dezza
Well-known member
How do you define them?
Domnic Garnett, in his latest book (well worth a read) writes about trying coarse fish with the fly as a change from trout etc.
Now I have caught many non-trout and non-salmon on the fly in my life, the species which stands out more than most being those African cousins of the barbel, the Yellowfish. These fish, which are cyprinids, are far harder fighting than any trout or even salmon and are judged to be game fish by anglers in South Africa.
And in the USA, both largemouth bass, smallmouth bass, walleye and even northern pike are classified as game fish, all these species being captured regularly with the fly rod.
But here, it appears that a fish has to have an adipose fin to get the title of "game fish". I wonder, in British terms, how one would classify the African tigerfish? Yet many say that the grayling is a coarse fish.
But what say you? How should we classify game or coarse fish?
Or do you like me think that the classification of fish into "game" or "coarse" is ludicrous.
Domnic Garnett, in his latest book (well worth a read) writes about trying coarse fish with the fly as a change from trout etc.
Now I have caught many non-trout and non-salmon on the fly in my life, the species which stands out more than most being those African cousins of the barbel, the Yellowfish. These fish, which are cyprinids, are far harder fighting than any trout or even salmon and are judged to be game fish by anglers in South Africa.
And in the USA, both largemouth bass, smallmouth bass, walleye and even northern pike are classified as game fish, all these species being captured regularly with the fly rod.
But here, it appears that a fish has to have an adipose fin to get the title of "game fish". I wonder, in British terms, how one would classify the African tigerfish? Yet many say that the grayling is a coarse fish.
But what say you? How should we classify game or coarse fish?
Or do you like me think that the classification of fish into "game" or "coarse" is ludicrous.