Barrie Rickards' Angling

BBC - Anti Angling?
There has been some interesting writing during the last couple of months or so, raising all manner of issues, so I'd be interested to hear what you think of them. One of the issues has been that of angling on terrestrial TV or, rather, the lack of it. A letter has appeared in several angling magazines from a TV producer, Gelly Morgan, castigating the terrestrial channels for turning up their noses at John Wilson's successful angling series. When criticism comes from a TV producer, and a successful one at that, it carries a little bit more weight than if the remarks come from someone like myself. Even so, I've said it before, and I'll do so again: the BBC in particular is opposed to angling; not just to angling on TV, but to angling. That they cannot see the quality of John Wilson's programmes would be almost beyond belief - until you realise that it matters not what they quality is, just as long as it is angling they have no interest. No, that is wrong: they are opposed to it.

Almost every utterance from the BBC, over many years, has demonstrated both its ignorance of and its opposition to angling. And what the BBC says does tend to spill over into the whole of the chattering classes/café society/champagne socialists, which is one of the reasons why that group of people is currently questioning angling - with a tinge of surprise in their voices, because angling is not a subject they have considered in the past. It's perhaps worth remembering that the BBC is currently under review, so if the editor could provide us all with the address (and name) of the Director, we could all tell him what we think about these things. Remember, please, that the BBC was anti the countryside march, is therefore anti-countryside (or prefers urban) issues, and is therefore by nature anti-angling. Personally I'd scrap the BBC licence now and tell them to prove themselves without subsidy.

Suspended Deadbaits
Turning now to an angling matter, a pike angling matter, that has cropped up several times in the last few months, namely the use of suspended deadbaits for pike. Paul Gardner, writing in Angling Times, fishes suspended heads and tails of mackerel, as well as other suspended baits, and his preference is to set them on the hooks so that they sit horizontally in the water. I used to do this a long time ago, but I satisfied myself that it was quite unnecessary, and I'm more than happy to hang any deadbait vertically. It makes casting and hooking easier for a start. What convinced me were two things: one, pike didn't mind at all (the main reason!); two, most fish on which pike prey actually spend quite a bit of time hanging vertically in the water, head up or head down, so pike must be quite used to seeing them like that. If you watch a shoal of almost any species for any length of time at least some of them - sometimes all of them - will hang their head down (usually). In my fish tank I have a very healthy tench that spends 90% of its time in a vertical position, head upwards. Of course, fish in the way that gives you most confidence, but my advice is not to be fussy on this one.

What about the World beating anglers?
I read an interesting statement in The Telegraph at the time of England's Rugby World Cup triumph: “In the last twenty years no England sport team has won a world title or a world cup.” Really? About as bad as the utterances of the BBC on sporting matters. Despite repeated wins of world titles (team and individuals, in most branches of angling, angling has featured in the honours lists (OBEs, etc) only five times in the last 10 years (I had the authorities look this up for me). In any international sphere, of sports involving more than a handful people, angling is the most successful sport - and the least recognised, either by TV and the media, or by the honours system. It stinks.

Do foul-hooked fish 'count'?
Back to angling. Did you see the debate recently about whether or not foul-hooked fish 'count'? In match angling, as pointed out by Bob Nudd (who by any criteria in use by the honours people should be Sir Bob Nudd) the inclusion of foul-hooked fish could tempt some anglers using some techniques to foul hook fish. I can see this problem and sympathise with it. In my own specimen hunting I always 'count' foul-hooked fish, but I record them as such in my diary if it's appropriate to record it at all. I always used to think that a foul-hooked fish was after the bait anyway, but this isn't necessarily the case, of course. And I do recall, as a youth fishing a canal off the Yorkshire Derwent, a gang of adult 'anglers' foul-hooking bream that were packed in a dense shoal. Quite what pleasure they got out of this Heaven only knows. I guess that in match fishing foul-hooking has to be ruled out. Elsewhere it's a personal matter, but deliberate foul-hooking as in the case above or as in salmon poaching, is actually illegal.

Rubbish Richard!
Zander! I read a piece recently by Richard Lee, editor of Angling Times, in which he said that zander were made a scapegoat for fish biomass decline in the Fens, and that cormorants were more likely culprits. What total rubbish. The cormorant problem, real though it is, came years after the zander impact on fen stocks. I don't know how old Richard Lee was then the zander crisis erupted in 1963-70+, but I was there, monitored the waters in question, caught a lot of zander, did some scientific research, and I can assure Richard that, much as I love zander (and I do), they were just as devastating in their time as cormorants have been. Unlike cormorants the zander were always expected, after a decade or so, to settle down in numbers and become part of the newly-stable ecosystem. And they did. The cormorants have not, and will not.

Eel today gone tomorrow
It now seems that what many of us have been saying for twenty five years, that eels were in decline, is at last widely recognised. To some anglers, eels are not important. But look at it like this: long before man came on the scene eels were a major part of the aquatic ecosystems. We may not like a bootlace eel on the end of our line, but eels are there for reasons, but not least because they moderate the numbers of other fish that reach maturity. They also provide food for major predators such as pike and others. Indeed, had the eel population been re-established before the enthusiastic re-introduction of otters then the latter would probably not have caused the problems they have done. Here was a good case of the green welly brigade not having much knowledge of the aquatic ecosystem. They knew a little about cuddly, furry otters, but not a lot about fish - and, as fish feed otters, it would have helped that they ascertained that the food supply was present first.

Getting eels back in reasonable numbers will mean carefully controlling commercial fishing of eels in fresh water, including elver catching. When I have sat on committees in the past, attempting to deal with this problem, the commercial eel men were adamant in their opposition to marking their sunken nets with buoys. Why? Crab and lobster fishermen have always marked their traps so, and they keep enough of an eye on the traps to deter poachers. So too should freshwater eel trappers. It is quite wrong that unmarked fyke net systems are left in our water: for one thing we might fish there and lose all our tackle on the sunken 'snag'. This often happens in fact.

Fish for food
Have you been following the occasional accounts of fishing (and cooking!) with the renowned chef Marco Pierre White? I'm not sure I'm happy about some of his pike catching claims - not, at least, as they have been reported in the popular press. And I'm surprised, to say the least, that he subscribes to the idea that some fish taste 'muddy'. Well, how does he know this? How do all those other foodies know this? Do they try a dollop of mud occasionally, just to keep their palate in tune? Odd isn't it? I've tasted a lot of fish, all over the world, and I've yet to taste one that reminded me of when I had my face trampled in the mud during a rugby match.

Still on fish as food, do you get as angry as I do when you see the term 'Sea bass' on an English restaurant menu? I mean, why not sea cod, or sea plaice. I sent the following letter to one of the broadsheet newspapers but received neither reply nor acknowledgement, and certainly it wasn't used. Maybe I'll try again sometime. It's just an affectation in my book. Sea bream is OK, because you really would need to know whether or nor you were eating bronze bream, wouldn't you?

Pop-up deadbaits for pike
Do you use pop-up deadbaits for pike? It is a deadly way of piking and one I have used since the 1960s. However, the modern pop-up (red) balls are a big improvement on my crude efforts of years gone by. Even so, I have realised that you do not have to be very sophisticated in your approach. I have found that all you need to do is tie the pop-up or pop-ups, with nylon, to the end treble. Set the length so that it reaches the end of the deadbait. With baits of up to six inches length it works well. You can, as some good anglers do, thread the line, or wire, through the deadbait, and then pull the ball/s into the head or cut end of the bait. The drawback to this method is that the red balls are not so conspicuous and therefore possibly less attractive to the pike. The downsides to my own method are that the pike sometimes bite the balls off the deadbait (if you excuse that way of putting it) and that the takes themselves are a bit fiddly as the pike struggles to mouth both bait and balls. But it is a deadly method and I always have at least one pop-up bait out on my waters. More about them another time perhaps.

One licence, two rods
I saw a letter from an Alan Wrigley recently, complaining about the fact that each rod licence covered two rods. As he only ever used one rod he'd rather pay half the money! Whilst I have a little sympathy with him, I'm just wondering where he's been living for the past twenty years or so. The debate was held, and the decisions made, to allow the realistic use of two or more rods (up to four) by specialist anglers involved in slow sports like carp and piking. Licences always covered two rods and no reason was seen to change this……have I got that wrong? It does seem so long ago now. The present system works well and it is difficult to see how it could be improved unless we had what Mr Wrigley wants, namely one licence at half price for one rod only.

Teacher's angling predjudice
Returning now to slightly political matters…… I came across a case of severe angling prejudice recently on the part of a schoolmaster. A particular year group in a secondary school were doing projects in sport - mini research projects, followed by a report after practical experience of the sport. Several projects involved football and cricket, but the proposed angling projects were banned! The teacher's reason? Anybody involved in angling projects, he said, would simply go fishing! Er, yes. What would the kids doing football and cricket do? Play shove-halfpenny?

Brolly bother
Here's a nice one for you if you re an experienced winter angler. Do you use those brollies with an adjustable pole? (If I have asked you this before, the editor can wield his knife!) Aren't they an abomination? They only hold the brolly in a good position when there is not wind! As soon as the slightest breeze blows they spin all over the place. I've now sealed mine in the straight position by using that liquid metal material that comes in a stick and just needs metal and hardener kneading into a stiff; paste. So far, in the wind, they've done well. Who wants silly brolly angles anyway?

One hand up the rod
There's a technique for playing big fish that puzzles me. It's been creeping into the big fish scene for several years now. It involves using the left hand part way up the rod to 'lift' it against the pull of the fish. That is, if you are a right-handed angler. So no hand is on the reel at the time and the clutch is often screaming off out of control. What is going on here? It is less easy to control the fish in this way and seems to me to be used by anglers who let the fish play them instead of them playing the fish. And if the rod has the correct design for its functions surely this 'third hand' is unnecessary. I have never found it so unless I have been with a youngster lacking the physical strength of an adult (say an 8 year old playing a 60lb Nile perch). In such cases he simply couldn't keep the rod up so I lifted it a little. What do you think? Do you do this? If so, why?

I've run out of space and still a few topics left, so I'll have to regale you with these next time.

Note The illustrations for Barrie's book, 'Fishers on the Green Roads' were done by the artist Rebecca Freear. Just two of the eight illustrations on offer These are now available as watercolours, enlarged, as a limited edition, either mounted or unmounted and cost approx £40.00 for the mounted versions. Anyone interested can contact Rebecca direct on rebeccafreear@hotmail.com.