|
|
|
Forums36
Topics42,114
Posts571,689
Members19,115
| |
Most Online45,564
|
|
|
2 members (FishinRod, gehajake),
11,279
guests, and
166
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 14,300 Likes: 450
Moderator Ambassador Field Correspondent Hall of Fame 2014  Lunker
|
|
Moderator Ambassador Field Correspondent Hall of Fame 2014  Lunker
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 14,300 Likes: 450 |
I think, techinically, its "Weight Relative."
Essentially, there's some averaged data of weight of a fish compared to it's length, and that average is assumed to be for a healthy fish.
So, against that standard, you compare the length and weight of your fish as a gauge as to how they're doing in your pond.
Excerpt from Robert Crais' "The Monkey's Raincoat:" "She took another microscopic bite of her sandwich, then pushed it away. Maybe she absorbed nutrients from her surroundings."
|
|
1 member likes this:
Bradley Goins |
|
|
Moderated by Bill Cody, Bruce Condello, catmandoo, Chris Steelman, Dave Davidson1, esshup, ewest, FireIsHot, Omaha, Sunil, teehjaeh57
|
|
|
|