record breaker

[rod MacAskill]

John- regarding your question about chub in the Lake District. I don't know about the other lakes but I have had some small chub(1lb+)in Bassenthwaite whilst roach fishing which have presumably entered the lake via the River Derwent.

 

[Peter Jacobs]

Firstly, let me say that I am very happy for the captor of this no doubt magnificent fish and would not wish to detract from its capture, or the skills required to put it on the bank.

I do, however, wonder if this (these?) chub actually spawn in the stillwater in question, or in keeping with most barbel that have been stocked (wrongly, IMHO) into stillwaters become barren?

Call me a purist (or whatever else takes your fancy) but I would have far rather have seen the record fish coming from a river, where they belong, spawn properly and thrive in their natural environment.

Finally, I agree with a contributor above regarding the question of should we have two records for chub, one from their natural habitat, being rivers, and another for stillwater caught fish?

Just my opinion, yours may differ and long may it do so.

"PJ"

 

[Dave Slater]

Peter,
Why have two records? They do grow just as big in rivers, whether they get caught or not. They do occur in stillwaters where they have not been introduced so who are we to say whether or not these are natural. The stillwater fish are always in good condition and at least as challenging as river chub. I also know a few lakes where they spawn naturally, Ivy Lake recently lost by your beloved CAC being an example.

 

[Andy Nellist]

The article in AT says that the captor is considering not claiming the record because he was carp fishing at the time. I think that would be a great shame because his Chub is a truly massive fish.

 

[Warren 'Hatrick' (Wol) Gaunt]

Each to their own.

Anyhow weights n measures outcome first!

 

[Dave Slater]

I agree with you Andy. A truly awesome fish. Congratulations to the captor. I am sure many of us, myself included, have caught p.b. fish when fishing for other species.

 

[Warren 'Hatrick' (Wol) Gaunt]

Errrrrr, Andy, spending 25 mins on the phone to me at 9am this morning, watching your work collegues passing you into your work place, whilst laughing down the phone to me "should be in work now". Now your playing on-line.

GET SOME WORK DONE MAN!

;o)

 

[GrahamM]

Again, some anglers are making the mistake that records are about captors. They're not, they're about the fish. This is possibly the biggest chub ever caught and it should go down in history as such.

The fact that some of us are disappointed that it didn't come from a river is nothing to do with it.

Also, the fact that the bloke was carp fishing is nothing to do with it.

We're recognising the biggest recorded fish of a species. That's all.

He should claim the record and let the fish be recorded for all time.

 

[Peter Jacobs]

Graham, I thoroughly agree with you that records are about the fish and not the captor, and should indeed go into the istory books accordingly.

The main point I was approaching was that I wondered if this was a "stocked" fish or if it had got into the stillwater by flood or other accident.

Dave, I am not obsessed with the point but meerly wondering if this could (or even should) be investigated.

Absent any scientific information regarding the growth rates of stilwater chub versus river chub, I am not able to comment other than I would be surprised if many rived-based chub get to see many hi-protein boilies, for example, compared to their stillwater cousins?
Let me rephrase that; I would be surprised if many river-based chub get to see "as" many boilies etc . . . . . . . . .

I am not saying that this particular fish had attained its weight on a staple diet of boilies, meerly pointing out what should be, reasonably,obvious.

Again, full cudos to the captor, as it was a magnificent fish regardless of where it came from.

Graham, any chance of combining these similar threads on the different forums?

 

[GrahamM]

Sorry Peter, I can switch threads about from one forum to another but not combine them. Not yet anyway, maybe in future.

 

[Dave Slater]

Peter,
I am not sure that boilees are quite as relevant as is sometimes thought. Very big chub are often semi-predatory and will continue to grow where there are a lot of small fish for them to feed on. The Ivy Lake fish are a prime example. The chub spawn naturally in that lake, which is spring fed, and they have an abundant supply of small fish to feed on. Some of the chub in there are huge. The same situation apples to rivers like the Dorset Stour where there is a huge head of small fish for the chub to eat. I am not suggesting that chub do not grow huge on boilees, just that they can also grow huge without them. I doubt if my 7lb 12oz chub had ever seen a boilee, as it was from a quiet stretch, and there are two much bigger ones there. I think these two fish could top the stillwatwer fish that has just been caught. There are other chub just as big on other stretches of the same river and various other rivers, as well as various stillwaters. Bearing this in mind I can't see the need for separate records. If ever I am lucky enough to catch such a fish I will not care where it comes from as long as it is not a 'known' fish.

 

[Peter Jacobs]

Dave, I totally agree with respect to big chub being semi-preditory and your observations regarding boillies as well.

It is a pity that I never fished Ivy when it was on the CAC book, maybe sometime in the near future I might get the chance.

Although, on second thoughts and from a personal point of view, I will continue to pursue my "six" from the rivers

You know me quite well enough to know that I would have far preferred this chub to have come from a River, and to have been caught on a split cane rod with a centre pin reel to boot :-0

As to spearate records my thoughts were just that, thoughts, maybe out aloud but nonetheless just thoughts.

 

[chris day]

I'm still trying to work out Kev Clifford's England football manager clue, and I fished the water for 3 years! The chub in there have never come out on deads to my knowledge despite some effort, only on carp food I think, although I do remember getting some strange runs on deads fished for pike once. I didn't realise Richard Lee had posted this up, I also put the info on the coarse thread, but the RMC site had the exclusive on this 29 hours before Richard Lee posted. That's quick.

 

[Ron Troversial Clay]

And again Graham gives some true wisdom here.

It's always the fish that holds the record, NEVER the angler.

There has been lots of records in the past taken by some very indifferent anglers.

 

[Warren 'Hatrick' (Wol) Gaunt]

So who holds the world record Long Jump, the sandpit?

 

[Warren 'Hatrick' (Wol) Gaunt]

The fish is THE record and the Angler holds it, surely?

 

[ED (The ORIGINAL and REAL one)]

I would have thought so too Wol ..........

 

[Ron Troversial Clay]

No way chaps.

In any other sport, such as long jumping, high jumping, running etc. The athlete holds the record.

And by doing so, it makes that athlete the best, or fastest at that time.

Record fish are simple biological facts. You can be the best roach angler in the world, but if there is not a roach in the water over the record you will never beat it. If you don't have access to such fish you will never break a record.

It's easy to measure 100 metres or 400 metres or to tape the throw of a discus or javelin. In many cases, a fish of record proportions of some species may never occur again.

The Atlantic salmon is a case in point.

Not only that, a record fish may not tbe the best specimen of its species. Take carp for example. I have caught enough big ones in my life to realise that many of the biggest were plain obese.

I do not think that a Sumo wrestler or a MacDonalds stuffed fatty is the most perfect specimen of mankind.

Do you?

 

[Chris Bishop]

So who holds the world record Long Jump, the sandpit?

Spot on Warren..!

 

[Dave Rothery]

your both right, but wols more right than ron (cos its ron)