• 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...

Front page photo

Steve Fantuzi told me he never submitted any claim for the Loddon river record, he simply put photos in the weeklies and the next thing it is the river record, I notice there is no photo in the list so that probably backs up the fact he never submitted anything!!
 
Thats a real worry to me then Crooky.........

But answers a thought I had at the time as why SF had entered it as a RR when he probably knew it had done bigger fish. More power to your fishing Steve.

I wonder if this has happened previously. Or in this case. Might account for some strange ones like Shippo hinted at.

Graham
 
Hi Crooky and Graham,

The Loddon record is in there from the Brian Dowling days. As I mentioned earlier in this thread, sometimes records were accepted as a result of them just being published in the weeklies.

I'm afraid this was the case with my beloved Bristol Avon :(

Regards,

Andy
 
Hi men,

Andy , it has to be that way , otherwise you could have a 18 lb Severn fish in the papers , with everyone agreeing its a pukka capture , but the official river record being somewhat smaller !. That would be silly , but shows what a mine field it is , and glad there is someone like Dave standing up trying his best , because I don't think I would want the hassle .

To be honest river records don't bother me in the slightest , but its part of barbel history , and some do care .

Hatter
 
Hi Mark. I had assumed one would have to put a fish forward for consideration? As per species records.

Bit surprised to be honest. I caught my 2nd rr 2 years ago and didn' t put it forward or report it as no witnesses. Mainly though because it was caught in what i don't consider a proper river even though its listed.
 
Hi Graham ,

I'm not saying that's how it works , just I can see on some occations it would be preferable to having the wrong RR ?. Example ( extreme I know ) having the Gt Ouse RR at say 19lb , when a well documented 21lb comes out ?, it would make the RR look silly .


Hatter
 
Yes Mark, pretty impossible to get it right.

I would prefer the list to show submitted/witnessed/checked record in the list rather than others just presumed. look at the couple of Thames monsters featured in fishing mags that weren't.

As we know anyway, there are many bigger fish not reported to either Dave or the Press.

Cheers Graham
 
Lol and just think mark you thought my scales were out and your right the stretch needs taking care of but holds in my opinion a good general stamp of fish. The fish in question is "Marks fish" he had her two seasons on the trott targeted it to prove its weight as 12lb plus did so and took some better quality photos and proved a point( well angled) it's not 15 lb by any stretch of the imaginatio! Mark for once we agree!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top