Keeping a sense of proportion.

[Frank Elson]

I like to have a bend in my rod. On some waters this may be a 1/2lb roach, on others a chub of at least 1.5lbs.
Reeling in tiny fish after tiny fish is not for me, but I see a lot of people on the banks who appear to enjoy it. So good for them

 

[laguna]

Most people would ask..." how many have you caught"?

Most of us would respond by stating the weight of what (if any) we had caught that day!

 

[itsfishingnotcatching]

Most people would ask..." how many have you caught"?

Or, "how have you done?".

It's all relative, if carp are spawning then a bag of silvers can be a good result. If you've struggled to get through small roach, rudd etc then a small carp feels like a good fish. They all beat blanking

 

[Ray Daywalker Clarke]

Ray, I've no idea but the sales demographics, based on area, of the angling press might make for interesting reading. It is noticeable that there are a few northern regional angling forums out there but I've not encountered Midlands or Southern equivalents (that doesn't mean they don't exist).

Sam,

I think the Drennen cup should be in regions for weekly awards, at the end of the year, the yearly winner being the angler who has won the most weekly awards. If there should be a draw, then a panel from Drennen vote.

I could understand a Northern Angler not being happy if he didnt win an award for a Barbel lets say of 18lb, from the ribble, yet an 18lb from the Ouse gets the award. The ribble would get my vote as the Ouse has had so many 18lb fish in the past.

I don't vote in the Drennen Cup anymore, the everyday angler doesn't get a look in anymore. As for the website's, I know of one in the south, but have never used it, so i can't comment on it.

 

[quickcedo]

But for goodness sake treat England's biggest river with some respect. This is where barbel fishing was invented.

I think Mr I Walton may have disagreed.

 

[Philip]

There are lots of different ways to rate a catch but weight is always going to be one of the first people look at....and why not ? .... I recon that every angler from the first cave man to cast a line has wanted the next fish he catches to be bigger than the last one.

So it makes me laugh when people go on and on about how unimportant weight is. Look in the tackle bags of 99.9% of the people saying that and I bet they have a pair of scales

...yours are little Samsons arnt they Ron ? :wh

 

[stikflote]

I must be odd one out then, i dont own any fishing scales at all,
and im always scared my pole will break on a big fish,
i put pole away and use a rod if i start catching big carp on pole

 

[dezza]

...yours are little Samsons arnt they Ron ?

I have a set of Avons which are spot on accurate and a set of Fox electronics which are always giving trouble.

In the old days I had 3 sets of Salters which were also bang on.

 

[Philip]

...so you do use weight as a way to rate your catch then ?

 

[no-one in particular]

Often proportion is better than weight

If a water has mainly an average of 1lb chub in it then I would rate a 2lb chub a good fish and a 3lb chub would rate a self given pat on the back. Of course on a river with many 3lb fish I would upgrade this. That can be applied to all species whether they are roach or carp. I hardly ever weigh fish and I believe that sense of proportion is more relevant than the actual weight of fish. Trying to compare your fish with outsized fish from big pits is not giving yourself a fair estimation of what you might have achieved and may prevent you given yourself a self congratulatory pat on the back when it is earned and well deserved. Of course you need to fish a water regularly to get a good feel of the size of fish present but, that’s all part of the enjoyment in learning all about your regular waters.
However, I appreciate that for really serious specimen anglers this wouldn't be good enough but, for pleasure anglers this is a good way to assess your catch.

 

[dezza]

Re: Often proportion is better than weight

And have you noticed how much it costs to fish these big pits these days.

When I took out a season ticket on Smith's Pool and Hardwick at Linear Fisheries in the nineties, it cost me just £40.00 for the whole year, go whenever you like!

Today it costs a little more than half of that for a day!!

Certainly the capture of double figure tench in these waters is now pie-in-the-sky for pensioners such as myself!

It reminds me of what that famous angler from Hitchin wrote many years ago when discussing salmon fishing. He said that "More salmon are caught by those who's money compensates for what little skill they may possess, than by skillful anglers".

I tend to think that this is the case not only with salmon, but with a lot of coarse big fish waters in this day and age.

 

[Dave Slater]

I think some of this is pretty irrelevant. If you are happy with what you catch that is all that matters. If the fish is big for the water it comes from then it is a good fish.
Many of the fish reported from my local waters are caught by visiting anglers, including glory hunters. Many big fish caught by local anglers are not reported. I wasn't even going to report my 8-8 chub caught a couple of years ago until Bill Neal talked me into it after he had witnessed and photographed it.
Most of the really big fish I know locally of are caught from club waters, open to all, rather than syndicate waters so there is nothing elitist involved in their capture.
My local clubs have many members from outside the area. I sometimes travel to other areas for species which we do not have big specimens of in my local area, when funds permit which is not so often as I would like these days, and everybody else is free to do so.
I do agree with Ray's suggestion regarding taking the region into account for reported specimens to magazines as not everybody is able to travel much these days with the rising cost of petrol etc.

 

[dezza]

I'm not against the reporting of significant catches. After all if we didn't report such captures, our angling literature would not be as rich as it is. Can you imagine what the angling world would be like today if Walker's capture of Clarissa had have been kept totally secret?

Carp fishing, as the industry it is today, would not exist.

 

[barbelboi]

[FONT=&quot]Yes, it’s all part of the mysteries fishing Ron, If DW hadn’t heard of the exploits of the ‘novice’ Bob Richards – who knows?[/FONT]

 

[dezza]

Well I have always said that Walker's capture of Clarissa was the single most important event in angling history.

And if Bob Richards had have kept schtum??

And if Walker had never been born??

Angling history is utterly fascinating.

 

[Philip]

If it had not been DW it would have been someone else.

It was the natural progression for angling at that time...the move from catching any fish that came along and hoping it was big to the specific targeting of bigger than average fish.

Angling is now reaching a new crossroads were people are beginning to know all the big fish by name and the anticipation aspect of angling which is so important to the sport is starting to be lost. This means angling is going to go through a new cycle and that cycle will be that catches will begin to get merited on factors other than weight alone.

...what will happen in 100 more years when not only are all the big fish known but ALL the fish full stop are known and probably tagged with micro chips so we instantly know whats swimming about in every water by pushing a button on a panel at the entrance to the water that instantly displays all the info and via GPS which lilly pad they are under...

 

[dezza]

what will happen in 100 more years when not only are all the big fish known but ALL the fish full stop are known and probably tagged with micro chips so we instantly know whats swimming about in every water by pushing a button on a panel at the entrance to the water that instantly displays all the info and via GPS which lilly pad they are under...

I won't be here in 100 years time, but if I was, I doubt if I would want to go fishing under those circumstances.

Explore the galaxy in an anti-gravity starship?

Definitely yes!

 

[Simon K]

I couldn't help but notice of the recent Drennan award winners, how many came from the same area of England, that is the southern gravel pits. Let's face it if you want to catch many outsize coarse fish, you must go to a southern pit, or nothing.

Yet fly fishers don't think like this. Most are happy to catch small wild brown trout of moorland streams along with the big trout of some stillwaters and reservoirs. A 1 pound wild brown trout is often regarded as a more creditable capture than a reservoir 10 pounder.

But the vast majority of coarse fishers would not rate a 5 pound canal tench against a 10 pound pit fish. Many would not even bother to attempt to catch a 5 pound canal or drain tench, or even a 10 pound river bream when 20 pound pit bream are being caught.

But how do you rate your catches. Is it weight at all costs or do you have a sense of proportion like many of the fly fishermen?

Weight is only for the best (or "better") fish you catch if that's your personal criteria.
I think most anglers fish "local" to themselves and either enjoy just catching regardless or target the best they can achieve for the waters they fish.
Very few have the ambition, the time and the petrol £'s to chase fish up and down the land.

At the moment I'm fishing a very hard "southern pit". A small handful of carp (and some very big tench and bream) in a very large acreage. The Head Bailiff asked me today why I didn't fish an easier lake if I wanted to catch carp. He doesn't understand that sometimes it's the sheer unadulterated challenge of the task at hand and the weight of the capture, if you manage one, is relatively unimportant. Any fish is a good fish.

The point with this is that you're fishing for "wild" fish that are largely unknown, rarely caught and have to be seriously worked for.
Not everyone's cup of tea, but you certainly learn a lot by doing it.

 

[The Monk]

By far the best way to measure fish is by the enjoyment it gives give you, least thats my opinion these days, so easy to get caught up in the riggers of youth chasing big fish up and down ther country or overseas, but I think we change with age, I certainly have, its nice to get to a point in angling were you no longer have to prove anything, either to otghers or yourself and can simply enjoy the sport in its simplest mode and re-lable yourself as a pleasure angler. Just an opinion of course and each to his or her own.

 

[dezza]

Very well said mate.

Although in a short while I will find out if I can still catch a barbel or two.

And in the 60s, there was probably none worse than me and my mates for chasing up and down the country. Mind you fuel was a hell of a lot cheaper.

Today, nothing pleases me more than to do a little float fishing, on river or lake, it really makes no difference.