Glory Hunter or Secret Squirrel

Now here's the scenario: You're fishing a nice quiet water and you catch a big fish worthy of the angling papers. Do you;

(A) Take the glory and the fame and publish it, with the consequences that brings ie. the circus arrives and exploits all your hard work and takes over your stretch of water.

or

(B) You keep it quiet and carry on in your own peaceful world.

I was going to have a third option ie. take the glory and the money, and give out a false location. But we don't want to go down that road again!

.

.

.

ps. I've not caught a big fish and if I had I would'nt tell you!/forum/smilies/smile_smiley.gif

B a fish is a fish to me might take a photo thats it, i would not even claim a record i am happy doing what i do just catching fish.

People like fish pictures, if I had to give away a location to get a picture published, I'd keep it to myself.

I've seen the results fish chasers tend to leave behind.

If no one publishes outstanding fish we don't have any angling news and we don't have any measure of our performance. If no one had ever published their catches we wouldn't know, for instance,if a 2lb roach was a big fish.

I've always found it possible to publish pictures with an unrecognisable background and make a report that doesn't lie, but is vague about the location, ie, 'a 12lb bream from a Cheshire mere.' Or, 'a 13lb barbel from the river Dove.'

What's wrong with that?

It's always worked for me, and I'm glad to have contributed to angling literature in my own small way and as a consequence shared the pleasure my notable fish have given to me.

If that's 'Glory Hunting' then so be it.

Better that than a selfish Secret Squirrel who harvests pleasure and information from other angler's catches and gives nothing back.

sharing is caring..............

Keona told me that !

Thought long and hard about Graham's post- then it dawned on me. Like the Irishman I'd taken his advice before he gave it.

In a nutshell, spot on mate.

Anglers! Britains secret army. Most of the selfish anglers that refuse to share anything have themselves received a share of something, be it a type of tackle, a successful rig, a good venue whatever but that advice, help or disclosure was given freely yet they choose to keep everything to themselves.

What the hell is wrong in sharing a picture of a good fish with other anglers? If no details are given of location it is almost impossible for the casual looker to even begin to discover where the picture was taken, background scenes can be attributed to anywhere you have fished in the past providing it doesn't have some distinctive bridge or other structure in it.

Most invasions of venues are a result of an angler talking in detail about where he made his capture and once the bush telegraph gets moving then it is inevitable that the glory hunters will turn up in force in double quick time. I would wager that very few are the result of a published picture on the likes of Fishingmagic.

I learned from sharing, including decent venues to fish and still do after 50 odd years of fishing and for that I am eternally grateful and I have no qualms whatsoever in sharing my knowledge with others.

All I need now is a decent sized fish, a picture of itand I'm away /forum/smilies/big_smile_smiley.gif

If posted a picturewith an unreconisable background,and a reportof a22lb barbel from the Trent, wouldsome of you on here,(mostly long termers)think you knew where I had caught it ?

If there was the remotest of chances of that, I couldn't possibly publish it, could I?

NOT THAT I HAVE!!!!/forum/smilies/surprised_smiley.gif

A tricky question, Steve.

Years ago the only way to find the venue where large/ spectacular catches had been made was through word of mouth, the angling press and the telephone. If you didn't know the venue or someone who knew the angler who'd caught the fish of your dreams there was less chance of a circus turning up. Especially as Graham says the locations were often vague.

However these days it is much easier to find the location and venue because of the internet and forums such as this one. Who doesn't want to boast to the whole world about what they have caught.

I think also that angling has changed in the fact that there are many more new anglers looking for instant gratification. There are hundreds of threads/ posts on fishing forums asking where 20lb or 30lb fish are available posted by relative newcomers to the sport. I'm sure we have all seen the "I'm new to fishing but where can I catch a 30lb fish from" threads. The question here for me is would I want to give that inexperienced angler the chance to catch and through ignorance/ inexperience potentially injure a specimen fish whether it be barbel, carp, pike, perch, roach, rudd et al because the angler in question has no idea of fish welfare or balanced tackle.

Before anyone jumps down my throat I am not having a go at newcomers to the sport. As in all aspects of life I am sure that the majority of anglers new to fishing have fish welfare at heart, but there are a minority as in all aspects of life who are just clueless as evidenced by the threads "plonkers on your lake" and "casting pearls before swine".Would I want to give them the opportunity to catch the fish of a lifetime - in a word, NO.

How about you?

So to go back to the original question, I am more of a secret squirrel in the fact that I would only disclose the details of location to an angler I deemed competent to fish for that species. I would however have no qualms in showing the photos to the world without identifying the venue.

I am with Graham, but would not name the venue.

Fred,

How come you fished Adams Mill then???? something to do with pictures in the press maybe???

No Ray not specificly, but I obviously knew of it, I fished that river for chub.I had an MKAA ticket and used it.

I also fished the river at Ravenstone, Stony Stratford & Bradwell and the Rivers Tove & Ousel andmost of their lakes.

More often than not I was the only one fishing Adams Mill, and I fished naturals and bread flake at that time, not even Spam.Certainly not boilies and pellets.

My point is Fred, that until you heard of the fish coming from there you didnt know anything about the place.

MKAA only got the lower part of Adams Mill with Ravenstone, until then only the odd MKAA member would fish the upper part.

Casters where a killer for the Chub and Barbel, bread and lob worm also Fred.

Ray,I lived 3 miles away, I knew where it was!/forum/smilies/thinking_smiley.gif

My point was, I had an MKAA ticket and fished ALL their waters, and didn't know anything about them either, at first.

Breadflake got me my PB under the bridge.

<blockquote class=quoteheader>Fred Bonney(ACA/BS/BTO) wrote (see)</blockquote><blockquote class=quote>If I posted a picturewith an unreconisable background, and a reportof a22lb barbel from the Trent, wouldsome of you on here, (mostly long termers)think you knew where I had caught it?

If there was the remotest of chances of that, I couldn't possibly publish it, could I?</blockquote>

I take your point Fred, but how many of the 'long termers' on here would go and poach your stretch? And if your stretch was deemed capable of producing a 22-pounder I think most of the those who would rush to fish it, the 'circus' as they're popularly known,would already be well aware that it had 22lb potential.

Such fish very rarely come from waters with no pedigree, although I'm well aware that rumours are always rife about these things but very rarely become reality.

In other words, 'Adam's Mill' type waters are already well known and if a 22-pounder came from there it would come as no surpise and those who would rush to fish it are already there.

Of course your right Graham, I hope.

But, there are those that trawl the internet for info and maybe willgain some clues./forum/smilies/i_dont_know_smiley.gifthey are the ones to worry about.

The Lodden and Wensum will show, if they haven't already, the problems with publicity.

glory hunter but lie about the country and whos wife I was with at the time/forum/smilies/smile_smiley.gif

I'm with Graham on this...publish but be vauge (not untruthful) about the venue...

The lodden has produced some very big Barbel, and the pressure is building up on some of the sections.

I think it all comes down to anglers wanting to catch big fish, and some will do what ever it takes to get those fish and with it a picture in the press.

Then you have the angler who catches a fish of a life time, they may only fish a few times a year, and are unaware of what happens when they go to the press.

The same can be said for match fishing. A section of river or a lake produces some big weights and before you know it the place is packed.

Its how some anglers go about it that is wrong

I'm always very vague about venues (unless the fishery has asked me to giver them a bit of publicity) but to be honest i think it makes little difference.
The grapevine is so good these days that the people on it know what has been caught and where before the fish are in the angling press, and the people that only find out when it appears in print often aren't the ones that will travel hundreds of miles and spend days on the bank trying to catch a big fish anyway.
Maybe a few years ago it would have made a difference but not these days.