After some private correspondence between myself and Paul Owens of the B.S., I'd just like to thank Paul for the the time and effort he's put in to explain events and I hope to see The Barbel Society involved in future events.
Barbel Care Revisited
- Thread starter Baz
- Start date
Bob Roberts
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2002
- Messages
- 2,334
- Reaction score
- 8
Thanks for reminding me of what a handsome chap I was back then, Eddie. Those were the days, eh, when you could turn up at any time of day and get a swim near the weir at Collingham...
Then again, I've never called for the complete banning of keepnets, nor claimed I haven't used one and I ain't saying I won't use one again in the future. Probably will in fact.
And isn't it good to see the Blades doing so well?
Then again, I've never called for the complete banning of keepnets, nor claimed I haven't used one and I ain't saying I won't use one again in the future. Probably will in fact.
And isn't it good to see the Blades doing so well?
Steve Spiller
Well-known member
Well done Simon and Paul,
Nice to see a happy ending, for a change!
Nice to see a happy ending, for a change!
Bob Roberts
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2002
- Messages
- 2,334
- Reaction score
- 8
I have received the following email from the NFA today:
Dear Bob,
I am sorry we have not replied more quickly to your letter of the 31st August ?Barbel Care and Conservation?. We have added the issue of Barbel care and conservation to the next fish welfare meeting which will be attended by representatives from all the major (coarse) angling bodies including reps from the SAA, FACT, CEFAS and PCFA. The intention is that we will start to examine the issue and look for a common way forward. We will keep you informed with our progress on this issue.
I would just like to comment on your statement that ?The NFA will rightly campaign for the retention of barbel in nets as to do otherwise would damage match fishing?. This seems to assume that the NFA?s only concern is with matches, this is not the case. We are concerned with all aspects of the sport ? specimen anglers and occasional pleasure anglers are as important to us as match anglers. We should wait and see what recommendations come from the fish welfare meetings but we will certainly be considering the bigger picture and not just focusing on the narrow remit of match angling.
Sent on behalf of;
Julian Taylor
NFA Angling Development Officer
I replied as follows:
Dear Ben
Thank you for your constructive and optimistic response.
Please do not concern yourself over the delay, if this was a race you would now be the only participant at the medals ceremony as neither the Barbel Society nor the Angling Times have reponded, which saddens me, but there we are. It seems the Barbel Society is set to plough its own furrow which will be a real shame as to pursue a policy of banning barbel in keepnets at all times is wholly unrealistic. The policy might influence their 1400 strong membership, practically all of whom don't use them anyway, but it will have little impact on the wider angling community.
Perhaps there is some merit in you inviting a Barbel Society representative to your meeting though.
Your assumption on my apparent assumption, that the NFA's only concern is matches, says much about your sensitivity to the widely held view that the NFA is only concerned with matches, or is that an assumption?
However, the bottom line is that members of the National Federation of Sea Anglers and those of the Salmon and Trout Association members rarely face the dilemma of whether to put a barbel in a keepnet or not. I dare go as far as to say that neither side's membership spends a fortune on keepnets, in fact they probably don't they carry one between them but what we cannot ignore is that without keepnets you simply don't have match fishing and we do have the NFA to thank for infuencing the world governing body to stop killing fish caught in World Championships and to start using keepnets. As such it is a fundamental issue to yourselves be that when you are managing the England team affairs at the highest level right through to when you represent the occasional pleasure angler.
Good luck with your meeting. Please do let me know how things go.
Bob Roberts
Still no official response from the BS but I will share it with you should I get one.
Dear Bob,
I am sorry we have not replied more quickly to your letter of the 31st August ?Barbel Care and Conservation?. We have added the issue of Barbel care and conservation to the next fish welfare meeting which will be attended by representatives from all the major (coarse) angling bodies including reps from the SAA, FACT, CEFAS and PCFA. The intention is that we will start to examine the issue and look for a common way forward. We will keep you informed with our progress on this issue.
I would just like to comment on your statement that ?The NFA will rightly campaign for the retention of barbel in nets as to do otherwise would damage match fishing?. This seems to assume that the NFA?s only concern is with matches, this is not the case. We are concerned with all aspects of the sport ? specimen anglers and occasional pleasure anglers are as important to us as match anglers. We should wait and see what recommendations come from the fish welfare meetings but we will certainly be considering the bigger picture and not just focusing on the narrow remit of match angling.
Sent on behalf of;
Julian Taylor
NFA Angling Development Officer
I replied as follows:
Dear Ben
Thank you for your constructive and optimistic response.
Please do not concern yourself over the delay, if this was a race you would now be the only participant at the medals ceremony as neither the Barbel Society nor the Angling Times have reponded, which saddens me, but there we are. It seems the Barbel Society is set to plough its own furrow which will be a real shame as to pursue a policy of banning barbel in keepnets at all times is wholly unrealistic. The policy might influence their 1400 strong membership, practically all of whom don't use them anyway, but it will have little impact on the wider angling community.
Perhaps there is some merit in you inviting a Barbel Society representative to your meeting though.
Your assumption on my apparent assumption, that the NFA's only concern is matches, says much about your sensitivity to the widely held view that the NFA is only concerned with matches, or is that an assumption?
However, the bottom line is that members of the National Federation of Sea Anglers and those of the Salmon and Trout Association members rarely face the dilemma of whether to put a barbel in a keepnet or not. I dare go as far as to say that neither side's membership spends a fortune on keepnets, in fact they probably don't they carry one between them but what we cannot ignore is that without keepnets you simply don't have match fishing and we do have the NFA to thank for infuencing the world governing body to stop killing fish caught in World Championships and to start using keepnets. As such it is a fundamental issue to yourselves be that when you are managing the England team affairs at the highest level right through to when you represent the occasional pleasure angler.
Good luck with your meeting. Please do let me know how things go.
Bob Roberts
Still no official response from the BS but I will share it with you should I get one.
K
Keith Orange
Guest
Bob, your articles are always thought provoking - can you write a few more for this site ?
B
Bernie Morrisson
Guest
i might be missing something here,but,why cant the match organisers have stewards covering so many pegs each and when a barbel is caught,the angler hands the fish to the steward who weighs it,and returns it properly,as i think the organisers must share some of the resposibility,even at the cost of smaller pools money to pay them,its just an idea which must be better than whats happening now
Matt Brown
Member
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2005
- Messages
- 8
- Reaction score
- 0
Baernie - this has already been raised and discussed previously.
In many club matches the officials actually compete themeselves. Stopping the match to weigh in, or having an extra official on the bank isn't at all feasible except in matches where huge sums of money are involved.
In many club matches the officials actually compete themeselves. Stopping the match to weigh in, or having an extra official on the bank isn't at all feasible except in matches where huge sums of money are involved.
B
Bernie Morrisson
Guest
apologies Matt,ive only just picked up on this thread,but i am aware of the problems involved com ming from a match back ground,it seems the only way is to not allow barbel to be weighed in,until someone comes up with a workable idea,taking such action might speed up the way forward
Bob Roberts
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2002
- Messages
- 2,334
- Reaction score
- 8
Last post before I head off into the earthquake zone.
I'll write more as and when the mood takes me Keith, but time is an issue. Full time job, fishing, social life, domestic bliss and paid work all have to come first I'm afraid. It's gratifying to hear that someone does actually appreciate my input to the site as there are clearly one or two sensitive souls who would prefer I never wrote or posted again!
Would Bernie's suggestion to steward all matches actually improve care? I don't think so. What qualifications in fish care would these stewards require and who can say what is the proper way at the current time when the main players are not even talking to each other in any official capacity?
Matt makes logical points and gives you the current reality but what would you do with a fish between landing/ unhooking and the arrival of a steward if we went down that route? What if two or more anglers hook fish at the same time? How does the angler make contact with the steward? Does he stop fishing and retain this barbel in his landing net? And why is a landing net deemed to be a better retention system than a keepnet? Can someone explain exactly what these benefits are? Do fins not get snagged in landing net mesh?
Is there any evidence whatsoever that a controlled period of recovery in a keepnet harms a barbel? This is simply a dogmatic stance that a majority of members of the Babble Society appear hell bent on imposing on the wider angling community and it simply is unjustified, unworkable and unenforceable.
The sooner they abandon the complete ban on nets at all times mantra the sooner regular folk will take them seriously. Until then they will continue to attract the Barbel Police, elitist, 'not special', jibes.
As for not weighing-in barbel, dream on. Enforce this and you effectively have no matches on the Trent or Severn and that will kill the controlling clubs and associations.
Great if you have a parasitic/ predatory syndicate mentality but an all-round no-no for the vast majority of anglers. Try to keep a perspective on matters.
After all, they are only fish...
I'll write more as and when the mood takes me Keith, but time is an issue. Full time job, fishing, social life, domestic bliss and paid work all have to come first I'm afraid. It's gratifying to hear that someone does actually appreciate my input to the site as there are clearly one or two sensitive souls who would prefer I never wrote or posted again!
Would Bernie's suggestion to steward all matches actually improve care? I don't think so. What qualifications in fish care would these stewards require and who can say what is the proper way at the current time when the main players are not even talking to each other in any official capacity?
Matt makes logical points and gives you the current reality but what would you do with a fish between landing/ unhooking and the arrival of a steward if we went down that route? What if two or more anglers hook fish at the same time? How does the angler make contact with the steward? Does he stop fishing and retain this barbel in his landing net? And why is a landing net deemed to be a better retention system than a keepnet? Can someone explain exactly what these benefits are? Do fins not get snagged in landing net mesh?
Is there any evidence whatsoever that a controlled period of recovery in a keepnet harms a barbel? This is simply a dogmatic stance that a majority of members of the Babble Society appear hell bent on imposing on the wider angling community and it simply is unjustified, unworkable and unenforceable.
The sooner they abandon the complete ban on nets at all times mantra the sooner regular folk will take them seriously. Until then they will continue to attract the Barbel Police, elitist, 'not special', jibes.
As for not weighing-in barbel, dream on. Enforce this and you effectively have no matches on the Trent or Severn and that will kill the controlling clubs and associations.
Great if you have a parasitic/ predatory syndicate mentality but an all-round no-no for the vast majority of anglers. Try to keep a perspective on matters.
After all, they are only fish...
C
Chris Pearson
Guest
Do you think if we completely ignore him he'll just go away, because there's certainly no point in trying reasoned argument?
C
Chris Pearson
Guest
Just in case:
BS handling code-Para. 14
14. The Barbel Society recognises that barbel are retained in keep nets during matches. We therefore appeal to all match anglers to use large 'barbel friendly' nets and to position them where the fish receive adequate oxygen and protection from strong sunlight. We ask all to consider a 'weigh and release' policy where fish are returned almost immediately after capture. We also request that slings are used instead of baskets and that all barbel be individually 'nursed' on their return.
Can't see anything wrong with that as an aim myself.
BS handling code-Para. 14
14. The Barbel Society recognises that barbel are retained in keep nets during matches. We therefore appeal to all match anglers to use large 'barbel friendly' nets and to position them where the fish receive adequate oxygen and protection from strong sunlight. We ask all to consider a 'weigh and release' policy where fish are returned almost immediately after capture. We also request that slings are used instead of baskets and that all barbel be individually 'nursed' on their return.
Can't see anything wrong with that as an aim myself.
B
Bernie Morrisson
Guest
Chris,im not for or against yours or Bobs different stance,but what would be the problem if ..say for example..the landing nets were made of retaining sack material,the same as used when retaining carp and the keepnets were made of the same material and black in colour,as its well known that black materials have a calming influence on fish,it works with carp and they fight until there exhausted,
Dicky (Angling Trust PAC)
Senior Member
Great debate.
Not sure about some of your comments Bob, as readers of 'Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy' will already know...
The babel/ babble fish (and presumably any society promoting the welfare of such a fish) was equally destined to spread chaos and order through its power to translate an argument with such accuracy that both sides understood the other's point perfectly ...
;-)No offence to either...
On a more serious point, after the AT Bowler/ Wilson/ Taylor article on fishing the Lower Severn last Tuesday, the WDUAA stretch below Worcetser (normally very quiet) was full to bursting with first time barbellers intent on catching a double. It is these to these people that we need present a united front to on fish welfare. It gives me great satisfaction to take a pike gag off an inexperienced angler and when the dust settles on this debate with the particpation of all parties, I hope that is the kind of feeling we all have..
Not sure about some of your comments Bob, as readers of 'Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy' will already know...
The babel/ babble fish (and presumably any society promoting the welfare of such a fish) was equally destined to spread chaos and order through its power to translate an argument with such accuracy that both sides understood the other's point perfectly ...
;-)No offence to either...
On a more serious point, after the AT Bowler/ Wilson/ Taylor article on fishing the Lower Severn last Tuesday, the WDUAA stretch below Worcetser (normally very quiet) was full to bursting with first time barbellers intent on catching a double. It is these to these people that we need present a united front to on fish welfare. It gives me great satisfaction to take a pike gag off an inexperienced angler and when the dust settles on this debate with the particpation of all parties, I hope that is the kind of feeling we all have..
Dicky (Angling Trust PAC)
Senior Member
Sorry massive typos...
Should read
It is to these people that we need to present a united front on fish welfare. It gives me great satisfaction to take a pike gag off an inexperienced angler and and when the dust settles on this debate with the particpation of all parties, I hope that is the kind of feeling we all have..
Should read
It is to these people that we need to present a united front on fish welfare. It gives me great satisfaction to take a pike gag off an inexperienced angler and and when the dust settles on this debate with the particpation of all parties, I hope that is the kind of feeling we all have..
C
Chris Pearson
Guest
Bernie,
On a personnal note I don't own a keepnet and haven't done for about 20 years BUT I fully appreciate and respect anyone else's desire to own and use one as long as the fish's welfare is considered.
I don't think anyone would disagree with Bob that a controlled period of recovery in a keepnet isn't harmful and I quite often use my landing net to rest fish prior to unhooking,I don't see that as an issue.
What I was trying to get over is that the BS is NOT calling for a complete ban and therefore B2B's statement is just not a true relection of their mission .
****y,
I fully agree that we do need a united front on fish welfare and I think Paul,Steve and the guys are doing a great job by getting articles such as the one in this months Angling Star and AT out to the masses.
On a personnal note I don't own a keepnet and haven't done for about 20 years BUT I fully appreciate and respect anyone else's desire to own and use one as long as the fish's welfare is considered.
I don't think anyone would disagree with Bob that a controlled period of recovery in a keepnet isn't harmful and I quite often use my landing net to rest fish prior to unhooking,I don't see that as an issue.
What I was trying to get over is that the BS is NOT calling for a complete ban and therefore B2B's statement is just not a true relection of their mission .
****y,
I fully agree that we do need a united front on fish welfare and I think Paul,Steve and the guys are doing a great job by getting articles such as the one in this months Angling Star and AT out to the masses.
B
Bernie Morrisson
Guest
chris,my views on releasing barbel are in line with your view,but it seems there needs to be concrete proof that retaining them in keepnets causes damage,but it does appear the onus on this lies with BS,as match fishings big business what with all the sponsers,and i havnt read anywhere yet that proves Bobs wrong,although i found his last remark a little wanting,ie...there only fish
Steve Spiller
Well-known member
Bernie, it's sarcasm!
Read the thread from the start if you have time, things would be a little clearer for you then.
There's a little "niggle" that won't be resolved! :-(
Read the thread from the start if you have time, things would be a little clearer for you then.
There's a little "niggle" that won't be resolved! :-(
Steve Spiller
Well-known member
Another good one to have a look at is "Barries latest article".
T
Tony Rocca
Guest
Chris,
Bob's not gone and written summut thats not true has he, I dont believe it, not our Bob surely.
Whoops, just thought, hes gone away on his holls again, forget I said owt.
Bob's not gone and written summut thats not true has he, I dont believe it, not our Bob surely.
Whoops, just thought, hes gone away on his holls again, forget I said owt.
Holls again??
I thought he was a very sick man (o
I thought he was a very sick man (o