360 Tuna Fishers Forum banner
1 - 4 of 4 Posts

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
2,924 Posts
congrats a 68.6" bluefin solo is quite an achievement. I always thought a 68+" fish was in the 200 range myself. OTI makes a great products

In the end you can have all the best gear, bells and whistles but its the angler that makes the difference and you should be excited about that catch
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
430 Posts
I also have been saying that a 67''-68'' fish caught in Cape Cod is well in the
200lb class. These fish are eating well and are extremly fat for there lenth
size. Girth size really matters:D

Congrats on a great fish.
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
1,386 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
I also have been saying that a 67''-68'' fish caught in Cape Cod is well in the
200lb class. These fish are eating well and are extremly fat for there lenth
size. Girth size really matters:D

Congrats on a great fish.

Thank you. Handling the boat and landing the fish solo, and getting a photo and even getting my Shibuki back, made it a total thrill--you know the feeling.

Interesting about the girth. The volume of a fish is a factor times the square of its girth times its length (f x G x G x L). So the girth is hugely important, much more so that length, strictly speaking. Two things though: when you measure curved-fork-length, you get a sort of measure of the girth because the tape travels the whole length contour of the fish; and also, the girth increases approximately in proportion to curved-fork-length.

There was an 80 7/8 inch fish caught in the same area a few weeks ago that was weighed at 337 lbs., after it bled. So perhaps it was about 345 lbs. Round Weight. The tables say that tuna would be 310 lbs. RW, making the fish about 10% above "book". So for fish the the CCB area, I'd use the NMFS data and know there was a plus or minus 10%, or so, range.

Or should we just get some tuna scales to carry with us? :rolleyes:
 
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
Top