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...
Taylor scoffs a Grayling , it's hardly Freddie Starr ate my hamster ! What we need is a big angling star chowing down on a Barbel that would get em going on farcebook . As for eating freshwater fish , well it's perfectly legal , personal choice really. In the 60's and early 70's I would occasionally take a fish for the pot usually a pike or Eel but sometimes a Grayling or Brown Trout . Back in the day I knew an old boy Bill who told me that his mum used to send him out after school to catch fish for the family supper , Burbot or Eels were his usual quarry
My father-in-law lives in Stockbridge (Test country) and told me that a few decades ago, river keepers would wander into the local pub with bags full of nuisance grayling that were handed out free to the locals.
I wouldn't keep any fish caught myself but if he's not breaking the law..Not sure of the need to post it on FB though, unless of course one was a bit bored and fancied some online action.
Grayling is rather nice, better than trout. I've not eaten one in over twenty five years, but, if one keeled over on me, I'd happily scoff it. Grayling are more common than wild brown trout on my local rivers, and no one would bat an eyelid over someone taking a trout.
Back in the 60s, my Grandfather would take me and Dad fishing for Pike, Grayling and whatever else he caught for the pot. He was brought up with his father doing the same. This was the norm for country folk for hundreds of years but seemed to die out in the 70s.
These days the only freshwater fish i eat today is jellied Eels from the fish stalls.
These days it seems to me it the youngsters who find it wrong and disgusting. But they have to remember it was a tradition and sometimes the only way to eat fresh meat if you had no money to feed the family.
That antiquated rule I think in this day and age needs to change.A rule written in black and white gives the EE's carte Blanche to take what they want,they don't distinguish between a barbel a carp or a grayling.I personally don't give a flying **** if the odd river angler takes a small fish for the pot if Tesco's is closed,but don't go posting it on social media for the morons to see.DT obviously trying to court controversy.
With all the pressure on all wildlife, taking fish for the pot is just not on imo. We moan about EEs taking Barbel for the pot, well taking the Lady of the stream is just a total contradiction. Just my thought I'm off to the chippy for a Haddock.
I suspect an awful lot depends on the type of river concerned, the location of the river and how grayling have been categorised historically. I know that grayling in my local rivers weren't generally relegated to being considered a "coarse" fish. They have always been considered a game fish by the majority. I know this hasn't always been the case in some rivers. Game angling sometimes went as far as persecuting grayling. They were often deemed to be an inferior "coarse" fish.
Most coarse anglers wouldn't dream of taking a fish of any description. Game anglers may choose to practice catch and release, but they tend not to bat an eyelid at the prospect of a fish being taken. Those of us that consider themselves as coarse anglers, but fish in trout and grayling zones of rivers, tend to fall between the two camps.
I don't see any issue whatsoever in the taking of the odd trout or grayling, where it's allowed. However, I choose not to. I'm no fan of Des Taylor, but I can't get upset over him legally taking a fish for the pot.