Carp and Barbel Record on the same weekend

Blunderer · Oct 24, 2005

A few years ago, if the carp and barbel record went on the same weekend it would be incredible news.

Now it barely merits a posting on a forum like this.

I am not taking anything away from the captors of Two Tone and The Traveller. I am sure they both put lots of effort into their captures and they can feel justly rewarded.

But this is getting a bit silly.

The same fish are just being repeatedly caught. How many times must Two Tone have been caught now? 100? More?
How many times has the average 5lb carp in a commercial fishery been caught? Nobody has a clue but I bet it is hundreds.
I cannot find a way out of this, but I am just feeling a little uneasy with the way our sport is going. We keep hearing that angling is a sport with falling numbers. Well, if that is true, then the number that still fish are plundering a small pool of fish - basically carp and barbel, in the majority of cases.

If you had told me 20 years ago that it would get like this, I would have thought you were exagerating - it is like some Orwellian Angling nightware!

Big carp dedicating their lives to avoiding rigs, being moved from water to water and being caught hundreds of times.

Small carp deformed and bait-dependant - virtually accepting being caught as a hazard of not starving.

Barbel changing their behaviour entirely to avoid the myriad hair-rigged pellets which assault them everywhere.

Riverbanks covered in litter.

Bivvy's with piles of beercans outside and cannabis smoke drifting out.

Whatever happened to fishing?

Steve Spiller · Oct 24, 2005

I feel exactly the same, why and what would make someone target a known record fish thats been caught hundreds of times?????
Just to get your name in the record books, no thanks!!!!!
Commercials! I stopped fishing them for the same reason, oh and because I got fed with listening to bite alarms at full volume during daylight!
My local river has everything a commercial contains, but it's a long walk and the fish are hard to catch!

Oh well, each to their own I suppose, but where is it heading?

Ian Cloke · Oct 24, 2005

" why and what would make someone target a known record fish thats been caught hundreds of times?????"

Perhaps this is one of the reasons behind the eel record venue being kept a secret?? Or at least trying to be kept secret.

There are a lot of "glory hunters" out there, they don't care what or where they catch, just as long as it is a record!!!

Joskin · Oct 24, 2005

"We keep hearing that angling is a sport with falling numbers"

I was under the impression that it was increasing in numbers. Where can I find the figures

NottmDon · Oct 24, 2005

It does sound rather depressing when you put it like that. Is it fewer anglers chasing the same fish or larger syndicates who have the financial clout to outbid anyone else for the exclusive fishing rights to the stretches and lakes that these record fish reside?

I would much sooner catch a 10lb barbel without a name than the traveller,better still a bigger fish than the traveller again without a name. OMG sounds like a Clint Eastwood movie title roflmao!

coming to a fishery near you " The fish with no name" caught of course on pasta!

Ian Whittaker · Oct 24, 2005

in the "good old days " 2 tone would have already been relocated to ease its burden.....

Chris Bishop · Oct 24, 2005

Who cares..? If you don't like it, don't do it.

Plenty of fish and plenty of water out there to avoid the hordes or the ker-ching mentality.

Make what you like out of fishing and do it on your own terms, compete against yourself, the fish, your mates - whatever turns you on.

Or just sit there and enjoy your surroundings, the company or just being away from work.

That's surely what it's all about or am I missing something..?

Tony Rocca · Oct 24, 2005

Dead right Blunderer and Dog B, I couldnt agree more.

Murray Rogers · Oct 24, 2005

Is Blunderer an Anti?

Murray Rogers · Oct 24, 2005

Just get out there mate and do it under your own rules (within reason of course) and for GODS SAKE ENJOY IT.
Or give it all up.

Chris Hammond · Oct 24, 2005

Somebody remarked recently that anyone who shows a picture of a fish to someone else is essentially a glory hunter.

Chris Hammond · Oct 24, 2005

.....Don't know what occured there but.......

CNTD.....In which case that category certainly encapsulates me. I've been known to post up, or show the odd pic to a mate or two.

I just cannot for the life of me understand how it makes an iota of difference to anyone else if someone should seek to capture a known record fish. Why the derogatory sounding 'Glory hunter' term?

As Chris says, if you're not interested in breaking a record so as to become part of angling history, then fine! That's your choice. Don't knock someone else for it though. They aren't breaking any laws, they aren't doing something that's morally wrong, and it could be fairly argued that they're helping to make the fishing world go around.

Good luck to em!

Steve Spiller · Oct 24, 2005

I prefer virgins, not old slappers that have been had hundreds of times.
Not much chance of that in Bristol though!
Oh well I could always go fishing for some.
;-)

Andy S · Oct 25, 2005

rules need changing. A recognised fish should not be allowed to break the record again until another fish has broken it, simple.

Everyone to their own and all that but i think its sad that these magnificent fish, that must be pretty old now recieve all this extra pressure from glory hunters.

Beecy · Oct 25, 2005

Two tone, the traveler, shoulders the parrot etc. etc etc... what a load of cobblers.

Sooner or later these "famous" fish will go belly up and become eel and rat food, why not get them stuffed and mounted the next time they are "out" ?

Graham Whatmore · Oct 25, 2005

The next time any of you catch a fish, stop and think to yourselves "I wonder how many times you've been in the landing net mate", or do you think you are the only one that has ever caught that fish in popular waters? The fact that its not a record doesn't mean its never been caught and looked on with pride before you were lucky enough to catch it, no different is it?

Beecy · Oct 25, 2005

Good point Graham.

I think there is a slight difference though, when I set off to fish I am not thinking "I hope I catch roger the roach or percy the perch again today"

- "had roger out today, 1lb 2 oz, thats an ounce more than last time!"

Blunderer · Oct 25, 2005

Murray, I can assure you I am not an Anti. Search on my name on the forum, I have been posting for a couple of years.

Lots of good points on this thread - I do think that more fish than we realise have been caught more times than we realise. In fact, I wonder what percentage of all the fish have never been caught? Very few I bet.

Andy, I like your idea a lot. A fish can only break a record once. The problem is, that would probably not reduce the pressure on fish like Two Tone much.

To those of you who said "Do your own thing", well that is exactly what I do. I don't fish commercials and I don't fish for named fish. I would rather catch a smaller fish in beautiful QUIET surroundings than a monster from a circus.

i am not knocking those who do fish for named fish - each to their own.

I just worry about the way the sport is going.

The problem for me is simple - we live in an overcrowded island.

ByNasty · Oct 25, 2005

The way I look at it is each to their own. The guys that catch these known fish put in a hell of a lot of time and effort to be successful in their pursuit so fair play to them, it's not my bag and I have neither the time, patience or inclination (or skill)to be arsed fishing that way, but I don't respect them any less for their choice.
Fishing is far too fractured as a sport as it is which is why the anti's can run around making us look like a bunch of muppets. As long as these guys are looking after the fish then I see it as just another side to our glorious sport.
As for the record not being allowed if it's the same fish, that is daft, the whole point of the records is to have a factual list of the biggest rod caught specimen per spacies at that time, who caught it or what fish it is is irrelevant to anyone other than the person taking pride in catching it.
Murray has put it best but I'll agree with his sentiments, do what you want, enjoy it, don't interfere or jeopardise my sport and if you don't like the records then don't follow them.
If someone gets pleasure in seeing their picture published then who cares? After all, anyone that strives to sport to a decent level and get recognition is in essence a glory hunter in some form and we don't harp on about them.
Forums seem to be becoming a place for people to moan about anything and everything.

Graham Whatmore · Oct 25, 2005

I wonder how many of those that advocate not resubmitting known record fish would stick to their principles if they caught it? If I were to catch it, unlikely as it is, for me that would be a first and I would treat it as such and what the hell is wrong with that for goodness sake.

Carp and Barbel Record on the same weekend

New member

Well-known member

Ian Cloke

Guest

New member

NottmDon

Guest

New member

Chris Bishop

Guest

Tony Rocca

Guest

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

Active member

Senior Member

Active member

New member

New member

Senior Member