Kennet Chub Weight 'Progression' since 1982

[Chris Plumb]

Been trying to put this on my blog - but keep bumping up against file size limits (which are more generous on the main forum it seems!)

 

5lb + chub are now quite common on the Kennet - and are my benchmark for a good fish. However before the 99/00 season I'd never caught one. In that year I had my very first 6lber (never having caught a 5) and in the 16 years since then have had over 70 above the 5lb mark. 17 years prior to that, not one despite fishing largely the same venues. I was curious to see how the chub have packed on the weight over this period and have spent the last few evenings having fun going back through my diaries looking at every fish (over 1lb) I've caught since 1982. (This was the year I joined Newbury AA).

 

Attached is a graph showing average yearly weight of my captures - and season's best for each year. It shows how 99/00 sees something of a step change in chub size with average weights rising quickly by a pound and season's bests from around the 4lb mark to 5.5lb mark after that date. No surprise that this corresponds with the arrival of Signals in the river - Mr Chub has certainly been making the most of this new food source....

 

C.

Chub Weight Progression.doc

Edited March 22, 2015 by Chris Plumb

[lutra]

There has been a similar rise in the average size of chub in my local river over the same period in time and it hasn't had Signals. Don't many other species like tench, bream, barbel,.......... all seem to have shot up over the similar period in time?

 

Maybe other factors like weather, predators and maybe some unknown have played a big part as well.

[Rusty]

I can’t view the graph because I’m still using Office 2003 but wouldn’t dispute your stats Chris. I just feel that there’s more to chub growth than signals and I do think that the crayfish infested Kennet is topping out at around 5lb. The reports of larger chub are quite old now, I don’t know of any recent 6lb’ers being caught from the Kennet…I hope I’m wrong. On the other hand a signal free stretch of the Thames is producing some massive chub and they’re not infrequent catches so there has to be another reason for the growth (credit to JV44 for that one).

 

One theory could be that chub need a balanced diet to grow and the Thames is more capable of providing that than the Kennet. We know that they eat anything, bread, corn and meat so if you believe that anglers feed contributes to growth how many Kennet anglers fish for them with carbs? Contrast that with protein only perch where the Kennet signal population is really contributing to growth.

[Phone]

Chris,

 

I've always been skeptical that these kinds of reports are marketing ploys. Electronic sampling rarely coincide with "angler reports".

 

I am suspect.

 

Phone

[philocalist]

Interesting post, which in turn has got me asking myself a rhetorical question ...

I'm much further north than almost all members on here, and the simple fact is that we really do not experience the sort of fish up here that seem so abundent further south - to catch ONE 6lb-plus chub up here would be seen locally as a major achievement, despite that fact that the stocks of chub seem numerically high.

The flip side of that particular coin is that neither do we have problems (yet) with signal crayfish ...

 

 

Given the choice, which would you take ... Signal crayfish and their associated problems, but with that apparent 'benefit' of much more numerous specimen - sized fish, or waters without Signals and much more modest, less abundent fish?

Edited March 21, 2015 by philocalist

[JV44]

Big myth that you need Signals for big Chub imo but where they are present obviously they switch onto feeding on them but every waterway is different ,prefer no crays and being able to target Beards with spam myself and having plenty of back up fish of all sizes esp the Chub and the barbell for the future but as said different waterways noit better just different

[Chris Plumb]

Hi Chris - have no doubt there may be other factors - though a lot of my returns - especially from the turn of the millennium are from Speen which saw about as many anglers then as it does today - ie hardly any and use of HNV baits is practically zero there. The point I was trying to show was the apparent step change in size which seems to correspond with the arrival of signals in the river locally. I used to do a lot of deadbaiting for pike in the autumn/winter. I gave up on that because of the crays after 00/01 - it was simply unsustainable and yet just 2 winters earlier was not getting bothered by them at all!

 

You have given me another idea about doing the same with my perch returns - my first ever 3 was in 99 - so might follow a similar pattern!

 

C.

[JV44]

Chris the ultimate wonder Perch and Chub bait is staring at us all but you cannot legally use em ,got your tickets for Wembley yet??

[Chris Plumb]

got your tickets for Wembley yet??

Don't go on sale until 1000 on Tuesday - I expect my wife will be first in the queue as usual!

 

C.

[Latimeria]

Given the choice, which would you take ... Signal crayfish and their associated problems, but with that apparent 'benefit' of much more numerous specimen - sized fish, or waters without Signals and much more modest, less abundent fish?

 

Give me healthy waters with a normal size range any day. If you're not catching chub of 1-4lb, you should be raising hell with the EA and getting organised, not congratulating yourself on what a great "specimen" angler you are.