-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Fish List (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Arbu
- Start date
opisska
rabid twitcher
For everything living, there is always http://inaturalist.org - good to keep records and get IDs and since a few days now also again good for maintaining a list (it's no longer buggy as hell).
I personally don't intend to watch fish in any capacity due to my deep hatred of water
Arbu
Well-known member
For everything living, there is always http://inaturalist.org - good to keep records and get IDs and since a few days now also again good for maintaining a list (it's no longer buggy as hell).
I personally don't intend to watch fish in any capacity due to my deep hatred of water
I do use that. But don't you have to have a photo for every sighting?
dantheman
Bah humbug
There are people on here who certainly know their fish. Was it only last year that someone managed to see/photograph all the freshwater fish species in the UK? (not on here). I guess it's hard to record fish without indulging in the questionable(?) practice of actually fishing ...
opisska
rabid twitcher
Only if you want to get others to give you ID and/or want to have your observation included in the "research grade" dataset. For your own purposes, you can store "casual" observations without documentation.
Arbu
Well-known member
Well there's scuba diving of course, for marine species at least. The Collins Pocket Guide to Reef Fishes lists about 2,000 species. It's very hard to remember everything you see on a dive well enough to identify it, so you'd just have to take loads of photos. But that could take a bit of the enjoyment out of a dive because it's pleasant to just observe. Anyway I don't know of any divers who seek out particular species the way that birders do.
Arbu
Well-known member
OK thanks. Could be worthwhile.
dantheman
Bah humbug
Making an assumption there - didn't read your first post properly. Plenty of divers are into wildlife so they must keep records of what they've seen ...
Ficedula
velico ergo sum
I keep a fish list, just as I keep an everything else list. In the last 3 years I have been putting a bit more effort into trying to get to 100 UK species. Its very difficult, probably easier to get 500 birds. Few fish are twitchable and even if they were info is difficult to get. I'm too old to learn to scuba dive, so I am restricted to rock-pooling, angling and just spotting from river bank etc.
So far I have managed 73 which breaks down as 43 angled, 12 field observation, 11 netted and 4 only seen when caught by others.
Only managed two new ones this year, Goldsinny and Dover Sole.
The fish list I am working from has 302 species, that's all freshwater and inshore sea fish. Deepwater fish would significantly increase the GB list, but unless you are on a trawler these are not gettable.
There are about 60 species I have not seen that I could reasonably expect to see/catch given enough time effort.
On a world basis I have seen 404 species, completely pathetic given that the number of fish globally well exceeds the world bird diversity.
At present, FishBase covers >33,000 fish species, so more than three time bird diversity! And with a much greater proportion still to be described.
So far I have managed 73 which breaks down as 43 angled, 12 field observation, 11 netted and 4 only seen when caught by others.
Only managed two new ones this year, Goldsinny and Dover Sole.
The fish list I am working from has 302 species, that's all freshwater and inshore sea fish. Deepwater fish would significantly increase the GB list, but unless you are on a trawler these are not gettable.
There are about 60 species I have not seen that I could reasonably expect to see/catch given enough time effort.
On a world basis I have seen 404 species, completely pathetic given that the number of fish globally well exceeds the world bird diversity.
At present, FishBase covers >33,000 fish species, so more than three time bird diversity! And with a much greater proportion still to be described.
Nutcracker
Stop Brexit!
There's also the problem of definitions - what do you count as a 'fish'? Worth remembering that e.g. salmon is more closely related to birds, and to whales, than it is to sharks . . . :eek!: o
Ficedula
velico ergo sum
There's also the problem of definitions - what do you count as a 'fish'? Worth remembering that e.g. salmon is more closely related to birds, and to whales, than it is to sharks . . . :eek!: o
hence https://www.nosuchthingasafish.com/
jurek
Well-known member
I used to bird with a friend who is also an angler, and he showed me that it is possible to watch fish from the shore. Basically you need to know a microhabitat which a given species likes, and look for some pale background to see them.
I am not really keeping the fish list, but just casually paying attention. I saw several huge Pikes, including spawning in spring. It is a bit difficult to write about them, because one fears that somebody would catch them immediately. Also a huge swarm of Rudd. And Tench which noisily feed on the surface in the morning. In mountain rivers, trout are often visible.
About online recording systems: ebird and ornitho have no fish. Basically this makes them useless as your private record-keeping place, because they also lack other interesting non-bird groups.
I am not really keeping the fish list, but just casually paying attention. I saw several huge Pikes, including spawning in spring. It is a bit difficult to write about them, because one fears that somebody would catch them immediately
. Also a huge swarm of Rudd. And Tench which noisily feed on the surface in the morning. In mountain rivers, trout are often visible. About online recording systems: ebird and ornitho have no fish. Basically this makes them useless as your private record-keeping place, because they also lack other interesting non-bird groups.
Nutcracker
Stop Brexit!
A pair of polarising glasses also helps, as it cuts out the reflection so you can see into the water better.I used to bird with a friend who is also an angler, and he showed me that it is possible to watch fish from the shore. Basically you need to know a microhabitat which a given species likes, and look for some pale background to see them.
I am not really keeping the fish list, but just casually paying attention. I saw several huge Pikes, including spawning in spring. It is a bit difficult to write about them, because one fears that somebody would catch them immediately
About online recording systems: ebird and ornitho have no fish. Basically this makes them useless as your private record-keeping place, because they also lack other interesting non-bird groups.
Arbu
Well-known member
I like to have a list which shows what I haven't seen as well as what I have. So I have an excel spreadsheet which lists all the birds and I work off that. I'm not sure that you can do that with ebird or ornitho.
opisska
rabid twitcher
There's also the problem of definitions - what do you count as a 'fish'? Worth remembering that e.g. salmon is more closely related to birds, and to whales, than it is to sharks . . . :eek!: o
Thats's actually pretty easy: everything in vertebrata that's not in tetrapoda is a fish. You just need to not be scared by the tree shape of the new systematics and not fall for the feeling that you want to cut it in a specific direction or size
Andy Adcock
Worst person on Birdforum
How many species in this group though? I've seen lots of 'flying fish' over the years but not a clue as to species.Also, you don't strictly need to observe all fish under water
Edit: A quick Google suggests 40.
opisska
rabid twitcher
It's not that hard from ferries in Canary Islands (from which is also my photo).
