If he didn’t seek reward why publish at all?
Well, apart from being a seasoned angling writer and an author of 3 books, Martin reported his phenomenal catch because he was – like many of us – a committed, life-long, passionate angler who felt that angling would be richer and more interesting for it. But there was a ‘bonus’ to it as well. I knew Martin well enough to know of the satisfaction he gained from making an unprecedented catch from under the noses of those he saw as the unacceptable face of carp fishing. He loathed the catch-at-any-cost mentality and the general lack of self-restraint within the world of carp fishing. We live in a very different world today, just 25 years up the line, and it can be difficult for some to accept that very different standards obtained in the pioneering years and right up until 1989-90 when Martin caught his haul of commons.
He had enemies (within the context of angling, of course) because he wasn’t afraid to speak out and, it must be said, didn’t hide his disdain for those who were establishing the new rules of carp fishing. No matter how rude or anti-social one might consider this to be, Martin’s was a deeply and sincerely held philosophy on what was right and what was wrong.
When he found an undisturbed water containing massive carp – and lots of them – he fished for them with the simplest tactics: a rod, a reel, line, hook and a shot or two. He gained their confidence with nothing more sophisticated than sweetcorn and positively delighted in stalking his fish unencumbered by the standard carp fishing paraphernalia. No bite alarm, Martin held one rod and felt for takes with his fingers. This way, he caught the most enormous common carp in 1989 and went on to make a huge haul of other impressive specimens during the 1990 season, from June through to August when he decided to let it rest – almost certainly out of respect for the fish and a sense of self-restraint. I also suspect he took the view that he’d managed to avoid detection for so long and didn’t want to ‘push it’.
It was the sheer simplicity of his methods and the ‘audacity’ he displayed by finding and catching huge specimens UNKNOWN to the ‘establishment’ that precipitated the hatchet-job. Yes, Martin made a special point of giving the Carp Society the good news via one Robin Monday who, I would wager, asked Martin if he’d caught the fish while on holiday; and Martin would have smiled an impish smile and said ‘Well…yes, I did‘ (I caught them during the remaining few days of my 3 week’s leave from work once I’d got home from Canada) There is no doubt in my mind – and Eddie’s – that this – or something very like it – is what happened. I believe that under pressure from the frustrated CS hierarchy, Robin was coerced into the ‘mountains’ myth (which, hilariously, turned into the Lennox power station myth 25 years later when I revealed that a dozen others had seen the untouched photo’s before Robin Monday did!)
If there was nothing distinctive in the background of the photos why mutilate them?
Like I said, at the time of Martin’s captures different standards applied. People – like me! – would have spent weeks, months, years, hunting around with the (untouched) image in their hands. They’d have found it, believe me, and a (relatively!) undisturbed haven would have been hammered. ‘Distinctive’? A clump of grass and a concrete post would have blown it. And he didn’t ‘mutilate’ the pictures for heaven’s sake. He carefully cut out the background.
Do you think James is making it up or do you believe Martin’s family in Canada agree that he fished there and caught large carp? Have you been in touch with them?
I don’t believe a word of it, largely because the scintillating ‘revelation’ about warm water outlets and power stations was so incredibly coincidental to my revelation that a dozen good anglers saw the untouched pictures before Robin Monday did; twelve individuals who can swear the shots showed backgrounds of grass, bushes, fence etc: no mountains.
I concede that Martin’s in-laws live in Ontario as opposed to British Columbia where I thought they lived but this is actually immaterial. In addition to the absurdity of Paul Selman’s 2,000 mile / 25 year miracle conversion from the Rockies to Lennox power station on the banks of Lake Ontario, we’ve had the highly improbable story of giant snake-keeper, Martin ‘…returning white and visibly shaking’ (at seeing some big carp) from James, in Ontario – not from Martin’s nephew, Nate, who, apparently, uttered these words, but from James who is only telling us what he was told by Nate.
If Uncle Martin was seen by his nephew, Nate, returning from the lake ‘…white and visibly shaking’ on spotting the fish, why were we not also told of Martin returning from the lake some time later “…beaming with the joy of catching so many huge specimens”?
Why is James unable to report that Nate told him about such jubilation? There can only be one explanation: Martin didn’t catch any carp whilst staying under the same roof with Nate and family! If he had made such catches, Nate would have known about it and would now be able to tell James about it – but he hasn’t. To add to the conundrum, James doesn’t seem to have asked his neighbour, Nate, the obvious question: “what was it like the day your uncle came home with all those huge fish under his belt?” Why has James not asked this and reported back to us?
Nate would have been a young boy in 1989 and 1990 (the two years that saw Martin’s historic catches) and, I suggest with confidence, his memories are clouded. We know that Martin’s 50lber was caught in 1989 but his half-ton haul of commons was made over a dozen-plus trips – June to August – the following year in 1990 when – as we know – Martin holidayed in Scotland! (AND attended the Moor Hall committee meeting in Essex at the time Paul Selman says Martin was in Canada catching his 34lb 4oz common)
What about the range of prominent anglers who state the fish were caught in Canada?
Those people only know what the rest of the innocent public were told. They may be ‘names’ but what do they know? How can they ‘state’ anything? And who, exactly, are you referring to? Chris Ball and Tim Paisley are very well known but they’re saying nothing. Evidently, they’re keeping their heads down.
Eddie has shown us that the ‘well-known’ Jim Gibbinson was not convinced by the Canada story despite Paul Selman’s characteristically brash claim that “Jim will tell you – one million per cent”. Well, Jim won’t tell you, will he? Paul Selman was being disingenuous to say the least.
Why not focus more on the Moor Hall committee members’ testimonies…on Chris Yates’ belief….on Nev Fickling’s belief…on my belief… Dr Bruno Broughton’s belief…Dr Barrie Rickards’ belief… Don’t forget, 13 of us saw the pictures but only one – Robin Monday – reckoned they portrayed a ‘foreign’ background.
Is anybody still buying the Paul Selman story? Watch this space in the coming days for Eddie Benham’s long-awaited piece…
