• 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...

A hypothetical question…

I have lived near and fished the Bristol Avon all my life and had always taken the barbel fishing on the river for granted. I’ve always loved the river and would never have considered moving house from within range of the BA.

It’s a well-known fact that the Bristol Avon has been emptied by otters and that the barbel population is a fraction of what it once was.

Here’s where my hypothetical question comes in: I live near a tributary of the Avon. It’s a small stream that has plenty of wild brown trout. There are pools and weirs and plenty of cover. I’m sure I also saw either an eel or lamprey back in the summer. There also seems to be plenty of fly life and crayfish (some signals). I would love to see barbel swimming and spawning in there too…

Although I know it’s illegal without the correct permission (hence the hypothetical nature of my post), I wonder what effect accidentally releasing some 6-12 inch barbel into the stream would have on it, just as the local otter lovers ‘accidentally’ allowed their otters to escape...

Hypothetically speaking, what are people’s views on putting barbel from a fish supplier/pet shop into a stream like the one I’ve mentioned above. Would the barbel have a detrimental effect on the other life in the stream, or would they thrive and live in harmony? Or maybe they’d die off though lack of food…?

I’d be really interested in hearing people’s views on this. Do you think it’s irresponsible? Do you think it’s a waste of time and money?

What would you do if you lived on the banks of a stream like this, having once had the luxury of having barbel on your doorstep, hypothetically speaking?

Thanks,

Steve
 
Well, they have put 20 thousand baby barbel into the Ouse over the last five or six years and apart from one year when the little 'uns showed up with regularity they have disappeared, so hypothetically speaking it would cost a lot of dough.
 
20 thousand! I was thinking more like 50-100!

The difference here is that the stream hasn't any otters present anymore (not enough food I guess). So hopefully anything that went in would stay around for a while, hypothetically speaking of course.

Steve
 
I have often thought the same too, by where I live they have created a wildlife habitat and the small brook now has bends and riffles, even pools where the fry can grow on. It has only been a year since the first stage has started, and yet I have seen Egret, and Herons along with the other usual suspects 'fishing'. I know the Brook contains Chub, I have caught them and possibly a few Brown Trout, so would probably support a Barbel or two. Of course all the blurb is towards the encouragement of Birds, Insects , Frogs etc, Otter, but no mention of fish, that are as much part of a water course than anything else......

Why do they do that????

So go for it, what is there to lose, the odds are stacked against them setting down roots there, as Barbel will travel, or probably get preyed on. BTW I used to walk and sometimes fish a BA tributary called Brinkworth Brook nr: Malmesbury, you could jump across it, and yet it was stuffed with quality Chub Roach and every other Coarse fish, it was where my kids first caught fish...magical place.
 
Steve , why don't you just go fishing for the trout in the tributary stream , save yourself some money [ theoretically speaking of course ] .Just as oranges are not the only fruit , barbel are not the only fish ..... On a more serious note , just leave things as they are would be my response , the tributary seems to thrive why risk upsetting things ?
 
That's a very interesting question and one I have pondered many times too. I know of a tributary like you have described which really does not get fished from year to year. It's very overgrown in places in the summer, so much so that you can't see any water in some stretches. I know it holds roach, dace, perch, pike, odd brownie, odd chub, odd bream and to complete the set should hold odd barbel. I did enquire to a fish supplier; they needed a section 32. I was quite prepared to squander my own money in this gamble although purchasing from a pet shop or aquatic outlet though would cost a bloomin fortune!
 
Steve , why don't you just go fishing for the trout in the tributary stream , save yourself some money [ theoretically speaking of course ] .Just as oranges are not the only fruit , barbel are not the only fish ..... On a more serious note , just leave things as they are would be my response , the tributary seems to thrive why risk upsetting things ?

That's a very sensible reply Mike, I now wish I had said similar:eek:
 
I feel for you Steve, like many other anglers in southern England we have been forced to endure the almost total demise of our Barbel fishing.Having to rely on Calverton stockings to top things up and try to bring things back to what they were, is not the way forward.I also have reached desperation stakes and have been eyeing up an unfished wild stretch of river near to London with the exact thoughts you have. But just think what happened to the Wensum after its private stockings,Otters are very mobile and i fear that they will soon be eating on your stretch if not already doing so.Barbel usually do well in rivers suited to trout.Good luck what ever you decide.
 
I wouldn't waste your money or time Steve, the otters will return and any barbel present will be first on the list. Its depressing.

Nick C
 
If this is a tributary of the BA, what has stopped the barbel from migrating into it naturally? Is there some sort of physical barrier? If not, then one can only imagine that the stream is deemed by the barbel to be not suitable for some reason...and they should know :D

That being so, any attempted stocking would surely end in failure.

Cheers, Dave.
 
Perhaps so Dave. In those old fishing books which contain recipes in the back , the old barbel never crops up much , usually condemned as tasteless along with the chub , or even poisonous I read once . Yet curiously it's close relative the mighty gudgeon is always exalted as a most toothsome morsel .Anyway I am not an otter and there is no accounting for taste :D
 
Why would barbel be first on the list ?

Perhaps otters prey on the barbel first because they too are attracted by the fight just as us anglers are.Maybe when they get their claws into other species it might not turn them on as much.Also maybe a barbel's eyesight isn't as keen as a chub's,with it relying on other senses more,only a theory
 
Create a starting line across the river. ( Hypothetically of course ). In the race. bertie barbel, charlie chub, peter perch, roger roach, dominic dace, and gordon gudgeon. 10 metres behind them and chasing the pack, is oliver otter. BANG!!!! The start gun fires. Who would be otters easiest target ? and most desirable for dinner. gordon, who is your chinese sui mai, dominic who is your spring roll, or bertie, who is your full on banquet.
 
Daft as it sounds Derek I have vague memories of some sort of study been done re fastest swimming fish / how long they could keep up a speed [ sprinter versus endurance ] . I seem to recall that Salmon and Barbel were the speed merchants , on the other hand this could be a pure figment of my imagination and I can't be faffed to google it .
 
Daft as it sounds Derek I have vague memories of some sort of study been done re fastest swimming fish / how long they could keep up a speed [ sprinter versus endurance ] . I seem to recall that Salmon and Barbel were the speed merchants , on the other hand this could be a pure figment of my imagination and I can't be faffed to google it .

Pike and Perch have phenomenal. speeds, for obvious reasons, can't see that Barbel would have anywhere near that. Salmon are fast, the speed they generate to jump over wiers etc must be impressive.
 
Back
Top