still water barbel - depressing news.

[Guest Ian Welch]

Originally posted by Graham E:

An extra point.....This is a MATCH lake, so those who agree with the idea also agree with fish, including barbel being in 50lb bags crammed into keepnets.

 

 

Graham, I can understand and sympathise with your criticism of my introduction of the barbel but not with the highly misleading and inaccurate statement above.

 

RMC Angling's policies of fish conservation have always been at the forefront of our management practices. Our rules have set the standards which other angling clubs and organisations have followed. We were, for example, amongst the first to set specific requirements for anglers fishing for pike and catfish.

 

If you had checked our rules you would have seen that we DO NOT allow barbel to be placed in keepnets. If a barbel is caught in a match it will be weighed in and released immediately - the same as current practice for a barbel caught in a match on one of our rivers.

 

Check out one of our matches Graham...as well as scales our stewards carry unhooking mats and Klinik, who else can claim that?

 

If you wish to stop barbel damage I suggest you try to educate the many hundreds of clubs who cram barbel into keepnets in matches on rivers such as the Severn, Trent, Warks Avon etc.

 

I would suggest that these clubs cause more stress and damage to barbel than I ever will by introducing a small number into a well managed, well regulated stillwater.

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by Ian Welch (edited 10 May 2001).]

[Guest Ian Welch]

Originally posted by Newt:

2. Re. the comments that if they can't breed they can't live a "natural" life - with the implication that this is a Bad Thing: How many of us keep pets at home and have them fixed so they don't ever reproduce?  I certainly do as I do not need a house/yard full of puppies or kittens.  I've never noticed that the pets have a sub-par quality of life.

 

 

Nice post Newt. Excellent analogy.

 

 

[This message has been edited by Ian Welch (edited 10 May 2001).]

[Guest pete falloon]

I think the BS have done the right thing in supporting Ian here. There is far too little concrete, scientific evidence for us to say, definitively, that barbel should not be stocked into stillwaters.

 

In a former Barbel Society magazine there was a review on the habitat and habits of the barbel (Paul Garner, I think). It was an excellent review, however, it was clear from the bibliography that there is all too little published scientific information on barbel in stillwaters, and on barbel in general. Reviewed publications would, in general, contain information from carefully controlled, designed and analysed experiments, the results of which would be subject to peer review by a number of experts in the field prior to publication.

 

I think the BS and RMC should, if possible, look into involving either Universities or suchlike in research into this area - it is quite possible that the EA may have funding for work like this.

 

Personally, I do not like barbel in stillwaters, but until there is sufficient evidence I will reserve judgement.

[Guest Jonty]

"Jonty, et al..It's OK to put barbel in keepnets then?"

 

Graham, that is not what I was saying. I merely commented on what I had been told by the EA Bailiff, which was that the barbel at Cudmore were in very good condition. And I suppose that would be despite them having been retained in keepnets for the duration of matches.

 

Jonty

[Guest Jonty]

Sorry - sent it twice

 

[This message has been edited by Jonty (edited 10 May 2001).]

[Guest scoobs11]

i personally have no feelings about stocking barbel in stillwaters.in fact my one capture to date of a barbel was from a stillwater but not intentional(it was a match and i was after carp)

the reason i am answering this thread is i cannot understand why people think ian should be thrown out of the bs just for doing his job !!!

anyone who knows me knows i hate traffic cops ,but only when they are on duty.and yes i drove a wagon and a bike (it was the bike that got me banned) doesnt mean i have anything against them when off duty.

the point i am trying to make is leave him alone for gods sake(and no i dont know him personally)all he's doing is his job the best way he knows how.and since rmc arent stupid it makes sense that he is good at his job or he would'nt be there.

sorry just had to say it , but i do feel better for it.

 

------------------

if you can't be good

be careful

 

[This message has been edited by scoobs11 (edited 10 May 2001).]

[Guest darrell.cook]

The BS 's stance on no barbel in stillwaters is an admirable one,the work and commitment they have is equally admirable.

However their beliefs seem to be unsupported with scientific evidence.

Surely the plan of Mr. Welch will provide conclusive evidence one way or the other.There seems little point in research if we have already decided the outcome.

[Guest trent.barbeler]

Ian,

 

My opinion concerning barbel in stillwaters is a matter of record so to go over old ground here would be pointless.

 

However, I would like to comment on some of the things you have said here so far.

 

Ian, I cant congratulate you enough for the attitude your fishery takes with regard to barbel caught in matches held at your venue.

 

Unfortunately, there is a tone of hypocrisy in my words. Whilst I defend the use of keepnets for all those who choose to use them, your attitude towards barbel caught in matches is possibly the first step in a encouraging direction with regards to barbel. Lets hope so.

 

When I first read Steve Popes posting, I had reservations. After carefully thinking on Steves words, I now take a different view although my view is gaurded to some extent.

 

Over the years gone by, Steve, Mike and others in the BS have faught tirelessly to stop the practise of stocking barbel into stillwaters. NO ONE comes close to the effort that the BS have put into this issue over the years. The main problem has always been the lack of scientific evidence to back up their claims. The EA and others will not listen to arguments based on moral opinions only.

 

What is needed is conclusive scientific evidence coming via an independant study conducted by eminent fishery scientists that PROVES stocking barbel into stillwaters is detrimental to the species.

 

Of course, the opposite may arise from such a study. If that were the case, I would accept its findings but would still personally object on moral grounds. My objection would take the form of not fishing for barbel in stillwaters but that is all it would be. A silent personal protest between myself and my conscience.

 

For any study or research to become conclusive on this issue, the same MUST be conducted by qualified experts. No matter how dedicated or well meaning any participants may be, the EA and other parties will only take serious notitice of qualified fishery experts.

 

On the face of things, some like myself at first, may feel the the BS have made a massive U turn over this issue. After careful thought, clearly that is not the case. Unless someone undertakes the research necessary within a stillwater environment, how will we ever learn the truth?

 

Either way, I would welcome and look forward to its findings.

[Guest Graham E]

1/ Just to be clear, I have not called for anyones expulsion from the BS, nor would I, the decision rests with the Committee.

 

2/So lets see the scenario of barbel caught in a match.

The captor attracts the attention of a steward, by whistle?

The barbel is kept out of water till one arrives and then weighs the fish, with the captor verifying/signing for the weight recorded?

The captor/steward then nurses the barbel in the water( not flowing through the gills) for lets say 10 minutes and when he/she is confident of it being fit and well releases it.

Lets be generous and say the process takes 15 minutes in total.

So the caring angler has given up the opportunity of capturing 3/4 carp adding 12lb to his match weight? Yes, and I'm a martian.

 

3/ Just to clarify, Two wrongs do not make a right, so the Severn Matches etc. is quite rightly condemmed.

 

4/ I have known Ian for many years albeit by phone, and have often given him info on local captures and we have always had a trusting relationship.....

This is the reason I am so aghast at what has happened. In all honesty, I have to believe it's a case of...he who pays the piper....

 

5/ Trenty's post. The BFishers letters page could be interesting next issue, and a FOX rod to win!

[Guest lyn]

Right here we go again. Another long post I’m afraid! I said that this was the hardest thread for me to post, trust me it was! This ‘statement’ has been just has hard/difficult.

 

I knew when I posted this thread it was going to be a ‘rough ride’ for want of a better phrase, purely because of the reasons stated. I have read with interest the response and like Newt (at the time of writing this) it has on the whole been constructive ie; no backbiting. Even though Steve Pope put himself wide open to it. Newt I wish you could come over & catch a river barbel & it would help you understand this love & respect I have for them.

 

What I am about to say I would like you all to know comes from within & not off the top of my head. I have had to think long & hard about the wording to ensure I come across just how I mean to.

 

Firstly, I will tell you all that when I saw Steve’s first reply, I hit the roof! I, like some others felt that the BS had done a U turn on one of the very issues why I joined them. Steve knows I have strong opinions/principles on certain subject. He told Des Taylor as much! He has found out this week just how strong they are on this subject.

 

I have been talking to Matthew (my 18yr old son) ref, this thread & said that if you don’t stand by your principals then there is not much point to life. I will also say, that I will admit when I’m wrong.

 

In answer to one question. If someone can prove to me, scientifically that barbel thrive/breed in still waters then I may look at the whole thing again. I know or very much doubt that that will ever happen. At present all the evidence has said they can’t because they need running water & gravel to spawn in/on. I am hoping that this study will prove just that.

 

I have spent so much time talking to different people over this, Steve has probably decided I’m worse than a nagging wife! I have not been off his case. I spoke at length to Trefor West, who quite rightly told me that I couldn’t change the world over night. Of course, as usual, Trefor is right. He also said that if I left the BS, which believe me was very much at the forefront of my mind, would be stupid. The reason being, as he said, in my position as RO I have to attend committee meetings etc. I am in a far stronger position there to voice my opinions than if I left.

 

I listened hard & long to both Steve & Fred Crouch (President of BS) at their reasons behind this. I am too long in the tooth, so to speak, to have the wool pulled over my eyes. (Just in case any of you are thinking that) As they said the damage had already been done, the fish were in. They will now use this situation to their advantage. Ian has been trying to stock barbel in stillwaters for a few years now. I had really hoped that he had given up on the idea. This survey/study of these barbel will be carried out over years, it has to, in order for it to be done properly. It & RMC will be monitored very closely by the BS. Steve has answered for the BS so I am not going to dwell on this. I just hope that they can prove that barbel do not belong in still waters.

 

Some of you have mentioned carp, trout, etc. All of these species have their own groups. Why the hell are you looking to me to something about it? Why don’t you get off your arses & do it yourself? I am only one woman but I will continue to help in the fight to try & put an end to this. Why don’t you do the same for your chosen species instead of just sitting there criticising & expecting someone else to do it for you?

 

With regards Ian’s response, I cannot answer it, for the simple reason, it would become personal. Like with Steve’s reply I hit the roof, but I realised that it was more personal that anything else. I know Ian better that any of you, that you can’t deny. This is not a cop out. I want to keep this as an overall picture & for that reason I will leave it at that. I know Ian only too well but if I respond I will probably have his solicitors onto me again

 

Ian as I feel so stongly about this, I ask but one thing of you. You said to me a while ago that you would take Liam to the match lake, that was before I knew that was where you had/were putting the barbel. You have stated that you are not going to fish for them yourself. Then I ask you in public that you DO NOT take our son there either.

 

I hope this comes over the way I wanted it to. I have rewritten it enough times!

 

One last thing, I am finally going to admit, to help prove a point. You’ll like this Lee; a few people are getting as curious as I am. The only problem is, they are curious about my age I will tell you now, I have been around the fishing scene a lot longer than a lot of you. I grew up with the likes of Chris Ball, Bob James, Chris Yates the list is endless. These guys all fished with my brother, they know me as Bob’s sister and they still do.

 

A lot of people have thought I was in my 30’s, thankyou for the flattery, because that is what it is. My Clerk of works says, I’m well preserved. (Makes me sound like a listed building ) As much as I hate too admit it I am 47. (Going on 17 at times ) So I have fished on & off for over 40 years.

 

I am going away for the weekend and will enjoy a day the BS AGM because they won’t get rid of me that easily. This fight, as far as I am concerned is just beginning

 

One last thing, too those it may concern, I am not ready too fall just yet either

 

Lyn

 

PS For those who hide behind pseudonyms, if you are man enough to criticise then you should be man enough to ‘come out’ & say who you really are. Quite honestly I have no time to give answers when I do not know whom I am addressing.