Coarse Fish.........

dezza · Apr 6, 2012

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.

Paul Boote · Apr 6, 2012

Having over the years caught pretty well damned everything worth fishing for in freshwater, home and abroad, from dace, chub, perch and pike, to many thousands of trout, grayling, sea-trout, salmon and steelhead, to exotics like mahseer, dorado and Goliath tigerfish, on the fly, I would suggest that they're all fair game, just so long as they don't get taken up, priced up, commidified and gentrified. All of them very fair fish, with only the men flogging them being foul...

bennygesserit · Apr 6, 2012

Paul Boote said:
Having over the years caught pretty well damned everything worth fishing for in freshwater, home and abroad, from dace, chub, perch and pike, to many thousands of trout, grayling, sea-trout, salmon and steelhead, to exotics like mahseer, dorado and Goliath tigerfish, on the fly, I would suggest that they're all fair game, just so long as they don't get taken up, priced up, commidified and gentrified. All of them very fair fish, with only the men selling them usiually being foul...

ha ha fat fingers you made a typo !

sorry I'm a little bit p*ssed - still funny though usiually , man I had to concentrate to type that usiually

Paul Boote · Apr 6, 2012

Get those knuckles dressed, benny - I know, it happens when you mix it with the big boys...

bennygesserit · Apr 6, 2012

Paul Boote said:
Get those knuckles dressed, benny - I know, it happens when you mix it with the big boys...

Ha Ha Paul (or should I say big boy ) you are without doubt the most interesting forum member I have ever come across (ooeer missus) thats why I prodded you a little bit , so you would say some more clever stuff, I looked at your profile the other day and read the out to my Daughter , she's a clever lass ( off to leicester this year been offered ABB , doing biology ) , "wow I said who is this guy - look at the threads he has started - warning extreme fishing bimbo , suitable targets for a time travelling hitman , now pay attention 007"
it reads like a vonnegut novel - she agreed you sounded interesting - now prove it. :wh

dezza · Apr 6, 2012

Paul Boote said:
Having over the years caught pretty well damned everything worth fishing for in freshwater, home and abroad, from dace, chub, perch and pike, to many thousands of trout, grayling, sea-trout, salmon and steelhead, to exotics like mahseer, dorado and Goliath tigerfish, on the fly, I would suggest that they're all fair game, just so long as they don't get taken up, priced up, commidified and gentrified. All of them very fair fish, with only the men flogging them being foul...

Very well said Paul; it seems that you and I are two of a kind, although I have never caught dorado, mahseer or goliath tigerfish, I have caught most of the rest, and on the fly rod too.

And in the UK I have caught roach, rudd, perch, dace, chub, bream, carp, pike, barbel and one solitary gudgeon on the fly rod.

barbelboi · Apr 6, 2012

I pretty much share the same opinion Ron and actually prefer fishing for roach, dace and chub in streams with a fly to trout. Also, how would I classify the tigerfish?.....................probably not one that I would go for with a fly knowing the state they left my lures in

Jerry

no-one in particular · Apr 6, 2012

Is the difference-ones nice to eat and ones that are not?

dezza · Apr 6, 2012

markg said:
Is the difference-ones nice to eat and ones that are not

No way.

Perch, zander, dace, gudgeon, grayling and if cooked properly - pike, are far better tasting than trout.

400 years ago, the gentry valued what we called coarse fish far more highly than trout and salmon. In fact salmon were thought of as common peoples food.

sam vimes · Apr 6, 2012

markg said:
Is the difference-ones nice to eat and ones that are not?

That still leaves the grayling in limbo. Very nice to eat, better than any trout, though I wouldn't dream of taking one these days. It has the all important adipose fin. Yet it's still classed as a coarse fish.

However, there does seem to be a shift in attitude from our game fishing bretheren towards the grayling. Are they trying to claim it back from us coarse fishing peasants?

barbelboi · Apr 6, 2012

Isn’t the reason that the grayling are classified as ‘coarse’ is that, despite being a salmonid, the grayling does not share the same spawning time as other species within this group. I.e. the grayling spawn usually from mid April whereas salmon and trout spawn during the winter month.
Jerry

dezza · Apr 6, 2012

To many non-anglers, the notion of catching fish and then returning them is wrong, cruel and unethical!

Have a look at the latest report on the BBC website.

Let's have your comments.

sam vimes · Apr 6, 2012

Ron The Hat Clay said:
Have a look at the latest report on the BBC website.

Let's have your comments.

Any chance of a link? Or at least a vague clue as to what we should search for?

Paul Boote · Apr 6, 2012

"However, there does seem to be a shift in attitude from our game fishing bretheren towards the grayling. Are they trying to claim it back from us coarse fishing peasants?"

Very much so with the grayling, Sam - particularly in the South. I was "fortunate" enough to have been born at a time when chalkstream grayling were designated vermin, taken by keepers by any means and consigned to a pit dug in the meadow a little way back from the river or given to local villagers to dig into their gardens. As a result, during the late 1960s, '70s, '80s and up to the very early 1990s I was able to fish autumn and winter-long on many fine fisheries for free, mostly with a fly rod, sometimes with a pin and float when the river was thick and if the keeper allowed it, taking, well, nothing less than thousands and thousands of grayling, killing a token handful of "tiddlers" on those fisheries that demanded to see "bodies", but returning 99.9999% of the rest. Then grayling were rehabilitated, becoming a must-do fish and now seen as a source of winter income for fisheries at first £10, then £20, then whatever the punters would pay, with the result that Southern grayling fishing became unavailable to mere mortals except on lesser chalkstream fisheries, like Barton, lower Itchen etc. Still, I had it very good for a long time, so can't complain.

no-one in particular · Apr 6, 2012

Ron The Hat Clay said:
No way.

Perch, zander, dace, gudgeon, grayling and if cooked properly - pike, are far better tasting than trout.

400 years ago, the gentry valued what we called coarse fish far more highly than trout and salmon. In fact salmon were thought of as common peoples food.

Couldn't disagree with that Ron but, funny how Salmon, Trout and Sea trout all appear in restaurants and fishmongers at premium prices and salivated over by foodies while coarse fish dont even get a look in.

A genetically modified roach that looks like a Sea trout and tastes like a salmon may happen one day though, wouldn't surprise me. Would this then be classified as a game fish?

beerweasel · Apr 6, 2012

I've known women who appeared to be coarse but turned out to be quite game.

dezza · Apr 6, 2012

sam vimes said:
Any chance of a link? Or at least a vague clue as to what we should search for?

Google BBC News. It's on the right hand side.

Mr Cholmondeley-Corker (PaSC) · Apr 6, 2012

"Over 100 years ago barbel knew great popularity......There were huge catches made in those days, and forty to fifty fish at a sitting was not exceptional. From this mighty barbel river (The Thames) the fish found their way, by steam wagon, to the Stour, and from there into the Hampshire Avon.
Then the scene began to change. Barbel interest waned as class values came into angling. Certain species became the right fish to fish for, or at least, to be seen fishing for, and fish without that little fin became established as coarse fish. Barbel were forgotten."

Peter Wheat 1967

Ron would you care to have a stab which book it's from?

Jeff Woodhouse · Apr 6, 2012

Mr Cholmondeley-Corker (PaSC) said:
Peter Wheat 1967 Ron would you care to have a stab which book it's from?

I have a copy of his 'Improve your Coarse Angling' from 1967 and I can't find that exact quote. He mentions that anglers would groundbait with hundreds of lobworms mixed with clay. He also says that 'Very few barbel exist above the Mill at Throop .... ' and I wonder if that is still true.

sam vimes · Apr 6, 2012

Ron The Hat Clay said:
Google BBC News. It's on the right hand side.

Did that, nothing fishing related to be seen.
Put fishing into the search box and this is what you get.
Put angling in there and this is the result. Which story were you alluding to?

Coarse Fish.........

Well-known member

Banned

Well-known member

Banned

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Banned

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Senior Member

Moaning Marlow Meldrew

Well-known member