• 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...

Record Barbel

One day
 

Attachments

  • 65EFDD1D-0DB0-42EA-9075-9E872DC41318.jpeg
    65EFDD1D-0DB0-42EA-9075-9E872DC41318.jpeg
    71.7 KB · Views: 355
Yes, I'd claim it too - even in the knowledge that unclaimed, bigger fish have probably been caught from other rivers. That fact seems to be inferred by at least a couple of posters, and it's a fact that's eminently believable.
It's a remarkable fish and good to see it go down in history - even if, as we all agree, the photo opportunity could have been anonymised better.
 
I can hand on heart honestly say I hope I never catch a record Barbel! As alluded to by others it is the bite,fight and thought I could be playing a PB that gets the adrenaline pumping, palms sweating, legs shaking and forgetting to breathe feeling that makes it so special for me - if I had already caught the biggest in the Country would I lose some of those feelings? I don’t know and hope I don’t find out! Caveat to me saying this though is I can....because I’m never likely to catch the record.
 
IF..say I snagged a WA record, or God forbid a Severn, I think I should just slip her back.
I have been told that this has happened on both these rivers, the Severn fish was caught by an Angler who had no rod licence, it was from a stretch that was perfectly well capable of producing a big fish, and was a 'free'.
Personally I have always felt the fish to be the star, not the captor, what such a fish had to endure in it's life to get to that weight was against all the odds, total respect.
 
Richard Parsons said:
Yes, I'd claim it too - even in the knowledge that unclaimed, bigger fish have probably been caught from other rivers. That fact seems to be inferred by at least a couple of posters, and it's a fact that's eminently believable.
It's a remarkable fish and good to see it go down in history - even if, as we all agree, the photo opportunity could have been anonymised better.
Click to expand...
How much has this new record beaten the old, an ounce?..This assumes the scales were accurate 100%,, and of course they never are, which sort of make a mockery of any claimed record weights. Of course these big old girls are special, but leave weighing fish to the match boys.
 
Neil Smart said:
How much has this new record beaten the old, an ounce?..This assumes the scales were accurate 100%,, and of course they never are, which sort of make a mockery of any claimed record weights. Of course these big old girls are special, but leave weighing fish to the match boys.
Click to expand...

Neil...are you really saying that we shouldn't weigh any bigguns that might grace our nets? Give over! 😝
 
The scales get checked, presumably, with a national record, Neil? I guess that's all one can do in terms of validation. An ounce is an ounce, though I agree that room for error exists. I wouldn't call it a mockery, however.
 
Leave it to the match boys neil? With a couple of ounce of hemp mixed in , few maggot and perhaps a few strands of weed to boot ? Seen it done,,,
Regards
 
OK I was a bit tongue in cheek about the weighing, but such fine lines between what is a record or not, by just an ounce or two when weighing over 20lbs on such scales as Lightweights makes it a bit dodgy to say the least. That's why you just cannot take these records too seriously at all.

Joe..I weigh the odd big Barbel, but it has to be worthy of weighing, I don't understand the weighing of smaller fish, but not condemning.

Richard, we have all seen these silly claims of 'big' Barbel that get front page covers on the mags, and some on here scoff, and the debates have been folk lore so I am afraid I stand by that by and large it is a mockery. Are the scales ratified? If so what scales, obviously any claim has to have a large dollop of honesty attached.

But I must say, that the claims committee are seemingly very good at throwing out frauds, well we all know who when and where in recent times made such a claim as to the Severn record.
 
Neil Smart said:
But I must say, that the claims committee are seemingly very good at throwing out frauds, well we all know who when and where in recent times made such a claim as to the Severn record.
Click to expand...

I won't labour the point Neil, but doesn't this sentence contradict your previous words? 'Seemingly very good at throwing out frauds' suggests that you trust the BRFC to some degree.?

I had a look at the BRFC's top 100 barbel the other day and Chris Mack's Wensum 21lb 2oz fish was at the top, despite not being accepted as the record (I think due to a poor picture and lack of witnesses). That strikes me as strange, actually, as I would have thought that all fish on the list would need to pass the same criteria.
 
Neil Smart said:
How much has this new record beaten the old, an ounce?..This assumes the scales were accurate 100%,, and of course they never are, which sort of make a mockery of any claimed record weights. Of course these big old girls are special, but leave weighing fish to the match boys.
Click to expand...
I can see the logic in the assumption that scales are not totally accurate. But in many cases inaccuracy in weighing is down to the procedure used. There are many examples of inaccurate weighing on the Old angling videos by the so called experts. Not zeroing properly, weighing in a sack or sling that has retained water, holding dial scales by the body and not the handle. Quality scales are in the main quite accurate. I have weights and measure certificates from previously used scales to demonstrate my point.
 
Richard Parsons said:
I won't labour the point Neil, but doesn't this sentence contradict your previous words? 'Seemingly very good at throwing out frauds' suggests that you trust the BRFC to some degree.?

I had a look at the BRFC's top 100 barbel the other day and Chris Mack's Wensum 21lb 2oz fish was at the top, despite not being accepted as the record (I think due to a poor picture and lack of witnesses). That strikes me as strange, actually, as I would have thought that all fish on the list would need to pass the same criteria.
Click to expand...
Not sure exactly how the committee can ratify the claims 100%, as I said any Barbel record submitted is done on trust and testimony, in my mind ordinary scales that we all use are not that reliable , not to the ounce they are not. If I was the existing record holder and wanted to retain it, I would certainly me miffed if an ounce was enough to lose it.
As far as witness evidence is concerned, that for many is a problem, given we mostly fish alone, and Barbel don't sack well so phoning a friend can be a problem.
These big Barbel are interesting and I have nothing against these lists as a reference, and they are a good indication of adaptation to certain rivers and conditions, albeit possibly proof that climate warming is effecting weights. Or is it that these big females lead a solitary life, not spawning but are happy to live their lives in relative peace, untill.....
To be honest I am obsessed with big Barbel, I live a mile from where the Severn record was caught, and a few miles from the Avon record, I have been lucky in landing some good fish, so I get it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top