British records increasing .

[Dave H]

Thanks Viney. Yes it was upsetting to see them flocking like Vultures on a carcass. but i am contented and it's my claim to fame if only a few days

[lutra]

In 1994 on the River Medway I caught it at 16lb ¾ oz. It was the British record. It was at fordcombe near Ashford. To those who know the stretch they will tell you that it is less than 6ft wide and it was taken at a 10ft wide stretch in no more than 2ft of water. At the time I was in the Royal Tunbridge Wells fishing club who owned the water. It was quite a popular area as there were quite big pike that were caught in the big eddies on the river. Word spread quickly and within 4 days it had been caught again at 16lb 1oz allegedly. Then the following week another. It was named ‘Bertie’ Barbel. Other fish came in at the 12lb/14lb mark. Then after about the 5^th catch in about 2 weeks the Carp boys literally built a damn of Robin Red boilies . Then a guy came along Pete Whitehouse who I think was a member and caught it pushing it up to over 16lb 2oz.

To my knowledge it and 4 or 5 barbel around the 12lb mark disappeared soon after. You can think of a conspiracy if you like but all were not seen. I would like to hope that they were removed and put in a deeper wider section of the Medway.

Many did not want to catch it of fear of killing it but many more wanted their name up in lights. Many thought it a dumb fish but I thought it just had nowhere to go and with many just popping up what chance did it have? Even poachers at night were having a go. At one point an official from the club and a police officer stood at night . I gave up fishing soon after due to family commitments and other issues.

So yes, held it for 3 or 4 days it’s not long but at least I did and I did it the proper way with feeder and maggots and that makes me feel good today J

Oh well, well done on the capture anyway. Must have put a big smile on you face at the time.

 

It's amazing how many rivers have top 16lb less than 2 decades on. More than 1 river for ever year that has past i make it. But its true of many other species as well, bream, tench, carp, ........... all seem to have many waters that produce fish of sizes that would have been monsters only a few years back.

 

Was yours the first UK 16lb barbel Dave?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest 1lastcast]

When you look at the nature of the Rivers that the really big Barbel are taken, they tend to be smaller slower and see a lot as Steve says HNV baits. The Severn and Wye for example are faster flowing and more wild if you like, and a Wye 'double' is not at all common. Of course the downside of big fish in small rivers is that they are more likely to fall prey to Mr Otter, as is the current situation to the Bristol Avon, Ouse and many others.

 

So I guess you might say these big Barbel are pampered well fed fish that really have come about since the Carp lads have moved onto the rivers

 

Oh well.

[Anderoo]

I think anglers put way too much emphasis on the role of bait when it comes to huge fish. I'm sure it makes a difference sometimes, but not to the extent many people think it does.

 

Think of the enormous barbel in the Ouse. That tiny river only started seeing bait going in in any quantity once those fish had been discovered and publicised. The were already huge.

 

My view is that the ingredients for growing huge fish are higher water temperatures, minimal energy expenditure, minimal stress, minimal competition for food, abundance of natural food.

 

Sticking tonnes of boilies or pellets into a water won't automatically turn ordinary fish into giants.

[Anderoo]

Remember the huge 'frankenstein' rainbow trout of the 90s? Places like Dever Springs and Avington? Those record-sized fish were grown in basically laboratory conditions, and I remember reading at the time that the most important factor by far was minimising stress by keeping the fish at a constant optimal temperature and ideal light level.

 

Fish that get caught a lot, unless they're very big already, are at a huge disadvantage. They experience regular stress, and the physical effects of being caught (flesh wounds, removal of slime) have to be healed.

[gozzer]

I think anglers put way too much emphasis on the role of bait when it comes to huge fish. I'm sure it makes a difference sometimes, but not to the extent many people think it does.

 

Think of the enormous barbel in the Ouse. That tiny river only started seeing bait going in in any quantity once those fish had been discovered and publicised. The were already huge.

 

My view is that the ingredients for growing huge fish are higher water temperatures, minimal energy expenditure, minimal stress, minimal competition for food, abundance of natural food.

 

Sticking tonnes of boilies or pellets into a water won't automatically turn ordinary fish into giants.

 

I agree completely Andrew, and the main factor I believe is the cray fish. It feeds on the eggs, and reduces the survival rates of fry, and provides a plentiful food supply for the larger fish. As the fish get bigger, they also become more predatory on smaller fish, and it becomes a vicious circle.

I dread to think what our rivers will be like in another 10years. Probably more crays, less chub, barbel, roach, dace etc, and the rest made up by the constant restocking with escapees from the commercials.

The natural 'pyramid' of plenty of small fish, reducing in numbers with size, until there are few big ones, is long gone on most of our waters. That seems to be how anglers today want it, but what will they do when the bubble eventually bursts?

 

John.

[Steve Walker]

It will sort itself out if we let it, John. There are things we can do to improve fry survival - habitat improvement, backwaters and flood refuges, etc. Like they said in Jurassic Park, "Life will find a way".

[Dave H]

You could count out predators but not much else when it comes to boilies. Life does sort it out but it needs help at times .

Edited March 20, 2013 by Dave H

[Anderoo]

 

I agree completely Andrew, and the main factor I believe is the cray fish. It feeds on the eggs, and reduces the survival rates of fry, and provides a plentiful food supply for the larger fish. As the fish get bigger, they also become more predatory on smaller fish, and it becomes a vicious circle.

I dread to think what our rivers will be like in another 10years. Probably more crays, less chub, barbel, roach, dace etc, and the rest made up by the constant restocking with escapees from the commercials.

The natural 'pyramid' of plenty of small fish, reducing in numbers with size, until there are few big ones, is long gone on most of our waters. That seems to be how anglers today want it, but what will they do when the bubble eventually bursts?

 

John.

 

Yes, the crays have had an effect without a doubt. I would class that as 'natural food' though (even though they're not native). It's strange, on some rivers there is a huge lack of smaller fish coming through, which I agree is a major concern. Locally, the Cherwell is a good example. Lots of crays, a few big fish, very few smaller ones. However, on others, this hasn't happened. The Thames here isn't that much bigger than the Cherwell, and is even more riddled with crays, but it's teeming with small fish of all species. So it's clearly not just the presence of crays that creates this 'big fish or none at all' situation. There's something else going on.

[gozzer]

It will sort itself out if we let it, John. There are things we can do to improve fry survival - habitat improvement, backwaters and flood refuges, etc. Like they said in Jurassic Park, "Life will find a way".

 

I agree Steve, it will sort itself out, but will we like the end results?

 

Look what happened in Jurrasic Park, it came back to bite them on more than the backside.

 

John.

 

John.