Bass Scales & Measurements Needed

[FishingGuernsey]

They go through the washing machine just fine as well, no adverse effects...

[Norm B]

--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Norm B @ Jun 23 2007, 06:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->PS, when you've decided what form the tape will eventually take send me an ad and I'll run you some free ads as it's for a good cause..

 

Norm,

 

The tape is currently available and for sale (I've bought a couple, much handier than the metal tape I've been carrying around till now, and it doesn't rust, floats too! They are made of Tyvek which is rip-proof, rot-proof and water-proof)

 

They are available for the princely sum of £2 per tape with all proceeds going to the Restoration Project Fund.

 

Please send cheques made payable to BASS to:

 

John Halton

BASS Treasurer

Millway Cottage

Hoofield Lane

Huxley

Chester

CH3 9BR

Got it. Too late for the July issue but it'll be in the August issue. Watch out for the July issue, you may have a pleasant surprise.

[Leon Roskilly]

-->

QUOTE(Norm B @ Jun 23 2007, 10:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Watch out for the July issue, you may have a pleasant surprise.

 

 

Oh Heck!

 

When I go over to Gillingham to collect a 'free' copy from the Anglers Den, I always end up buying tackle that I probably don't need.

[steve pitts]

--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Norm B @ Jun 23 2007, 06:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> I was just going to suggest that one side is imperial and the other metric. Is it purely length or length x girth as a fat bass will weigh more than a thin one and all my bass are fat ones. PS, when you've decided what form the tape will eventually take send me an ad and I'll run you some free ads as it's for a good cause..

 

Hi Norm

 

Thanks very much for your support.

Greatly appreciated.

 

This MK I version is the product of some novel thinking on how to get a few messages out to RSAs about the bass mls. Anyone looking at the 36cm mark on the tape will realise just how small a bass that is.

 

Next step up to 40cm (Bradshaw's compromise which didn't happen) is hardly anything at all - in fact one year's growth at current rates.

 

45cm is when most bass will be mature and will have spawned at least once. Even this isn't a massive fish, as some folks think (around 18 inches in old money) and will probably weigh a kilo (a couple of pounds).

 

You are quite right about the girth measurement being important for a more accurate estimate of weight. I expect we've all caught long, lean fish - or short, fat ones of all sort of species. This kind of suggestion is the sort of thing we can can look at for the MK II version.

 

Once we've sold the first 1,000 that we've have made for the first run, maybe we can incorporate some info. on the back of the tape as has been suggested.

 

You'll note that the tape goes up to just over a metre and 22.5lbs (sorry about that Dave )

Rather optomistic, I'll admit, but bass of this size have been caught in France and with global warming and all we wouldn't want to have lots of complaints from tape measure owners, that it wasn't long enough.....

 

Cheers

Steve

Edited June 24, 2007 by steve pitts

[Norm B]

--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Norm B @ Jun 23 2007, 06:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> I was just going to suggest that one side is imperial and the other metric. Is it purely length or length x girth as a fat bass will weigh more than a thin one and all my bass are fat ones. PS, when you've decided what form the tape will eventually take send me an ad and I'll run you some free ads as it's for a good cause..

 

Hi Norm

 

Thanks very much for your support.

Greatly appreciated.

 

This MK I version is the product of some novel thinking on how to get a few messages out to RSAs about the bass mls. Anyone looking at the 36cm mark on the tape will realise just how small a bass that is.

 

Next step up to 40cm (Bradshaw's compromise which didn't happen) is hardly anything at all - in fact one year's growth at current rates.

 

45cm is when most bass will be mature and will have spawned at least once. Even this isn't a massive fish, as some folks think (around 18 inches in old money) and will probably weigh a kilo (a couple of pounds).

 

You are quite right about the girth measurement being important for a more accurate estimate of weight. I expect we've all caught long, lean fish - or short, fat ones of all sort of species. This kind of suggestion is the sort of thing we can can look at for the MK II version.

 

Once we've sold the first 1,000 that we've have made for the first run, maybe we can incorporate some info. on the back of the tape as has been suggested.

 

You'll note that the tape goes up to just over a metre and 22.5lbs (sorry about that Dave )

Rather optomistic, I'll admit, but bass of this size have been caught in France and with global warming and all we wouldn't want to have lots of complaints from tape measure owners, that it wasn't long enough.....

 

Cheers

Steve

Hi Steve, I don't expect that anyone catching a bass off the measure would complain, I know I wouldn't. Just over a metre, would that be 40 inches or 3ft 4ins?

[Leon Roskilly]

-->

QUOTE(Norm B @ Jun 24 2007, 10:52 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi Steve, I don't expect that anyone catching a bass off the measure would complain, I know I wouldn't. Just over a metre, would that be 40 inches or 3ft 4ins?

 

er you mean 1 yd, 0ft, 4ins

 

[captain cojones]

or about 39.4 inches?????????????????

[Norm B]

--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Norm B @ Jun 23 2007, 10:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Watch out for the July issue, you may have a pleasant surprise.

Oh Heck!

 

When I go over to Gillingham to collect a 'free' copy from the Anglers Den, I always end up buying tackle that I probably don't need.

So if you subscribed at £12 a year you'd actually save money.

[Leon Roskilly]

-->

QUOTE(Norm B @ Jun 24 2007, 01:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So if you subscribed at £12 a year you'd actually save money.

 

Better idea.

 

 

If you start charging £2.50 an issue, I could read it for free in W.H.Smiths

[Norm B]

--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Norm B @ Jun 24 2007, 01:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> So if you subscribed at £12 a year you'd actually save money.

 

Better idea.

If you start charging £2.50 an issue, I could read it for free in W.H.Smiths

Funny you should mention that, I've had an offer from a distributer for it to go on sale at 95p in various shops like you just mentioned. The jury's out until I see what it looks like from our new printer but your prayers could be answered shortly.