How about a chub section

P

Patrick Hall

New member
Joined
Jul 8, 2005
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
All very well these carp and barbel chaps having their own sections but what about CHUB or roach or are these species not de rigeur ? Am I missing the point ( wont be the first time or the last ) ? Those PET carp and barbel ( you know the same fish week in week out , least shows those PETA types fish dont stand repeat capture )get a bit repetitive for my tastes , how about singing the praises of a big CHUB or ROACH a bit more !
 
P

Patrick Hall

New member
Joined
Jul 8, 2005
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
Just got annoyed being lumped under the heading of "general" as big chub and roach do take as much effort as the more common quarry .
 
P

Patrick Hall

New member
Joined
Jul 8, 2005
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
Eureka , all I have to do is get catching and then writing about proper fish enough and then there will have to be a chub section ( with honourable mention to big rodneys too ) , or get thrown out trying ! Also must stop replying to my own posts as surely talking to oneself is a sign of madness .
 
F

Frank "Chubber" Curtis

Guest
Usually Patrick it's the only time you'll get a sane answer, but I have to agree with you about carp and barbel. Just what makes them so bloody special they have to have their own forums.
Catching a 3lb roach or a 7lb chub is a bloody sight more difficult and demanding than catching a 35lb carp or a 10lb barbel which are reported almost every week, usually from the same few lakes or stretches of the Ouse, in the angling press but how often do you see reports of specimen size roach or chub. It's not that they're considered non-newsworthy but because they are far less common.
 
B

BLAM

Guest
>Just what makes them so bloody special they have to have their own forums.

About 3000 threads I'd say.
 
M

matt

Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
yeh what about the gudgeon. Takes as much to catch a 3oz gudgy as any carp or barbel.
 
R

Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA-Life Member)

Guest
Not a good idea. In my opinion there is too much specialisation in angling.

I am not particularly in favour of having coarse/game sections.

Angling is angling and the best fish is the one you happen to be fishing for at the time.

Barbel Societies!, Carp Societies!, Chub groups! ad infinitum.

Load of rubbish!!
 
Graham Whatmore

Graham Whatmore

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2003
Messages
9,147
Reaction score
9
Location
Lydney, in the Forest of Dean
Ron is in his best colonel Hrrrump mode I see, but this time I totally agree with him. There is a coarse section on here already which presumably is for threads to do with coarse fishing, why would you need to break it down into individual species sections?

Some on here got fed up of all the talk about barbel so Graham formed a special section (I think a lot of that was because of the Collingham slanging match) just for the barbel, but what, pray, is the difference of reading them under a barbel/chub/roach heading than doing so under 'coarse'. It just doesn't make any sense does it?
 
M

Merv Harrison

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2003
Messages
9,979
Reaction score
8
Location
East Yorkshire
I think the true Carp fisherman is only interested in 'catching' carp, it is the only fish that he is fishing for, whatever the time of year, so having a dedicated section suit's for information exchange.

The Barbel section was recently formed, due to 'heavy infestation' of the Coarse and General sections, to the detriment of both of those sections, but as above, the dedicated Barbel angler is one fish, (with apologies to the Traveller) orientated,

Most other anglers will fish for any species dependant on time, weather, season, inclination, be it Roach, Chub, Barbel, Carp, Bream etc: so the General or Coarse sections suffice.
 
R

Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA-Life Member)

Guest
I've lost count in my life of anglers who have either written to me or sent me emails asking about the carp fishing potential of a stretch of river or a lake.

In some cases I have told them that although the carp fishing potential is poor, there are excellent tench or bream or roach or chub etc. But this seems to fall on deaf ears.

I seem to remember one guy who wanted to know if there were 20 lb carp in the little River Leam!

This is something I cannot understand. Why does one angler want to fish for one species seemingly for the rest of his life?

It must get tedious.

Why even Terry Hearn is fishing for other species these days.
 
Neil Maidment

Neil Maidment

Moderator
Joined
Oct 7, 2003
Messages
5,087
Reaction score
296
Location
Dorset
A recent club AGM saw a proposal for a separate chub section. It was thrown out despite some minor support.

Quote from one of the dissenters:

"A Chub Section? Only useful if you're fishing for Zander or Pike!".

It brought the house down!
 
B

Bully

Guest
Patrick - you are not lumped under "general" there is a course section.
 
M

matt

Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
oh what the hell lets have a Burbot section and one for sturgeon as well !!
 
P

Patrick Hall

New member
Joined
Jul 8, 2005
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
Only trying to make a point about too much carp/barbel stuff not just here but everywhere , its a breath of fresh air to read about peoples chub/roach/perch even gudgeon exploits as all my previously favourite magazines seem too " fashion " conscious ( I know it sells copy ) with TOO many articles dedicated to carp/barbel . Heck the carpers are already well catered for magazine wise without losing column inches in the more generalised angling press .
 
P

Patrick Hall

New member
Joined
Jul 8, 2005
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
Like it or not we are a splintered lot as people have a habit of throwing a tanty and going their own ways ( religion and angling have a lot in common ), but in defence of the various societies they bring a more acute understanding of our various CHOSEN quarries that a more generalised approach cant hope to emulate . So there !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top