• You need to be a registered member of Barbel Fishing World to post on these forums. Some of the forums are hidden from non-members. Please refer to the instructions on the ‘Register’ page for details of how to join the new incarnation of BFW...

Noooooo

Am I missing something?
when barbel were stocked in rivers that had never seen the species before and in many situations this proved to be serious detrimental to the original stocks of natural bred fish, in many cases they have never recovered to this day and the barbel over the coarse of time struggle to survive in rivers totally unsuitable to them.
But selfish Anglers don't give a dam because THEIR river hold barbel and that's all that matters!
River Severn is a classic example of mans selfish meddling and double standards.
The stocking of Barbel in stillwaters is just a ongoing example and I believe nobody on here has a right to begrudge the stocking of stillwaters claiming they are unsuitable, as they are probably fishing a river which is equally of poor quality but because its a river its okay.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nice first post Tom, Your missing nowt in my book, posted similar stuff myself in the past about rivers, not ponds though. It escapes me completely how big names in this specialised little bit of our small angling world can complain about the aquatic balance of rivers being disturbed and Barbel recruitment being poor when by the natural order of things they should not be there in the first place. To put the tin hat on it the two rivers everyone moans about the most are SSSI's and an initial stocking would never be allowed these days. Barbell anglers need to be careful of an under surge of the "we want our chub and roach back brigade" start a campaign of their own.
They outnumber us considerably face
 
Tom Dodds said:
Am I missing something?
when barbel were stocked in rivers that had never seen the species before and in many situations this proved to be serious detrimental to the original stocks of natural bred fish, in many cases they have never recovered to this day and the barbel over the coarse of time struggle to survive in rivers totally unsuitable to them.
But selfish Anglers don't give a dam because THEIR river hold barbel and that's all that matters!
River Severn is a classic example of mans selfish meddling and double standards.

The stocking of Barbel in stillwaters is just a ongoing example and I believe nobody on here has a right to begrudge the stocking of stillwaters claiming they are unsuitable, as they are probably fishing a river which is equally of poor quality but because its a river its okay.
Click to expand...

Two wrongs don't make a right? But I do agree that the spread of Barbel in the rivers has meant other species have suffered as a consequence, I have said so on here.

But I think the issue here is that the Barbel doesn't really have the attributes to do well in still water, the very dynamics of the body shape and other features would support that. Or I may be wrong, I am no Biologist, perhaps they are adaptable, but unless someone can come up with a intelligent response I remain sceptical.

So I do have a right to begrudge the stocking of Barbel in still waters, and as far as Barbel inhabiting unsuitable poor quality river's I wonder, do you have an example? That is not a challenge merely a question.

I think the selfish attitude you refer to fits very neatly into the still water argument, not the Rivers.


Welcome to BFW :)
 
But I think the issue here is that the Barbel doesn't really have the attributes to do well in still water, the very dynamics of the body shape and other features would support that. Or I may be wrong, I am no Biologist, perhaps they are adaptable, but unless someone can come up with a intelligent response I remain sceptical.
Click to expand...

Cozimo barbel do very well in stillwaters. With exactly the same body dynamics (whatever they are!).

Barbel are just a fish, one that we love to fish for.

Just because we like fishing for them in fast flowing gravelly rivers does not mean that is the only conditions barbel can thrive in.
 
Last edited:
Ash Gould said:
Cozimo barbel do very well in stillwaters. With exactly the same body dynamics (whatever they are!).

Barbel are just a fish, one that we love to fish for.

Just because we like fishing for them in fast flowing gravelly rivers does not mean that is the only conditions barbel can thrive in.
Click to expand...

But Ash, surely "thrive" includes reproduce, one of the most basic and natural functions? I don't believe it is the case that barbel breed in stillwaters, even though they can survive and grow.
 
Howard Cooke said:
But Ash, surely "thrive" includes reproduce, one of the most basic and natural functions? I don't believe it is the case that barbel breed in stillwaters, even though they can survive and grow.
Click to expand...



Why does "thrive" have to include breeding? individual fish can easily thrive without breeding, a species needs to breed to maintain its numbers but that's not thriving as I understand it.

There are parts of this world where the humans that live there are breeding but haven't enough food to survive in some cases or even to grow properly, is that thriving?
 
Ash Gould said:
Cozimo barbel do very well in stillwaters. With exactly the same body dynamics (whatever they are!).

Barbel are just a fish, one that we love to fish for.

Just because we like fishing for them in fast flowing gravelly rivers does not mean that is the only conditions barbel can thrive in.
Click to expand...

That particular Barbel may well survive in stillwater, the Barbel that is found in UK rivers are less able to survive as well according to studies.

Your second sentence probably is more wishful thinking then anything else I reckon Ash. :)
 
Neil Smart said:
Two wrongs don't make a right? But I do agree that the spread of Barbel in the rivers has meant other species have suffered as a consequence, I have said so on here.

But I think the issue here is that the Barbel doesn't really have the attributes to do well in still water, the very dynamics of the body shape and other features would support that. Or I may be wrong, I am no Biologist, perhaps they are adaptable, but unless someone can come up with a intelligent response I remain sceptical.

So I do have a right to begrudge the stocking of Barbel in still waters, and as far as Barbel inhabiting unsuitable poor quality river's I wonder, do you have an example? That is not a challenge merely a question.

I think the selfish attitude you refer to fits very neatly into the still water argument, not the Rivers.


Welcome to BFW :)
Click to expand...




I think the fish at the start of this thread might show that they can and do.
 
Some good posts all round. I don't have the answer to the following, but :- How many rivers which are now in seeming decline for Barbel, really ever had a self sustaining population at all ?? Like I said, I don't know the answer to this and I'm sure that many did , but would be interesting to know.........
As a slight aside regarding the stocking of certain species and them upsetting the balance as it were, my Grandfather many years ago was very strongly opposed to the stocking of Bream into the Bristol Avon around Chippenham, citing that it would ruin the Roach fishing. Guess what ? It did !! (We are talking a long time ago). Ironically he went on to hold the Rivers Bream Record for over 30 years !!!!!
 
Never thought I would see the day when some posters on BFW would seem to prefer that the Stour, Hamphire Avon, Severn, Teme, Wye etc didn't hold any barbel.

Sad. Where have the lovers of rivers gone? Those that love the pleasure of Fishing in the Natural environment for these fish.

Very Sad. Carry on chaps. And try and denigrate what some still feel is important and precious. Emotional rubbish? probably, but it's how I feel. Try reading "The deeping pool" By Chris Yates to understand.

Holiday time for me.
 
Last edited:
Graham Young said:
Why does "thrive" have to include breeding? individual fish can easily thrive without breeding, a species needs to breed to maintain its numbers but that's not thriving as I understand it.

There are parts of this world where the humans that live there are breeding but haven't enough food to survive in some cases or even to grow properly, is that thriving?
Click to expand...

That's a good point, in fact any successful breeding of Barbel in a stillwater would probably be a problem for the health of the lake, let alone the fry, but for a fish to breed it has to have ideal conditions, we should appreciate that as anglers, however still water barbel do not breed, unless I am wrong, because it is not the conditions that Barbel need to breed,.

They are not Carp.

I don't understand your Human analogy, as barbel as all animals do breed by instinct, Humans do not, in other words animals make sure the environment can support offspring, as Barbel would.
 
Neil Smart said:
That particular Barbel may well survive in stillwater, the Barbel that is found in UK rivers are less able to survive as well according to studies.

Your second sentence probably is more wishful thinking then anything else I reckon Ash. :)
Click to expand...

That is pure conjecture on your part Neil. What studies are you referring to? Are you referring to survival or growth?

A quick glance through some studies into stillwater barbel reveals some interesting stuff. One chap found they do well in stillwater compared the middle severn. Another that barbel continue to grow in stillwaters despite it being an a typical environment for them. Another that competition with carp hinders their growth as carp out compete them, and in order for barbel to thrive rather than just survive fishery owners should think about the stocking density and relating inter species competition.

I havent checked for studies into breeding because they cant breed properly in rivers and that really would confuse the matter.

The evidence is there for all to see, i have changed my viepoint over the last 20 years as stillwater barbel have survived well which i didnt think they would. But objectivity is what its all about.

My second sentence is wishful thinking? Can you count? The cozimo is almost iidentical in bodyshape to the barbus barbus. No wishful thinking there. Both members of the barbus family which are also members of the cyprinids.

Cyprinids are a freshwater species and barbel are just fish.
 
Graham Young said:
Why does "thrive" have to include breeding? individual fish can easily thrive without breeding, a species needs to breed to maintain its numbers but that's not thriving as I understand it.

There are parts of this world where the humans that live there are breeding but haven't enough food to survive in some cases or even to grow properly, is that thriving?
Click to expand...

Because in this context, I would choose to include it in a definition of thrive. If barbel were stocked in a stillwater and left to get on with it, didn't breed, but got on with life, grew and then died. When looking back, reflecting on the whole experience, I personally would find it difficult to say "yes, those barbel we stocked really thrived in there". But that's just me. Reproduction is so core, so primitive and so absolutely necessary that I can't see how it can be excluded from the word thrive.

However, your human example above is an interesting one I grant you but fraught with complexity simply because of human will and intervention. But no, I don't think that would amount to thriving. Anyway, I didn't say the ability to breed was the only thing that constituted thriving. Access to sufficient food is obviously vital.
 
Graham Elliott said:
Never thought I would see the day when some posters on BFW would seem to prefer that the Stour, Hamphire Avon, Severn, Teme, Wye etc didn't hold any barbel.

Sad. Where have the lovers of rivers gone? Those that love the pleasure of Fishing in the Natural environment for these fish.

Very Sad. Carry on chaps. And try and denigrate what some still feel is important and precious. Emotional rubbish? probably, but it's how I feel. Try reading "The deeping pool" By Chris Yates to understand.

Holiday time for me.
Click to expand...

Graham despite my last post don't include me in that. My Nan lived in Bournemouth when I was a kid my cousin John In Parley. we fished the Stour week in week out and occasional trips to the Avon to mostly blank and dodge the bailiffs. I love the rivers and long may I fish them. My point was; we as a very small minority of the fishing world cannot be so picky as to where any fish is stocked. We need the backing of all anglers and all anglers need our backing in return. That includes the bloke in a wheelchair who cannot afford Wasing prices to fish six swims or get himself into a safe position on the Team. If this guy and his mate who takes him, also the guy down the road from me who is totally able bodied but likes to have a few hours out of the back of his car at a pigpond wants to catch a barbell then who are we to deny them.

PS How to fish is better
 
Neil Smart said:
Thanks Sam, certainly the point about water quality is something I can relate to, when I was your age m'lad, my local Bristol Avon was reckoned to be polluted, didn't stop huge catches of Bream being made, along with Chub and Roach.
Click to expand...

It's the reason why some canals are throwing up big fish, ie the Chub in the Staffs/Worcs. Loads of food, coupled with the fact that as the fish don't spawn they don't expend energy on doing so, and get bigger as a result.
 
Tom Dodds said:
Am I missing something?
when barbel were stocked in rivers that had never seen the species before and in many situations this proved to be serious detrimental to the original stocks of natural bred fish, in many cases they have never recovered to this day and the barbel over the coarse of time struggle to survive in rivers totally unsuitable to them.
But selfish Anglers don't give a dam because THEIR river hold barbel and that's all that matters!
River Severn is a classic example of mans selfish meddling and double standards.
The stocking of Barbel in stillwaters is just a ongoing example and I believe nobody on here has a right to begrudge the stocking of stillwaters claiming they are unsuitable, as they are probably fishing a river which is equally of poor quality but because its a river its okay.
Click to expand...

I think you are missing several things in this post Tom. Firstly, your post almost reads like you are anti-angling with your selfish anglers not giving a damn comment. The Severn can hardly be classed as a river unsuitable for barbel when it has been one of the country's top barbel rivers for close on fifty years! Why is the Severn a case of double standards? Stocking barbel in any river is plainly not the same as stocking them into a stillwater. The middle and upper Severn could hardly be classed as not being the typical fast flowing environment barbel are suited to. Their spread to the slower, deeper water of the lower was presumably natural, so therefore voluntary. What many people don't take into account is that the barbel is indigenous to this country and almost certainly comfortable in most of our rivers. I cannot believe how many people comment negatively about barbel colonising different rivers on a barbel fishing forum!

Selfish Tom? No mate, not at all. Enjoying having barbel in our rivers does not make us selfish any more than say, the Cotswold fly fishers enjoy their rainbow trout in the Windrush. As for meddling, do we not meddle with nature every time we throw in a handful of pellets? Or groundbait? Or if you want to be really pedantic, every time we catch a fish! Barbel have, by and large, done very well in the rivers they were stocked in. The demise of barbel in recent times is probably worse in the Thames, Windrush, Cherwell, Ouse and Wensum than anywhere else. Strangely enough, these are all rivers where the barbel is an indigenous species and where the dominant species has always gone through natural cycles.
Barbel being stocked into rivers is, I think, a good thing. Into stillwaters, not really in my opinion. But I would not take a massive anti stance on it as the comment about the disabled angler does put an entirely different slant on it. Also, with the river populations declining, maybe the still water fish will help preserve a decent stock.
 
Last edited:
Here is a quote from the Barbel Society website ?




The Barbel Society remains resolutely opposed to the stocking of barbel in stillwaters.
The barbel is clearly highly adapted to life in flowing water with consistently low temperatures and high oxygen levels, and requires great care on return to the water after capture.

There is little evidence that barbel already stocked into stillwaters thrive or survive in the long term, or that there is a strong or genuine demand from anglers for stillwater barbel. The Society urges fishery owners to refrain from stocking barbel into stillwaters, and also expects the Environment Agency to review their policy of allowing such stockings.

The moral and ethical arguments against stillwater barbel are also considerable.
Putting barbel into lakes is like keeping kestrels in a chicken coop.
 
Graham i agree totally with your veiws mate, as you know i can be a real old fashioned so n so with my fishing but like yourself i enjoy every minute i am on the banks:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top