In the Pilgrim's Progress article which spawned this debate, I wrote from a layman's perspective, but still included in the article facts, ie the barbel is a lithophilous species, reference to the 38 barbus species in Europe, the 60% difference between tench and barbel as far as lethal oxygen content is concerned etc.
But, more importantly as far as the thread of this mail is concerned, I made reference in the article to another that had been recently published in the Barbel Society magazine by Dr Paul Garner. It is littered with scientific facts, all backed up with references.
I would recommend (as I did in the article) anyone that doubts the authenticity of the statement that barbel should be in stillwaters to get hold of a copy. In fact, if anyone is interested contact me.
Taking a totally open view on the subject, (which I did in the first place, and is the reason I arrived at the conclusion I did) it is clear that barbel do not belong in stillwaters. I know there are grey areas, there will be in any topic for debate. But the overwhelming opinion of people like (Drs) Paul Garner and Andy Orme is that barbel do not belong in stillwaters.