Liamsm

I think that one or two posts that have followed my previous one, only enforces the point that I made, that decisions are made without considering the whole picture. Anyone that thinks that the signal crayfish will not spread throughout every piece of water in England is either very naïve, or really did not get their little talk from Daddy about the birds and the bees. They started in a lake in this country. Birds eat them. It is quite common to see crested grebes with them in their beaks. Crayfish carry their eggs. I will leave the rest for you to work out. As for the somewhat sarcastic post about their native habitat in America, they are part of that eco system and that is where they belong. As posted they are a very small part of many many other species of crayfish within that eco system with lots of competition. Anyone that knows their Darwin will know that it is competition that controls evolution. Also they will have their already evolved predators within that eco system . Which was also the point of my post concerning the otter. I don't think that any angler in this country is in any doubt that signal crayfish do not belong here and that they are not part of our natural eco system.. Now that it is here, it needs to be controlled until it does becomes part of the system. We will never eradicate them completely now, that is obvious, but like I have said, the piper has to be paid. ………Liam [ 28. February 2004, 04:39 PM: Message edited by: Liamsm ]

[ 28. February 2004, 04:41 PM: Message edited by: Liamsm ]

I was only using pike as an example, as if you dig a lake completely isolated from any river eventually it will be inhabited by pike in what is quite a short time. These as we all know are introduced by the birds. As Bruno has said about birds from other continents often being blown off coarse the introduction of a species does not have to be by man, but can happen through nature. It is likely to happen a whole lot more in the future as well, due to the climate change. Do we then try to take a hand in these natural introductions, because they were not there 150 years before, or do we except that it is just part of natures natural world growth?. Bruno has also mentioned about otters not being in some areas of the country, but would they have been, if man had not already taken a hand in the natural spread of these animals?. It now appears that otters are going to be the saviours of our rivers, with their re-introduction to combat the signal crayfish. A plague introduced here by man that are devastating our fish stocks, by eating thousands of fish eggs per meal. It is very easy to see why the intervention of man can mess things up and also go from bad to worse. I have listened to many anglers shout loudly against the plan for the re-introduction of otters before they have even looked at the reality behind it. “They will eat all the fish” They will eat far more crayfish, because that is what they are being fed on in the otter farms and crayfish are far more abundant and easier to catch than fish are. OK! they will eat some fish, but every crayfish that they eat will save thousands more. They will also control the mink that have spread everywhere, again by the stupid hand of man. It is very easy to have a very one sided view of these things, before you know all the facts, but sometimes even then we miss nature's little twists. Sometimes the best thing to do is nothing, but if you are going to mess with nature, you have to be prepared to address the balance sometimes. And! pay the piper for what you could not see the last time that you interfered. .......Liam.

Hi Peter, I think that you got it the right way around the first time. I say hang him! . Not for the lack of a comma, but because he is a carp angler. Only Joking Den. ...Liam

It seems that this argument is missing one important point. What about nature herself. The birds and the bees!. What is a speices that is introduced naturally?. The pike seems to be one of the first fish to find its way anywhere to a new habitat without being introduced by man. Is it counted as indigenous then?. .....Liam

Who is to say that feeling pain is cruel or a bad thing?. Whip me again! Harder! HARDER! AAAHHH!!!!. ......Liam [ 27. February 2004, 07:50 PM: Message edited by: Liamsm ]

Getting a rod is usualy a good place to start. ...Liam [ 27. February 2004, 05:14 PM: Message edited by: Liamsm ]

Hi Chris, I have not fished the mill for donkeys years, it was just that I could not think of any other day ticket stretches in the area. Are there any more that you know of?. ....Liam PS You are spot on about the weather of coarse. [ 26. February 2004, 06:54 PM: Message edited by: Liamsm ]

A day trip to Aldermaston mill is usually a good starting point for out of towners to have their first bash at the kennet. However It is possible to get an invite from the many very friendly local anglers once they get to know you a little. I hope that Elton does not mind me saying that it might help you to look in on one of the barbel sites bfw, or barbel playground as it is based on Kennet barbel angling in this area. ......Liam [ 26. February 2004, 05:56 PM: Message edited by: Liamsm ]

Sorry about that Elton, It is the spam filter that I have, sixty junk mails a day now. Thanks! for doing it again mate. I picked it up the second time. I have just had a new PC and have not been able to get back on since. All working good now though. I might try to join your web masters forum when I have finished my coarse. .....Liam [ 26. February 2004, 12:44 AM: Message edited by: Liamsm ]

Nice little story this, well done Pete. I enjoyed the irony very much. .......Liam. [ 25. February 2004, 10:04 PM: Message edited by: Liamsm ]

The suggestion that people could go and sit by the lakes without fishing, to enjoy nature, put a smile on my face. Would the lakes actualy be there in the first place without anglers?. What would the rivers be without angling?. I would give good odds that they would turn into boating canals. Like has already been said if you are only willing to see one side of an argument, nothing will change your mind. The funniest thing is that these people are university students. With minds that closed how do they hope to learn anything?. .........Liam

As far as legality is concerned. I think that it would be an obstruction issue, that would get you moved on. ..........Liam [ 08. August 2003, 06:59 PM: Message edited by: Liamsm ]

If you want to teach a youngster how to handle a rod and reel quickly. Take it away from fishing and make a game on the lawn along the lines of who can cast into a bucket. Without the distraction of wanting to actualy catch fish, he will learn far more quickly, but keep it interesting for its own sake and make a good game of it. ......Liam

Sascha, Lee also has a very good article on bfw, articles section, about bait making. .........Liam

Hi All, It does not require much foresight or imagination, to see that it would be a lot easier in the future to effect a ban on angling, without the license or EA in place in its present form. From a legal point of view, fishing is at present being endorsed by the government, in the collection of the license revenue. The best legal and logical defense we have at the moment. In reality the EA is the only real tie between anglers, in the form of a noted government body. The biggest mistake anglers in general could make would be to lose it now. I am not saying it is perfect and could not afford some change , but it is all we have got at the moment. .........Liam [ 29. July 2003, 01:27 AM: Message edited by: Liamsm ]

Peter, In my opinion, Your last post is the best bit of writing on this thread so far. ........Liam

Try using barbel fishing tactics for big bream. Although I could not understand why anyone would want to target them instead of barbel. I can't stand the things. I often catch them up to eight pounds when fishing deeper slow swims,to my annoyance. I think that they seem to get on the pellet when I use a lot off hemp. I try to avoid them, but if I used a smaller hook I would probably catch even more. .........Liam

Gilbertron, I would not go that root if I was you mate. You are responding to criticism from only two posters. What about all the rest of the posters that do not agree with the criticism?. You are totally right not to try to prove your self to anyone else. I had no difficulty at all in understanding the point that you were trying to make, as it was writen. There are a lot of ”sad” things in this life and it is usually used to express how the writer feels about something, personal to themselves. I do not think that it was used as a personal view of your self. It may appear as if this post has gone off the track of helping the original poster, but in fact in my opinion, it is the best lesson that this youngster could have learned, if he is about to embark on a writing career. What people write is often not always interpreted as they meant it to be, when it was writen. Surly this is one of the most important things to achieve when writing?. .....Liam

I totaly agree with you Den. There are still alot of people in the world, that still have the opinion that the earth is flat. They are entitaled to their opinion also. No proffit in us trying to change their minds,or arguing about it is there?. ......Liam

Nick, There you go mate I need say no more. "STILLWATER BARBEL. THE FACTS 1. A total of 38 species of barbel have been recorded in Europe with only one (Barbus barbus) in the U.K. It is the U.K. species which requires clean, flowing, well oxygenated water (Lelek, 1980; Huet, 1959;) with a gravel river bed to reproduce (Balon’s 1975, 1981, Baras, 1994). 2. The Environment Agency in their good practice guide to Freshwater Fisheries state that is dubious practice to deliberately stock barbel into habitats where they are expected to live on a catch-and-release basis while being very unlikely to be able to spawn successfully. 3. Barbel (Barbus barbus) are widespread in the river systems of our country and are easily accessible to the angler. There is no need for stillwater stocking of these river fish. 4. There is justifiable fear that stocking small barbel into commercial stillwater fisheries creates a demand leading the unscrupulous to take large barbel from the rivers to the detriment of the river anglers and the barbel themselves. 5. Fish farms that breed barbel and grow them on for stocking do this in semi still water but all require some method for increased oxygenation (Ibbotson 1994). 6. There is no published scientific information which recommends the stocking of barbel into stillwaters, or which claims barbel thrive and grow big in stillwater. 7. Barbel require conditions to spawn which cannot be found in stillwaters (Ibbotson, 1994) and naturally sustaining populations of barbel in stillwaters are not possible. 8. Barbel are less tolerant of high water temperatures and low oxygen levels than stillwater fish such as tench and carp. The lethal concentration of oxygen is almost twice as high for barbel than it is for tench. (Ibbotson, 1994). 9. In 1896 and again during the 1960’s a few barbel were introduced to the Dorset Stour and the Hampshire Avon where they multiplied and thrived to produce a barbel mecca. In 1956 Angling Times introduced 509 barbel to the River Severn and we now have over one hundred miles of prime barbel fishing. A few barbel were also introduced to the River Wye, the Bristol Avon etc. and some northern rivers such as the Ribble, Dane and Weaver. They have thrived in all these rivers. 10. More barbel have been stocked into stiliwaters than all the above mentioned rivers put together. These stillwater stockings are frequently repeated, as the only impact they have is to increase the mortality rates of the stillwater fishery. 11. Barbel are great wanderers in rivers, often moving several kilometres in a matter of days (Hunt & Jones, 1974; Baras & Cherry, 1990; Lucas & Batley, 1996) in order to seek suitable conditions when changes in water temperature, flow rates etc. occur and also to suit their seasonal needs. Barbel cannot do this in the commercial stillwaters. 12 Commercial stillwaters do not provide the correct habitat for barbel to thrive not just the water quality is in question but the overhead cover is usually missing. 13. Copp & Bennetts (1996) reported a significant decrease in the abundance and size of barbel in a reach of the River Lee after the removal of some 30% of the bankside vegetation. 14. After removal of all the bankside vegetation and instream branches from a stretch of the River Teme all the barbel moved to other areas. Stillwater barbel have little choice - they have to stay, until they die, in conditions they would not normally tolerate. 15. Several case studies of the effects of impoundment of river sections containing natural barbel populations exist. In all cases, with the onset of stillwater flow conditions barbel populations declined appreciably. (Fernando & Holcik, 1991; Juradja & Penaz, 1994; Juradja, 1995; Lusk, 1995; Penaz 1995, 1996). 16. Thousands of small barbel have entered Trimpley reservoir via an inlet from the River Severn yet Trimpley is not full of large barbel! If only 10% of them had entered a suitable habitat there would have been a barbel explosion. 17. Barbel are stocked into commercial stillwaters without any thought for the fish themselves but for financial gain - greed! 18. Barbel spend most of their lives on the riverbed and in stillwaters they have a greater risk of parasites in these conditions. 19. The potential for recapture is far greater in stillwaters than it is in rivers and barbel will experience increased stress when frequently caught and more so at spawning time by being unable to spawn in stillwater conditions. 20. Continued exposure to poor water quality and lack of water flow will affect the survival of individual barbel - they will die. Many thanks to the Barbel Society for supplying the above literature" Quoted from bfw site. ..........Liam

Den, Sorry, but in my opinion anyone fishing a lake for barbel is not a "barbel angler". They live in rivers and that is where they should stay. If you want to put yourself in the "not worth your salt" bracket, that is up to you. If you think that they should be in a lake, I think that you can not be a serious "barbel angler". Therefore you must be "worth your salt" in a different field. Lake fishing maybe?. ......Liam

Rickster, I strongly advise you not to go fishing for barbel in any still water. They do not belong there and any barbel angler worth their salt will not even fish a still water where they are kept. Not even for other species. If you want to catch your first barbel any seasoned barbel angler would be willing to take you and witness the event. The joy of watching someone catch their first barbel is as good as catching a personal best of your own, to most seasond barbel anglers. A visit to bfw would put you on the right path, With probable offers, but if you are a minor you will also need to be accompanied by an adult that you know. Good luck with your quest. .........Liam [ 13. July 2003, 07:57 PM: Message edited by: Liamsm ]

Paul, It takes quite a lot to overcome your natural instincts to pull away from a snag, instead of towards it on the initial strike, but in practice it really does work and you will lose far less fish. I see a great deal of anglers nowadays trying to bully fish,instead of using skill to play them. This is what gives rise to "having to have" a certain rod to do the job. With the right amount of skill, it does not matter too much about the rod. Most reasonable rods will do the job and the fish suffer less by being led and diverted to the net rather than being bullied to it. I had no trouble at all recently in landing a twenty three pound carp while tench fishing, with four pound line and a very light rod. The fish needed no time to recover either as he was never under any real pressure. ( Not suggesting anyone actualy uses gear this light for carp) Just try to have the bottle , to try it once pulling towards and you will soon see what I am talking about. Nine times out of ten the fish will change direction. Like I said though not easy to overcome that natural instinct. Also you can not always get the required angle from the bank to do it, but there are plenty of other technics that one can employ also. .......Liam. [ 11. July 2003, 07:28 PM: Message edited by: Liamsm ]

Whatever rod you are using, the biggest tip is to be able to change the direction off your side strain very quickly. To keep the fish moving in a tight circle. Another tip worth mentioning is that if there is a snag near by, you want to be able to apply sidestrain to pull the fish directly toards it on the initial strike. I know that it sounds daft but nine times out of ten it will go in the other direction away from it. Liam.