed and don't need it then why kill it?  If you're killing a trophy fish just for bragging rights then there are better ways these days and the number of clubs and contests that are moving to measure based contests and enabling the anglers to either keep or release the fish is growing. 

On the subject of genes, and breeding ability I think it's pretty well documented that large snapper produce more eggs than small snapper. Any gene pool carries a range of genetic material and some individuals will grow to be considerably larger than others and at any specific age, there will be a normal distribution of size - weights and lengths. So the argument about letting the big healthy specimens go from a genetic perspective is simply that they carry those strong healthy genes for biggie-size.

Here's a piece that ran in NZ Fishing News in March 2018 ago on genetics that goes into much more detail - I know the author well and she's a keen angler herself...



If you’re not already a member of the 20lb snapper club, your time might be running out thanks to human-induced evolution, suggests genetics student Anna Blair…

According to Darwin’s theory of evolution, the most successful organisms will survive to thrive and pass their genes on to the next generation. While environmental factors are normally the major determinant of reproductive success, when we interfere with natural selection, the gene pool is altered, a process termed Human Induced Evolution. 

Selective agents
We tend to act as selective agents when fishing because there is a natural tendency to think that ‘bigger is better’ and to place a high value on ‘PB’s’ for different species. Large trophy fish often end up on the scales – most fishing contests bear witness to that observation. 

Removing a disproportionate number of fish with certain genes from a population means those genes are not passed on in the same proportion to future generations and the percentage of those fish in the total population will decline. 

Size-selective harvesting or killing of larger fish means a shift to greater proportions of smaller fish in the population. These smaller sized fish pass on their genes, so the average size in the population is shifted towards the smaller end of the scale.

Fisheries-induced evolution has been happening for decades and it happens much faster than natural evolution. Archaeological evidence confirms that the average size of snapper was once much larger than it is today. The age, size and weight of snapper at maturity has declined over time with the most likely causes an increase in fishing pressure and advances in technology.

Shrinking populations
Fisheries-induced evolution poses a threat to the future state of fisheries, affecting yields, stock stability and recovery potential of populations. Size-selective harvesting may cause fish populations to reach maturity at a younger age and smaller size, at which the individuals have lower productivity. 

Large female fish produce more eggs and larger males produce more sperm, so the number of offspring per head of population tends to be larger than with populations containing smaller sized fish. Larger males also tend to be preferred by females and have more reproductive success than smaller male fish. 

Genetic diversity is critical for the health and success of a population because it is the raw material for evolution. Genetic traits are naturally selected for or against based on fluctuations in environmental conditions. A reduction in genetic diversity results in decreased ability of individuals to adapt to changing conditions: fewer individuals will survive in the event of environmental change and population size decreases. The fish that do survive to produce offspring pass on similar genes, contributing to greater genetic uniformity. 

The cycle repeats, making it more difficult for a species to return to the productivity and diversity it once enjoyed. 

Not only does fisheries-induced evolution have a negative effect on the fish populations themselves, but it also has social and economic implications, such as decreased commercial fishing potential and a reduction in the contribution of recreational fishing to New Zealand’s economy.   

Norway’s cod
An example of fisheries-induced evolution has been exhibited in the case of the Norwegian cod stock. Large fish are prized in Norway and fetch higher prices at fish markets. The cod stock has undergone multiple declines since the first quota was introduced in 1978, and since 1930 the average size and age of sexual maturity in cod has decreased significantly. 

Doctoral research fellow Anne Maria Eikeset of the Centre for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis published findings that suggested evolutionary change, as a result of the boom in the commercial fishing industry, is the culprit. As large fish go for the highest price, their genes for large size, increased reproductive success and later sexual maturity have continuously been removed from the population. 

The fact that changes are being made at the genetic level means fishing, both recreationally and commercially, is affecting species more than we have been aware of. While some populations may be able to recover in terms of biomass, it is unclear whether reversals in terms of genetic diversity are possible. 

Research models produced by various groups indicate that several years of evolutionary recovery will be required to restore populations to their highly productive and diverse states for each subsequent year of exploitation at its current rate. This ‘Darwinian debt’ will need to be repaid by future generations that are already suffering from other effects of environmental neglect. 

Fish for the future
So, what can we do about it? Fortunately, there are a few ways we can aid the recovery of our great New Zealand fish populations and reduce the amount of genetic diversity lost through fishing. We already have a size limit on the lower end of the scale, so maybe an upper size limit could be introduced during breeding seasons to allow big fish to reproduce and pass on their genes. 

Releasing large fish will also be important and fortunately a change of attitude around killing the big ones is starting to filter through to most anglers. 

Competitions should focus on sustainability rather than kill and weigh. Again, there’s a real shift to using measurement as the criteria for angling achievement and recognition. Today’s technology makes it easy to photograph a fish on a measure and have that recognised, but also allows big fish to be released to breed another day. 

The DB Export NZ Fishing Competition is a good example of the use of technology to empower anglers to make their own decisions on what’s best for the fishery and sustainability.

We have an opportunity to make a positive change for future generations – letting some of those big catches go is worthwhile for the benefit of the future keen anglers of New Zealand. 

So, when you tick off that bucket-list goal of a 20lb snapper or a 30kg kingfish, if it’s in good condition, maybe it can go back to keep those large-growth genes in the pool!

Anna Blair is studying genetics at Otago University.

References
https://www.forskningsradet.no/en/Newsarticle/Humaninduced+fish+evolution/1235738803339
http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-112414-054339
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote cirrus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Jun 2019 at 11:30am
cirrus View Drop Down
Titanium
Titanium


Joined: 07 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 8384
Interesting. What was the source of chart. Probably accurate.
Did a bit looking to see what i could find.

Found that a 4 year old fish is 30cm. But another source says a 4 year old is 25cm. Neither report stated what fishery these figures came from. So growth could vary dependent on the fishery zone.
Another pdf from nz govt stated the oldest recorded snapper was 65 years old,measured 67cm ,recorded from sn7 in 2000.

Also statedthat from 1994 class in hauraki gulf, surveyed in 2009 @ 16years ,size varied from 28cm to 58cm. Big variation for same year class.
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (1) Likes(1)   Quote waynorth Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Jun 2019 at 10:06am
waynorth View Drop Down
Platinum
Platinum
Avatar

Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Location: Kerikeri
Status: Offline
Points: 1100
They often get a bit chewy over 7kg or so - fine for smoking or curries but maybe not so good for fish & chips.

Could be an age issue rather than size - the ranges in this chart surprised me. A 12 year old fish might be 90cm or might be undersized.


treat fish like fish
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote Garry 23041 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jun 2019 at 6:52am
Garry 23041 View Drop Down
Platinum
Platinum


Joined: 19 May 2007
Location: Mangonui
Status: Offline
Points: 1983
I put big fish back in part so someone else might get to catch it and have that buzz.
Particularly with kingfish these days getting smaller on average where I fish.
I think small snaps are finer flesh, nicer eating and to divert slightly we think fish from cleaner water taste better.
My wife and I agree fish from up north on the coast (north cape, reinga etc) taste better than bay fish.
Anyone else think/notice that?
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote Horse1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Jun 2019 at 10:20pm
Horse1 View Drop Down
Bronze
Bronze
Avatar

Joined: 30 Dec 2011
Location: The Tron
Status: Offline
Points: 11
I have the belief that good spawning is about more than the size of the fish and the size of the roe. Climatic conditions play a far bigger role than fish size from what I've been led to believe. Every legal fish on our boat is taken and we will pull stumps when we have enough for a good feed. I hate the thought i could be releasing a heap of fish that won't make it, that's just a waste.
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote smudge Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Jun 2019 at 10:07pm
smudge View Drop Down
Moderator - Ninja
Moderator - Ninja
Avatar

Joined: 17 Jul 2002
Location: Te Toro
Status: Offline
Points: 22966
I don't understand the big fish genetics thing. All fish with big fish genes were little for most of their lives. They still had the same genes. Correct me if that statement is wrong. 

If that is true then a lot of fish on their way to the top should have been released? Surely that statement is true too. Also it must be true thatonly fish with big fish genetics get to be big fish. 

Ohhh hang on a minute, is their any science that says there is a 46cm snapper that is 80 years old? 

We only know what we know. 


Best gurnard fisherman in my street
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (0) Likes(0)   Quote cirrus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Jun 2019 at 9:58pm
cirrus View Drop Down
Titanium
Titanium


Joined: 07 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 8384
If you want to keep a big fish keep it. If you want to release it and its in good health release it. My wife managed a big fish last year .Open sand about 10-15 meters. Was gut hooked on a huge bait but  not bleeding. Tried to release three times but it just would not swim away
The fight in current had worn it out.
Kept it. Was one of the sweetest ,most tender fish you could wish for. 
Was only 72 cm to tail fork but in condition like you rarely see. So fat & deep across the shoulders.Would have gone 16-17 lb.
Do fish taken from deep water survive when released. I have had some snapper from 15 meter with the gut bulging out the mouth. Others from same depth look o.k
Re big fish been best breeders. Bigger the fish the bigger the roe.
Couple of years back there was a big snapper in new world. It went 24lb. It did not sell as a whole fish as hoped. So they filleted it.
They showed me the roe. Massive. Just didnt know roe got that big.
Shame that fish was lost to the fishery
Back to Top
Post Options Post Options   Likes (1) Likes(1)   Quote Muppet Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Jun 2019 at 9:36pm
Muppet View Drop Down
Titanium
Titanium
Avatar

Joined: 26 May 2004
Location: North Shore
Status: Offline
Points: 14352
This old chestnut, do what you will you know the limits. 
Back to Top
Page  12>
Forum Jump
Forum Permissions View Drop Down


This page was generated in 0.164 seconds.