| PROFESSOR BARRIE RICKARDS | |
Professor Barrie Rickards is President of the Lure Angling Society, and President of the National Association of Specialist Anglers as well as a very experienced and successful specialist angler with a considerable tally of big fish to his credit. He is author of several fishing books, including the classic work ‘Fishing For Big Pike’, co-authored with the late Ray Webb and only recently his first novel, ‘Fishers On The Green Roads’ was published. He has been an angling writer in newspapers and magazines for nigh on four decades. Barrie takes a keen interest in angling politics. Away from angling Barrie is a Professor in Palaeontology at the University of Cambridge, a Fellow of Emmanuel College and a curator of the Sedgwick Museum of Geology. |
Eel Fyke Netting
Sometimes, during a debate in the angling presses, you find yourself saying, “Yes, that’s what I think too,” and other occasions occur when you say “Damn it, I’ve been saying that for years.”
I experienced both recently, the first when I read Keith Arthur’s column in Angling Times, arguing that Peter Collins (of zander set-line ill-fame) had suffered enough, and that a caution was enough. Quite so. The second was in the same paper, same issue, when eel fyke netting (illegal) was exposed.
Well, I’ve been writing about this problem and danger, both in articles, in letters to the authorities, and in addresses to EA bodies, for the best part of twenty years. The authorities failed to take notice, not just of me, but of others, and now we are reaping the benefits. The only reasons there are only half a dozen licensed eel netsmen on the UK’s rivers are a) the eel fishing is now very poor and b) why buy a licence when you can operate illegally with very little chance of being caught. Eel licence holders should mark at the surface the positions of their nets so anglers can avoid losing tackle on them, unaware that they are in the water. How the licence holder mounts vigil on his gear is his business, but as they have almost wrecked this aspect of the aquatic ecosystem they can reasonably be expected to help put it right, especially as they earn money by it.
Talking about the debates, this time on sea fishing licences (again!) Keith Arthur does raise a valid point: why not add it to the coarse licence so that it reads coarse, trout and sea. Of course, that will give them yet another reason for raising the cost again but it does make sense if a sea license is to be introduced.
Big Fish Lists
There has been another interesting debate running for a couple of years now and that concerns not only British Record lists, but any lists, such as Neville Fickling’s Big Pike list, coupled with how one evaluates repeat captures, such as is often documented with carp and pike.
I suppose one of the problems with lists is that it opens the door to fiddles of one kind or another. I have long been of the opinion that serious fiddling has been common in other countries, but not in the UK and I still hold that view. I think it is all to do with the way angling has developed in this country since the days of Izaac Walton and since the 1950s when some new philosophies were added. Neville mentions a case he has discovered where one of Nigel Williams’ big pike appeared with someone else’s face above it, in a foreign country, presumably to sell holidays! It beggars belief almost, except that as a well-travelled person I have always been aware of different standards in some countries when it comes to – I almost said ‘earning’ money, but I suppose I mean procuring money. With the use of computers nowadays almost any photographic fake is possible.
What about multiple captures? Do they ‘count’? Well, it depends what the counting is for. If the idea is to celebrate the fish, rather than the anglers, then recaptures are of interest but possibly not enterable in record lists. It’s a difficult one that, and I’m not quite sure how I feel. If the idea is to record a meritorious capture, celebrating the angler more, then recaptures should be included. This would be included in Neville’s list I should think, and Mick Brown’s’ capture of a thirty pound pike five times should certainly go down as five, not one. In my own diaries I record the capture, and if I had the good fortune to land a good thirty five times, then it would go down as five (I think!). Of course, you don’t always know. One of my thirties may have appeared twice, although I’m not certain. Who is to recognise a thirty if you last saw it at, say 7 lbs. A degree of common sense is needed I would think.
In the case of national records, as recently discussed by Des Taylor, the matter is even more difficult. Here we are celebrating the fish, not the angler. (Although the angler will celebrate, no doubt!) So if the well-known carp Big Gob comes out at 70lbs, and therefore holds the record, it would surely be odd if, when it came out at 71lbs the following year, we didn’t recognise it as the new record holder (having just beaten Little Gob, caught the same month, but earlier, at 701/2 lbs).
I sometimes reach a point of wondering whether it matters! I’ll tell you when it will matter: if we have a major winter kill and all the big ones die! It will be decades before such fish are seen again, if ever, and everyone will clearly know every bream, tench, carp and pike on that record list, because the list will be stable for decades (as it was until the 1980s). List are always useful for some purpose or other and all power to the elbows of those people who take the trouble to compile them. For me, my own diaries (now 50 years worth) are enough of a bother!
Personal Bests
Somewhat related to big fish lists/records/diaries is the matter of our personal bests or targets, and how much effort we put into breaking them. Again, I’ll begin by quoting Neville Fickling, because it is a good starting point to a discussion: “I cannot seriously fish a water that can only produce 16 pounders”. I don’t have a problem with that, except that it is a philosophy of others, not me. Ray Webb was like Neville, quite obsessed (in a nice sort of way) with catching only big pike (or whatever). To me, who I fish with, where I fish, and under what rules I fish are far more important. I have a good big fish record but it didn’t compare with Ray’s then, or Neville’s now, but our aims are rather different. A couple of years ago I fished a small stream for pike where the fish ran from 1 lb to 5 lbs. I got a 7lb fish which is, as far as I know, still the record for the water! I got a huge amount of pleasure out of fishing that water, lots of pike, and lots of understanding the use of some lures.
I don’t like rules and regulations, but I’m not generally prepared to break them. I simply don’t bother to fish the waters. That’s why I don’t join many of the trout reservoir jamborees. I have nothing against others doing so, and most certainly do not belittle their catches, but I cannot enjoy fishing to half-baked regulations. There are far too many silly bans in angling, as David Overy said in his recent brilliant article on the subject. If I am lure fishing for pike I want to choose my lure size and type. I don’t want some ignorant fisheries bod doing it for me. I am sporting, not him.
Awesome!
Okay, that’s that lot off my chest! Let me get something else off my chest too. It’s that dreadful word ‘awesome’. Can we ban it? It started in carp fishing and has spread everywhere else, and I have had enough of it. There are other words in the English language for God’s sake. Whilst we are having a whinge, what about that word ‘amount’? You hear it all the time: “Any amount of anglers fish that water.” They mean number. Okay, I’ve had my whinge for the time being. Your turn now!
