Record Fish List

[Goose Ganderton]

Following on from a point made in Ron?s Barbel in stillwater thread, should we now be considering having separate British rod caught record fish list?s for both river caught fish and those from still waters.
.
A Carp of 20Ib+ from a river is a fantastic fish but wouldn?t raise an eyebrow from a stillwater what with the record being over 56Ib and 30Ib fish being quite common in most club waters. Likewise a river caught Roach of 2 1/2 + is considered the fish of a lifetime but as we have been seeing in the weekly press (forgetting the hybrid debate) of late, you are just getting started with a 3Ib er.

When was the last time you had an 8Ib Tench or a 10Ib+ Bream from a river? A couple of lakes I fish are stuffed with them and everyone are after the fish over 12 & 15Ib.

I don?t think that it will be to many years before the majority of record fish will be from stillwaters. I personally keep my own specimen list for both and consider them as separate records.

 

[David Preston]

Trouble is that there are too many grey areas. For example -

What about canals?
Some rivers flow faster than others - some of them are practically canals.
Should stocked stillwaters be separated from 'natural' ones?
Imports - if you separate rivers and stillwaters then there will be more pressure to differentiate native and non-native fish.
Then there are methods - when did anyone last catch a 30lb carp on the float?

I could go on, but surely the only solution is to have just one list for the overall biggest fish of each species.

 

[Philip Inzani]

I have to agree with Dave on this.

For me a record is a recording of the biggest fish of a given species and not anything else. Merit of capture, venue, tackle used etc should nto come into it (assuming it was caught within the parameters defining a rod and line capture)
I mean where would you draw the line...should we split float and ledger caught fish, how about biggest fly caught Pike etc etc, it starts getting stupid...mind you the whole record situation is already getting stupid so who knows.

 

[Fergal Scully]

In Ireland we have a seperate lake caught and river caught pike record with canals being counted as rivers. A 20 pounder is considered a specimen from river/canal and a thirty pounder is a specimen for lakes or loughs as we call them.

 

[Fergal Scully]

Sorry we also have the same rules for brown trout with a 5 pounder from a river and a 10 pounder from a lough being specimens.

 

[DAVE COOPER]

I can see the pros and cons of both arguments. To me, the biggest problem is in the record keeping. I don't think the current British Record Fish Committee would be either prepared or geared up to administer and validate such a complex list of classes. I might be wrong, but I doubt it.

The upside would be a better understanding of the merits of captures that are not necessarily huge when compared with the current B.R. The weeklies might even stop giving prizes to 'known' big fish repeat captures for a while.

 

[Paul Williams]

Coop's
You make a valid point about the weeklies it could well bring some sanity back to it all and also revitalise interest in rivers as fisheries, mind you the bounty hunters would move in big time and want you to share your swim )

 

[keith miller]

Dual lists would be open to abuse by the unscrupulous, who might well be tempted to move fish from one venue to another.
To me a specimen pertains to its location.