Should barbel be stocked in stillwaters

[GrahamM]

Whilst I agree with most of the sentiments expressed by Stewart, Andy Orme and Steve Pope, in that we shouldn't stock any species into an environment where it doesn't belong, I can't help wondering why the same ruckus hasn't been raised about the stocking of chub in stillwaters.

Is this yet another instance of barbel being thought of as more important than other species?

 

[Paul Williams]

I like Sedge have been reared on the Severn but believe me the barbel haven't always been so revered!! i remember the moans about them pushing out the chub and roach, i have even seen them tossed up the bank!!
Of course things are different now and the barbs are here to stay...and i love em! however i do honestly believe that they are being elevated to a position of false height!!
I do agree that they "belong" in a river but as Graham pointed out no such issues were raised when chub started to get caught in stillwaters and how about trout???
The fish stealing should really be a separate issue.....after all a carp that is river born and bred may not adapt to stillwaters of the muddy commercial type, but more importantly noone should be allowed to stock a water for commercial gain on ANY stock from a river (or stillwater)gained under the cover of darkness!!! it stinks regardless of wether the fish is a barbel or roach!
I know that barbel in stillwaters is a much debated issue and overall i do believe it is not the best road to take but the barbs have many "champions" to fight thier cause, what about the other species?
At the end of the day it boils down to a question of supply and demand and there are plenty out there who are happy to fish for stillwater barbs, and whilst that is the case there will be waters that hold them.
I must go feed my tropical fish now.....they are from the rivers of the world you know!!!

 

[vince battams]

if it is a fish farm reared fish whats the problem with putting in stillwaters.
But if people are taking them from rivers and putting them in stillwaters then a big no no and its has been done or there would not have been questions raised against fishery owners in the past, there is no smoke without a fire.

 

[Ron Clay]

Chub are quite different from barbel - a true river species. Chub often get into still waters through their own devices. We all know how gravel pits next to the Thames and Windrush get their chub. Chub also do very well in some still water. They seem very happy there and may even spawn there.

Barbel should be kept where they belong - in rivers

 

[GrahamM]

I agree, I'm merely suggesting that perhaps we have a double standard - in more than one area - where barbel are concerned.

 

[Gary Knowles]

Should barbel be stocked into stillwaters - NO.

Still I suppose it gives bone idle anglers a chance to catch one.......

 

[Stewart Bloor]

I think the comparison to chub etc is true to a point, I can see the argument. But there is a difference in the biological make up of the fish. (Ok, at this point, I concede I'm not a scientist and don't have the knowledge in depth to get into a deep debate. But, there is a biological difference).
Regarding other single species, then surely it is the role of their groups etc to fight their corner. The fact that the barbel is well represented, and its case is fought for, by the Barbel Society and lots of well known individuals, is a credit to them. There is nothing stopping other groups from doing their bit. That can't be used as an argument against those whose cause is the protection of the barbel.
The point about farm reared fish, I raised in the article. When barbel are reared in this way, extra oxygenation is required. When put in the stillwater, that artificial situation is no longer present. Therefore the barbel is being placed into an alien environment.
At the end of the day, whatever point of view we have, it has to be based on facts. It's like the close season. Some say we should have it because 'I like to get the decorating done'. Now, I'm not making comment here on the issue of the close season. Just stating that if that is the only argument we have, then it's not really based on anything solid. The same with barbel in stillwaters. In the article I put forward my argument, which I felt was based on good solid facts, rather than circumstantial evidence.

 

[Rob Brownfield]

This is so funny! Barbel have become the "fasion" fish at the moment, and there is so much hype about them its untrue!

A few years ago when they started being stocked, people did not bat an eyelid, but all of a sudden people are knocking the practice. Why? Because they have become THE fish to fish for and suddenly only pure river fish are worthy...same as only pure bred English carp are worthy to some anglers. Its rather amusing.

Barbel as a species is very adaptable, living in fast flowing rivers, to slow, sluggish deep pools with a tidal influence. They will live happily in stillwater (no water is really still anyway what with undercurrents, springs etc) as has been proven beyond doubt. Remember...only a few years back Carp could not live in a river!!!! Tell that to the carp in the Royalty!!

I don't actually agree with the practice because it would appear that the waters they are being stocked into are commercial match fisheries that are overstoked, and I dont agree with any fish being treated that way.

 

[GrahamM]

Good points Rob. My main argument is based on the fact that many of those who shriek about barbel in stillwaters don't think twice about fishing for chub in stillwaters and carp in rivers. It's like Rob says, barbel are fashionable. So much so it is wrong, according to some, to use boilies and bolt rigs to catch them.

As I've said, I've no argument about barbel not belonging in stillwaters, but let's not elevate barbel to a higher position than any other fish that has been stocked in unsuitable waters.

 

[sam oddy]

I quite agree Rob. I recently got a Leslies of Luton catalogue with a magazine and the general theme were that they were specialist suppliers of barbel tackle. John Baker now carries a few lines of base mix, flavours etc specially for the barbel angler. Mr barbel certainly seems to be headed for the vogue fish in the coming years.

 

[Rob Brownfield]

Blimey, I have people agreeing with me
Now then, on the very rare occasion I fish for Barbel, I use a split cane rod and a centre pin and roll meat along the bottom. I have been laughed off the Wensum coz I did not have the latest gear. Strange, coz the gear they were using was the same stuff I used for Tench in the 80's! And guess what...they caught bugger all!

I havent seen anyone raise there arms about Gudgeon (a river species) being in Redmire!

 

[Rob Brownfield]

Oh....just remembered, there are HUGE shoals of Dace in Loch Lomond!!!

 

[Stewart Bloor]

''Blimey, I have people agreeing with me ''
Ah well, Rob, sorry to burst your bubble....gudgeon and barbel are different fish. It's like saying just because grouse can thrive on upland moors in winter, then reed warblers should too. They're different species. Just because they're birds (or fish, to bring it back to the thread), a comparison can't be drawn between the two.

 

[Stewart Bloor]

For all the points of view put forward so far, all that has been written has purely been opinion. I haven't seen anything yet that can refute any of the scientific or factual evidence regarding barbel in stillwaters. I made reference in my article to another that was written by Paul Garner. Mine was written by a layman for laymen, so to speak. Paul's was much more scientific, and really, leaves us in no doubt about the issue.
Regarding barbel being an 'in' species, that's also my view as well. I was reading through a magazine the other day to discover there were barbel bait buckets, barbel rig wallets and so on. It was apparent that the inclusion of the word 'barbel' was a selling point. Just like the word 'carp' is. But, and it's a big but, you can't blame the barbel for this, any more than you can blame the carp for its popularity.
And it's unfair to taint all barbel anglers with the same brush. Look at the discussions we've had in the carp forum about lumping all carp anglers together and making sweeping statements.
Just remember, it could be YOUR species next that gets all the attention and attracts a few 'bad apples'.

 

[GrahamM]

I've just trolled through the thread looking for a 'sweeping statement' and can't find one.

All species are 'my' species, which is exactly the point I've been making.

 

[Stewart Bloor]

''I've just trolled through the thread looking for a 'sweeping statement' and can't find one.''
Graham, what about the following, which was in reference to carp anglers? (apologies to the author for lifting the quote, because he did go on to clarify himself later)

''What do you see today. Arrogance, noise, loud T shirts advertising boilies, beer guts, skin headed prats, and bank side booze ups.''

Hey, I must be getting really argumentative in my old age....come on all you barbel Society members, I'm feeling like Custer in his last stand here....help...is the cavalry on its way...

 

[Rob Brownfield]

Stewart, Gudgeon are indeed a different species. I was trying to make the point that no one cares about gudgeon which are really a river species coz its not big, its not fashionable etc.

 

[David Preston]

But gudgeon aren't a river species - they live quite happily in stillwaters and canals quite naturally.

 

[GrahamM]

I meant sweeping statements in this thread, not the carp one, in reference to your "unfair to taint all barbel anglers with the same brush."

I can't find a sweeping statement that does tar all barbel anglers with the same brush - in this thread.

Yeah, come on you purist barbel anglers, where are you?

 

[GrahamM]

I'm going fishing now. I'll get back at (sorry) to you on my return Sedge!