Estimating fish size

[spinner1]

I have 2 ways to guess fairly close to the actual length of a trout

One is the tip to tip index to thumb for me is 8 inches.

The other is the general width of a person's knuckles across their hands.

They vary from 3.5 inches to a huge 5 inches. This is not scientific at all.
But is good way to "guess" Better than laying the fish on the ground and measuring.

My bud John always measured his fish with his net. It has a bag in it with inches actually
on the net bottom.

GUESS to closest inch what length these fish are.







Most people guess wrong.

[DG]

28, 28, 28. Definitely. Tell your clients.

[126barnes]

24...........23............24

[spinner1]

[JohnScott]

Len -

Another, and I think more reliable, method, for larger fish, is to measure from the tip of your index finger to the inside of your elbow, and from the tip of your index finger to the upper end of your arm. For me, that is 17" and 24", respectively. Instead of putting the fish down on the ground to measure it, you can lay it on your arm and get a very good estimate of its length. If you need more than a very good estimate, you'll probably need to mark your rod or get a measuring tape.

As to the fish in the picture, its difficult for me to estimate the length of a fish that is held at arms length, or close to it, toward the camera. I guess I would just say BIG, BIG, and BIG. Or something like 22-23".

John

[okflyfisher]

Nice fish 19.5 18 18.5

[Clay]

Even at arms length the distance across the knuckles can give a clue to true length. I know the type of picture where the mans hand looks 1 1/2 times his head, none of these pictures are like that, but even in those types of pictures this can be a good guide. I think that Len hinted about using this method in his original post. My guesstimate is 22, 23 and 20.

Another comment is that measuring a fish is usually quicker and there for less stressful on the fish than weighing it. But we have all seen the very long fish with the big head vs the shorter but very stocky fish with the smaller head and huge body. Weighing them can also give you further info, but again most of us just don't want to stress the fish, especially trout.

My carp catches for this year will be documented in not only length but also weight. I plan on weighing them in my net to reduce the stress even on the carp. I'm also enjoying documenting my outtings much better this year than last. During the winter months, hopefully I can relive some of the good times had during better weather.

[hap]

I find the 3.5-5" knuckle width numbers interesting. The websites I found say the average male human hand is ~3.3" wide, or conveniently below your range. My hands are far larger than average and Jumbo Green Ape gloves are one of the few models I have found that fit. My hand is not 4" wide. Comes in a full 1/4" shy actually, yet nearly 14% over average. Large enough to go beyond large and extra large gloves from most makers.

I admit there are lots of folks with bigger hands than mine. Polly Rosborough had enormous hands and I remember well when meeting him, how my hand disappeared inside his while I towered over him by nearly a foot.

A great fish is a great fish and does not need stretching... or even a number.
art

[Clay]

A great fish is a great fish and does not need stretching... or even a number.
art

Agreed. If you don't want to measure that is cool. Some like to measure so that they can keep accurate records. Some like Spinner are more concerned with a quick release than grabbing the tape measure so they use a reasonable estimate in juding the fish. I have one of the measure nets and it is very handy indeed.

If you don't want to measure no one said that you have to. Everyone doesn't have to do it the same way. Fishing is different things to different people, as long as no one is doing anything illegal and they are showing respect for the fish, life if good.

[gutbomb]

I have a pretty simple measuring system

Dink
Medium
Big
Hog



I'm rarely wrong. Those three would fall into the "big" category.