Barbel weights and sizes....

[jayson69]

Hi all

 

Hope for some advice and information.

 

I´m going to organise a Barbel match on a river here in Germany. Unfortuntly Keepnets are not allowed, and the tradition here is to knock the little fella´s on the head. A situation that I´m hoping to change on our club water.

 

What I´m planning is, to make a chart that lists the average size and weight of a Barbel. When an angler catches a Barbel, he will have to call his neighbour over, measure the fish and record it on his card (the neighbour will be holding his card) before releasing the fish back to the River.

 

Obtaining enough Scales will be a problem, so I will reward weights accordinly with the size of the fish. below is my cm - Kg table.

I ask, are the sizes and weights relistic? has anyone better information maybe? I´ll welcome any more idea´s that you chaps may have!!!

 

55cm 1.70 Kg

56cm 1.75 Kg

57cm 1.80 Kg

 

in fact, no need to list them all here, as each cm receives 5 grams etc etc. so that:

 

65cm -- 2,25 Kg

 

70cm -- 2,50 Kg

 

are these relistic "average" sizes and weights of Barbel?

 

Thanks Jayson

[Steve Burke]

If you double the length of a fish the weight will be approx 8x bigger.

 

In the "standard" weight for length tables a 14inch (approx 35cms) barbel weighs 1lb (approx 0.45kgs). So a 28inch (approx 70cms) barbel would weigh approx 8lbs (approx 3.60kgs).

 

I'm tied up today but will construct a table in centimetres and kilos for you as soon as I've got time.

 

Unless some other kind soul can help in the meantime?

[Steve Burke]

Here you go:

 

20cm = 0.08kg

21cm = 0.10kg

22cm = 0.11kg

23cm = 0.13kg

24cm = 0.15kg

25cm = 0.16kg

26cm = 0.18kg

27cm = 0.20kg

28cm = 0.23kg

29cm = 0.26kg

30cm = 0.28kg

31cm = 0.31kg

32cm = 0.34kg

33cm= 0.38kg

34cm = 0.41kg

35cm = 0.45kg

36cm = 0.49kg

37cm = 0.53kg

38cm = 0.58kg

39cm = 0.62kg

40cm = 0.67kg

41cm = 0.72kg

42cm = 0.78kg

43cm = 0.83kg

44cm = 0.89kg

45cm = 0.96kg

46cm = 1.02kg

47cm = 1.09kg

48cm = 1.16kg

49cm = 1.23kg

50cm = 1.31kg

51cm = 1.39kg

52cm = 1.48kg

53cm = 1.56kg

54cm = 1.65kg

55cm = 1.75kg

56cm = 1.84kg

57cm = 1.94kg

58cm = 2.05kg

59cm = 2.16kg

60cm = 2.27kg

61cm = 2.38kg

62cm = 2.50kg

63cm = 2.62kg

64cm = 2.75kg

65cm = 2.88kg

66cm = 3.02kg

67cm = 3.16kg

68cm = 3.30kg

69cm = 3.45kg

70cm = 3.60kg

71cm = 3.76kg

72cm = 3.92kg

73cm = 4.08kg

74cm = 4.25kg

75cm = 4.43kg

76cm = 4.61kg

77cm = 4.79kg

78cm = 4.98kg

79cm = 5.17kg

80cm = 5.37kg

81cm = 5.58kg

82cm = 5.79kg

83cm = 6.00kg

84cm = 6.22kg

85cm = 6.45kg

86cm = 6.68kg

87cm = 6.91kg

88cm = 7.15kg

89cm = 7.40cm

90cm = 7.65kg

91cm = 7.91kg

92cm = 8.17kg

93cm = 8.44kg

94cm = 8.72kg

95cm = 9.00kg

 

These are based on a 35cm barbel weighing 0.45kg. The figures are rounded to 2 decimal places, which is why for instance there's a greater increase between 21cm & 20cm compared with 22cm & 21cm. Of course it's just a rough guide, but it should serve your purpose nicely.

 

If anyone catches one below 20cm I'd suggest it doesn't count as it may be a gudgeon.

 

If anyone catches a barbel above 95cm I'd suggest you award him the match!

[Steve Burke]

The standard weight for length tables were worked out many years ago and as fish are now growing bigger don't go high enough. I therefore had to extend the barbel table.

 

In case anyone wants to extend such a table for other species here's how I did it.

 

Firstly you obviously need a weight for length table. However you don't need the full table, just one value. Here are some to help you.

 

12inch perch =1lb

14inch grayling = 1lb 1oz

11inch roach = 1lb 2ozs

30inch carp = 16lbs

18in chub = 3lbs

16inch trout = 1lb 12oz

20inch tench = 5lbs 2oz

40inch pike = 20lbs

32inch salmon = 14lbs

 

The standard barbel table shows a 14inch barbel weighing 1lb. As Jayson's on the continent I converted this to metric but rounded it to make the calculation easier. 1inch roughly = 2.5cms, 1lb roughly = 0.45kg. So this gives a weight of a 35cm barbel as 0.45kg.

 

Fish are 3 dimensional and roughly the same shape whatever their size. So if you double the length, the weight will have gone up by 2x2x2, in other words 8x. So a 70cm barbel would weigh 3.60kg.

 

The maths for double the length is nice and easy, but it's not much more difficult for other lengths. For instance the weight of a 50cm fish compared with one of 35cm would be 50x50x50 divided by 35x35x35. Then just multiply this by the weight of a 35cm barbel, in other words 0.45kg. The answer to 2 decimal places is 1.31kg.

 

Pounds and ounces is slightly more difficult as you'll need an additional calculation as your answer will be in decimals of a pound. To convert into ounces just multiply by 16. For instance 0.5 pounds = 8 ounces.

 

The principle is the same for other species. For instance using the example I gave above an 18inch chub weighs 3lbs. A 23inch chub therefore weighs 23x23x23 divided by 18x18x18 multiplied by 3lbs. The answer is a fraction over 6lbs 4ozs.

 

Of course all weight for length tables are approximate as they don't take into account the girth of the fish. We all know there are fat fish and skinny fish, and there is a formula to take this into account. However the length for weight tables are a very useful starting point.

Edited November 7, 2008 by Steve Burke

[jayson69]

Thanks very very much Steve!

 

spot on, that´ll be just perfect, and you´ve educated a fellow angler! and hopefully made a lot of fish Happy :-)

 

Again thanks a lot!

 

Jayson

 

P.S could you maybe supply the standard value of a Bream?

[lutra]

From my experience of catching barbel up to low doubles, i would say that list looks just about spot on. One thing i would say about barbel is you do seem to get a number of fish that don't fit with the average (short & fat). I seem to remember reading that the Traveller was one of these measuring just 34" (15lb size i think) yet weighing over 20lb.

[Guest tigger]

From my experience of catching barbel up to low doubles, i would say that list looks just about spot on. One thing i would say about barbel is you do seem to get a number of fish that don't fit with the average (short & fat). I seem to remember reading that the Traveller was one of these measuring just 34" (15lb size i think) yet weighing over 20lb.

 

 

 

I had a 14lb 8oz and it was around 37 inch long but it didn't have a podgy belly it was very thick and solid, it looked super fit to be honest, as I think the Northern Barbs are

[lutra]

I had a 14lb 8oz and it was around 37 inch long but it didn't have a podgy belly it was very thick and solid, it looked super fit to be honest, as I think the Northern Barbs are

Sounds like some fish that Ian, it would be nice to catch it on the 14th March when they seem to weigh there best. I think there might be a bit some thing in that you say about northern barbel, but Ive still had a few short fat fish up here.

 

I think you can see what i mean when you compare pic's of the Traveller to this new fish The Beast.

[Guest tigger]

Sounds like some fish that Ian, it would be nice to catch it on the 14th March when they seem to weigh there best. I think there might be a bit some thing in that you say about northern barbel, but Ive still had a few short fat fish up here.

 

I think you can see what i mean when you compare pic's of the Traveller to this new fish The Beast.

 

 

Yeah I do see what you mean Bri. It's wierd how pic's either make a fish look bigger or smaller than it actually is. The Traveller pic makes the fish look about 13lb to me and yet the pic of the Beast makes it look it's weight.

[Steve Burke]

Thanks very very much Steve!

 

spot on, that´ll be just perfect, and you´ve educated a fellow angler! and hopefully made a lot of fish Happy :-)

 

Again thanks a lot!

 

Jayson

 

P.S could you maybe supply the standard value of a Bream?

 

Just caught up with this again. Sorry, I don't have a table for bream.

 

Can anyone else help?