North Australian FISH FINDER TM forums

Hey guys, I'm doing an assignment in regards to the size limits off barramundi and whether there should be a maximum size limit? Please feel free to leave your opinion as I need some primary sources.

Thanks for your help

I think there should be a max size limit. Just to keep the breeding stock going. I understand that the older the fish gets the lesser amount of eggs are produced but less eggs are better than none. Plus the tourist dollars they bring in and untold amounts of money that all us fishos spend while chasing them would bring an immense benefit to the community that would be very hard to measure. What should that limit be? I dont know but the proposed 90cm seems ok to me

I think anything under a meter is fair game. Over a meter must throw back!

I think the save the barra crew have taken things far enough already to ensure stocks will be be there for the future wich I dont see as a bad thing but anything else added and I think it would be getting out of hand
They are a prolific breeder

I think they should be a max limit purely to keep the stocks going. True they are a good breeder and stocks are healthy, but wby not keep that running along nicely?
we should never be in a position where stocks are under threat like the jewies etc.
Ive eaten my share of large breeders and like any old animals, they taste like cr.p IMO
The question is where to set that limit.
The big fish are much harder to successfully release than the rats

Surely 90% of the big girls are caught by local fisho's, and throw in a few by tourists with guides. I have no doubt that 90+% of those would be thrown back. I would have to say, that I haven't heard of any of the fisho's in my own circles ever keeping anything over 90cm. It feels to me that the gentlemen's rule is becoming far more widely recognised and even broadening down into the 90's.

Keep up the word of mouth, it will look after the big girls and the number of barra will take care of themselves.

It easy, just say they taste sh!te compared to the ones in the mid 70's.

people are like sheep - they follow.

I would say at this stage after speaking with Ronalds at Fishing and outdoor world that anything from 55-85cm is fair game. Anything between 85-115cm go back. Anything over 115cm your welcome to kill or keep for mounting etc. This is because we think that given the older fish start to produce less eggs and we also reckon that they would be eating more undersized barra then they would be producing in their year. Just our thoughts.

Anything 80 & over I throw back.

I agree with Mr RiverBabe.
85 cm is probably big enough to throw back, and it would be nice to be able to keep a fish to mount, if I ever get the chance.

If it doesnt fit in my esky, it swims again...

Hemi sounds like you need a bigger esky

I think 90

Mr RiverBabe wrote:I would say at this stage after speaking with Ronalds at Fishing and outdoor world that anything from 55-85cm is fair game. Anything between 85-115cm go back. Anything over 115cm your welcome to kill or keep for mounting etc. This is because we think that given the older fish start to produce less eggs and we also reckon that they would be eating more undersized barra then they would be producing in their year. Just our thoughts.

Speaking with Ronald sounds like some good science there Mr Riverbabe. How many we think marine biology papers have you two produced.

80 and over goes back in northern WA.

What about lowering the lower limit?