LEGAL BREAM

[ON-THE-CHEW]

I would like to find out peoples opinions on the legal size of bream is 23 cms to small. I am a land based fishermen and admit probably 75% of my catch is usually bream, but I am wondering how many people would actually keep a 23cm bream, this size you don't get fillets worth even filleting.

Since they have increased the legal size of squire it seems the general size of catch has also increased is this required for bream to give them a chance to grow into a decent size fish. Generally my mates and I don't keep a bream unless it is over 30cm at this size you can at least get a reasonable fillet of one.

I have brought this subject up because on the weekend I was fishing down at the seaway and saw people keeping bream by the bucket full which would have all been just legal.

I am wondering what peoples opinions are on this mater and if you think what size is a reasonable bream to take home.

<>< <>< <><

[Jethro]

In NSW the leagl size is 25cm and I believe that even at that size they are not worth the effort for a feed.

On the rare occasion that I do keep a bream for a feed it would have to be at least 30cm to make it worth while.

There are plenty of better table fish out there and I would much rather take home a nice feed of flatties ;D

[slugo]

ON-THE-CHEW
just like yourself I only keep the big fat bream I find It to be awaste of time keeping smaller ones. I always throw the smaller bream back and try to catch his grandfather to have a beer with him :) . bream size In NSW are 25cm to keep a 23cm bream would be nothing than skin & bones..

cheers
LEN

[markpeta]

After catching a few nice squire in the passage when you bring up a just legal bream end up throwing back without measuring them they look too small. Think 30cm would be a bit harsh 25-27cm more reasonable but until these sizes are lift up if people want to keep the legal size ones I wouldn't look down on them it's up to each person.

Mark

[Billo]

I let em all go ;D

seriously though , a 23 cm Bream is pretty damn small ...but the regs will go on the terms that it will allow succesfull replenishment of the stocks....and it doesn't seem to ( IMO ), so there is no real reason to raise the limit , you still get more out of a 23cm bream then you do a legal limit whiting ....or gar etc etc , some peoplethink they are the bomb and have no problem with fiddling with the bones :-/

[gogecko]

I dont keep a bream under 30cm either.

However, we need to encourage the kids and families who are not so regular fishers.Bream is the most plentiful and easiest to catch, in my opinion. Weve gotta let people keep something to keep their interest in the sport, so why not 'sacrifice' the most plentiful catch?

Have you seen a 5 yr olds face when he catches a 23cm bream? I wouldnt like to tell him to put it back.......he'll never fish again. Dad wont tell him to put it back either, unless hes very dedicated to understanding legal limits, and we dont want to make criminals of ordinary dads.

[Roo]

I don't think kids need to keep fish to be excited by catching them. I've not got any kids myself, but when fishing with my mates young family the kids go ape over the catching of anything.......even toadfish. In fact just catching the bait (yabbies) is as entertaining for them. We have a great time with the kids and best of all no stinky cleaning little fish.

The big one's (30cm up) are a different story.

Cheers, Roo.

[2iar]

I tend to agree broadly with the general concensus. A 23cm bream is a pain to fillet, and you won't get much flesh for the bother.

I occassionally keep one or two around this size (NEVER under) for the little fella to see the "ritual" of cleaning and cooking if we haven't managed anything better, but otherwise if I'm on my own I really woudn't bother.

On the other hand, as I understand it, bream are prolific breeders and the 23cm ruling wouldn't be there if the DPI (or whoever sets it) thought it was affecting "safe" levels. I don't have a problem with people taking a few of these since they're behaving legally, I just don't think it's worth the hassle personally. Nor would I have a problem if the DPI felt 23cm was too low and raised it a bit - it wouldn't affect my habits much.

Perhaps a reduced bag limit on the smaller ones would be a fair compromise if it's a problem.

I believe that in general, Ausfishers are consciencous anglers, so you're unlikely to have anyone behaving irresponsibly and disagreeing with what's being said on here. If only that were the case across the whole community.

Mike

[joeT]

Like others, I don't keep bream under 30cm either.

But I don't see any reason to enforce a greater limit than 23cm. If, as we all say, a 23cm fish is ridiculously small to keep, then people who keep ones that are smaller have absolutely no excuse for breaking the limits.

If a 23cm limit is sustainable, then we should not deny some little kid the choice to take that fish home and show mum and the rellies, or some person who fishes with very little success to take something home to feel that they've at least got a feed.

There are many 'casual' fishers who hardly catch anything but a barely legal bream. Eating a fish that you caught yourself is always more pleasurable than one you bought from a shop, so we should avoid denying people the choice to do that, even if its just skin and bones ;D

[bugman]

Gents,

Bream is a true bread and butter species for everyone. It makes up a staple part of the take come component of average mum and dad weekend fishos. Us guys that are a bit more experienced may have the opportunity to catch bigger and better fish but you have to take into account the majority of people that fish from land.

To that end it's always got to be possible to allow those fisherpeople to take ahome some fish to eat. Mike is right in that there is fair bit of evidence that Bream have quite a number of chances to spawn at 23cm.

You also have to take into account that an increase in size will have a detrimental affect on the catch of pro fisherman. And before everyone starts we all have to face the fact that there is always going to be a pro fishing industry.

Another influencing factor is the NSW size and bag limit for compliance sake. Makes policing and understanding the rules much easier given our proximity.

Have said all that - I have no idea what the news rules will be ;)

Brett

[jimmybob]

i cant remember where i saw it but apparently a 23cm bream is 5 yrs old....imagine how old a big blue nose is?...

[imnotoriginal]

I'd like to see it brought up. It won't really affect my catch, I'd rather have a cast at a flathead any day if I needed something for the table, but I'd still like to see the limit raised. It would be good to have the regulations the same, just to ease the confusion for holidays-only fishermen. Just MHO
Joel

[gif]

I did a little research on this a while ago.

At 23 cm Qld has the lowest size limit. (Except NT which has none)

(BTW WA has a bag limit of 4)


Minimum sizes are set by their maturity. Basically they should be allowed to breed once before being caught. That’s the general rule on all species.

(How the heck Mangrove jack is allowed to be caught in juvenile sizes I don’t know)


Anyway they have the larger Black Bream down South which may account for the larger minimum size.


Anyway back to Qld it seems the scientists originally got it wrong Or they only got it right for males. According to the latest DPI study (2002) - minimum size for breeding females is 24cm while males is 23 cm. On top of this they usually add a bit.

So in reality I say the minimum size anyone should keep is 25 cm. And that is probably close to what will happen in the next set of regulations (Inshore Fin Fish) which last I heard was delayed for a year.



Even when the kids want to keep dinner - we measure to the fork That adds a good fudge factor.


Gary

[basserman]

in NSW the leagal size used to be 27cm (the size i still stick by and to the fork not streching the buggers bockbone out to get it to the size) however a few years ago the fisherys changed it down to 25cm after a study showed that at 25cm a bream has breed at least two times
but as i sayed i still stick to 27cm no realy point other wise
another thing but and that is if most of us don't keep them untill 27-30cm i'am sure more people out there do the same too so in that case it may be the manority that keep the smaller leagal size hence not really affecting much at all ;)

[gif]

great reply above #- very sensible chap #- but boring as used dish water


Age: # The same DPI study says 23cm Bream are 3 to 5 years old.

I seem to recall reading (Starlo?) # the old Bream are maybe 30 years old #- he is a reliable thorough write # # but I have not see the original #science on that.


Gary


Modified: Whoops sorry basserman I was making a joke about my post not yours - you snuck in there while I was typing.

[basserman]

don't worry i thought you was calling me a sensible chap ;D

about age there is a wite up in the latest Barra and bass + Bream said some thing like some bream in one river reached 26cm in three years while in another river it took the same bream 8 years to reach that size
as for why WA has a bag of 4 the resone behind that is that they only have Black bream and they are the slowest growing bream of the lot and NT have a size and bag of 0 because they only have pikey bream

[LoveLutjanids]

The legal size for any species regulated by size is determined solely by the biology of the species.. not the return of meat.

Meaning, minimum size restrictions are only set on species in order to allow them to reach breading maturity and thus be able to participate perpetuating the species.

For bream this has been determined to be 23cms

Ciao!

[Derek Bullock]

Ahhhhhhhhhhhh, 23 cm bream, tailed and topped, sprinkled with fresh grated ginger and finely chopped schallots, placed on alfoil, drizzled over with soy sauce and cook to perfection in a camp oven, on the barbecue or straight on the coals.

23 cm is fine with me ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D


Derek

[NeMo84]

i dont fillet bream, eat em whole :)

[gif]

LoveLutjanids - yes but read my post the 23cm limit is a mistake They got the science wrong, have said so and will correct it in the next regs - probably to 25cm.

In the mean time we should do the right thing and have a self imposed limit of 25 cm now.

Gary

[DICER]

a 23cm bream is a kids meal....and still great fun

usually only keep the larger ones >25 cm and eat them whole

sweep in SA has a really small size limit, but they taste 100% better than bream - again they done whole

[theoldlegend]

In May 2003, we saw a bloke on the wall at Iluka keeping nearly every bream he caught, and we told him that the inspectors were in the area and was he aware of the legal length. A lot appeared to be well under the 25cms. He disappeared soon after we fronted him.

I got so fired up I shot off a letter to the NSW Fisheries mob in Maclean when I got back home and in part of their reply they said " Research in NSW shows that bream take between 2 and 6 years to reach the minimum length of 25 cm, however this research has also found that bream less than this length may be sexually mature and capable of spawning"

Still doesn't excuse this grub from doing what he did.

[jackash]

I agree 23 cm wayyyyy to smal, i dont keep any under around 30 cm either.
cheers,
Jackash

[saphire]

You are so right, 30cm would be the smallest I would keep as well. Anything smaller does not give a decent feed. Let the little fellows live a bit longer.
saphire [smiley=balloon3.gif]

[logan_whiting]

30 cm for a bream !!!!!!!!! most people only get two or three over the 30 mark a trip some people go fishing for a feed bream are one fish you don't need much skill to cacth them, this means they are a great fish for familys to catch keep it at 23 cm

[Lucky_Phill]

There is a push on to have the legal minimum size limit of Bream ( and other ' bread & butter species' ), to be brought into line with our NSW neighbours.

The ' push ', is also on for a bag limit. Should such a bag limit be introduced, the Club fishing scene will have to adopt. As it stands now, Club fishermen can regulary weigh-in up to 100 plus Bream / Whiting each, for a nights catch.

In the end, many of us have imposed size and bag limits on ourselves. And the reasons for this are simple. 1, to make our selves a better fishermen by settings a higher standard than the one set by the governing body of our hobby, and 2, taking only what we need for a good meal or two.

As Brett ( bugman ) said, there will always be a Commercial industry, and that industry will never support increased size limits, but they do have to contend with the groundswell of support given to the recreational Angler, by those now in power.

Cheers Phill

[MulletGuts]

I go out to catch a feed. If I've already caught a couple of good sized fish, the small legal bream go back.
If I haven't caught anything for a while and I land a couple of small legal bream, they're coming with me.
The size varies on how I'm travelling. Have recently thrown back 28cm bream in the surf cos I've got a couple of nice ones in the bucket. However in the estuary I generally don't catch fish of the same size.
I don't fillet them to eat them, so I don't waste as much as others. Usually find one with some chips is a nice feed.
And if I don't come home after a day with a feed for dinner, then I'm in big strife. You got a problem with me taking small but legal bream..... take it up with my missus.

[Gazza]

There is a push on to have the legal minimum size limit of Bream ( and other ' bread & butter species' ), to be brought into line with our NSW neighbours.

The ' push ', is also on for a bag limit.

Well "push back" !!! ;D :-X

Guys, IF the spawning size is wrong, i'd accept an increase/decrease in sizelimits.....no problem.

Point of "note" :
IF it's being incorrectly determined ,at 23cms, it's been wrong?? forever ...did the fishery collapse??.....NO!!

As for nsw/Qld 'common' size for bread & butter species

HAVEN'T I ALREADY BEEN RIPPED OFF WITH SNAPPER,MJ's AND FLATHEAD BAG/SIZE ::)
(compared to NSW!!)

Q. so do we PUSH to bring our SIZELIMITS down >:( ??? ???
think about it ;)

p.s. fishing hint ,use 2/0 or 3/0 hooks , as minsize ;D :D :D :D
....and...learn to fillet :P :-X

[2iar]

....and...learn to fillet :P :-X

This was partly my point about keeping small but legals occasionaly for the young 'un. If he's never going to keep anything, he won't be able to learn. And I guess if you can fillet the small ones, the bigger ones are no problem.

Mike

[cjbfisher]

I was talking to someone recently, who is in the thick of things, and he told me that at the end of the year. the legal size of bream will be 25cm anf that there will be a bag limit (he couldn't tell me how many).

[angling-addict]

Studies undertaken in Victoria have shown that the average age of a 40-cm black bream in Victorian waters is 27 years old, a 35-cm fish is 15 years old and a 30-cm fish is 9 years old. In Tasmania, in one system where some studies are being done at the moment, the males are reaching the minimum limit (25cm) before reaching sexual maturity.

Does anyone like the idea of slot limits? Why would you want to kill and eat a 30+ year old fish, or take one home to feed the cats ???

Addict