• 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...

Spawning time.

I don't want to put a dampner on what the B.S. are doing but I am struggling to see how this information that is being gathered is massively important to all of us.

Yes it will show areas where fish have spawned this year (if all reports are true) it cannot show what % of the progeny from the spawning survive.

Perhaps someone can explain to me why it is so important?
 
Hiya Ade, excuse my confusion in assuming people would like to get involved on a dedicated barbel forum full of barbel anglers. Habitat improvement can and does benefit all species, not just our elusive, whiskered friend.
Top man Jeff. Well done. Hat off to you sir.
 
Graham Young said:
I don't want to put a dampner on what the B.S. are doing but I am struggling to see how this information that is being gathered is massively important to all of us.

Yes it will show areas where fish have spawned this year (if all reports are true) it cannot show what % of the progeny from the spawning survive.

Perhaps someone can explain to me why it is so important?
Click to expand...

I would need to defer to Pete Reading for a more academic response Graham, but my own view is that the value of this exercise would come through over time provided that data is provided routinely, extensively and consistently. It's by no means the complete picture but wouldn't data showing changes in spawning sites and activity over time provide some insight into the health of the river and barbel stocks? Particularly if combined with other insights (evidenced based or even anecdotal)?

I would perhaps understand reservations if a big burden was being placed on anglers. But it's just a short form requesting some data points and narrative. Based on what I see on Facebook it seems many anglers are walking the banks and spotting fish and perhaps even some spawning activity. We are just being asked to record what we see.

If you believe there is no merit in this exercise, is there any other data you think would be of value?
 
Jeff Collins said:
:D great post Howard.
Some people want the moon on a stick!

To quote the excellent film Hot fuzz "it's for the greater good"
Click to expand...

I think you might want to accept that there is an alternative view to most things, certainly I can see why some might not want to submit the details to the BS. I can also understand why broadcasting exact locations of spawning / grouped barbel might not be for the greater good either.

See how it works? :rolleyes:
 
I'm pretty sure that those fish after spawning will return to the Severn Neil. And once they do good luck finding them!
 
I like you Howard can't see that it's a lot of effort to complete and contribute to the survey and I imagine over time better knowledge of habitat is only a good thing as it will enable and justify the preservation and knowing creation of suitable environments for the fish to thrive in the future. My only concern is in how the information is shared, feeling there are some potential risks if it's in the common domain. Am I being cynical?

I know where they are on the rivers I fish - mainly because I often walk them in the close season and I'm happy to share that info with the BS and Pete Reading because they have a deeply conservation minded heart. But I wouldn't want to share that information too publicly in this 'I want it now' world.
 
Funny how Ade joined in 2010. About the same time Richard Hamlyn/ Paul Boote/ Chris Avis/Paul Bassinder registered too:)

Uncanny similarity in contentious posts as well....
 
Howard Cooke said:
I would need to defer to Pete Reading for a more academic response Graham, but my own view is that the value of this exercise would come through over time provided that data is provided routinely, extensively and consistently. It's by no means the complete picture but wouldn't data showing changes in spawning sites and activity over time provide some insight into the health of the river and barbel stocks? Particularly if combined with other insights (evidenced based or even anecdotal)?

I would perhaps understand reservations if a big burden was being placed on anglers. But it's just a short form requesting some data points and narrative. Based on what I see on Facebook it seems many anglers are walking the banks and spotting fish and perhaps even some spawning activity. We are just being asked to record what we see.

If you believe there is no merit in this exercise, is there any other data you think would be of value?
Click to expand...




I certainly do not believe that there is no merit in the exercise Howard I have an open mind and am willing to be persuaded that it is worthwhile, there may be merits that I am not seeing. I still fail to see why this is so important to us all.

There is no doubt that rivers change year on year and with the changes fish activity changes, to record that achieves what?

Perhaps if the information being gathered was available to all I would be more able to see any advantages but as you say at the moment it is not and I do kind of understand why with new information being submitted.

Thank you for your reply.
 
Nick Clark said:
I like you Howard can't see that it's a lot of effort to complete and contribute to the survey and I imagine over time better knowledge of habitat is only a good thing as it will enable and justify the preservation and knowing creation of suitable environments for the fish to thrive in the future. My only concern is in how the information is shared, feeling there are some potential risks if it's in the common domain. Am I being cynical?

I know where they are on the rivers I fish - mainly because I often walk them in the close season and I'm happy to share that info with the BS and Pete Reading because they have a deeply conservation minded heart. But I wouldn't want to share that information too publicly in this 'I want it now' world.
Click to expand...

Agreed Nick and I will be picking this point up with Pete to understand what can be shared. I would never imagine that precise locations or any sort of roadmap of spawning sites will be published, but reports that provide narrative on changes or form part of wider reporting in relation to stock levels/health of the river etc may well be of interest to the angling community. If people are prepared to make the effort in providing data, then I do think its right to share the insights gained, even if these are fairly broad. It could encourage more anglers to participate if they see value in the process and there is a degree of transparency.
 
Bobby Baker said:
Hiya Ade, excuse my confusion in assuming people would like to get involved on a dedicated barbel forum full of barbel anglers. Habitat improvement can and does benefit all species, not just our elusive, whiskered friend.
Top man Jeff. Well done. Hat off to you sir.
Click to expand...

Quite rightly some if not most are apprehensive of giving out information as to what they have seen or caught Barbel wise, especially with rivers such as the Teme, where it could be argued that along with predation angling pressure has not served this beautiful river well. Actually the very spot that Jeff was speaking of was the very same location that last season suffered from close season poaching, so we do need to be guarded, it's not only the good guy's that read these forums, some even lurk for years before contributing.

This is not the Barbel Society, and I would like to think we are perhaps a little less crazy in a nice way :p but what is evident there is an element of mischief making on here, it is impossible at times to know just who is supposed to be who :confused:
 
Indeed Neil, goes without saying. Always nice to encourage the less doom and gloom viewers too though.....as for the latter, best just ignored, the mischievous ones don't take too long to implode.
 
Bobby Baker said:
Indeed Neil, goes without saying. Always nice to encourage the less doom and gloom viewers too though.....as for the latter, best just ignored, the mischievous ones don't take too long to implode.
Click to expand...



I have yet to see any "doom and gloom" on this thread, why is it that when anyone has an opposing view to others the name calling starts?

If anyone wants to persuade others to their way of thinking then sensible debate with each side putting their points forward for discussion without name calling should be IMO the way forward.
 
Graham Young said:
I have yet to see any "doom and gloom" on this thread, why is it that when anyone has an opposing view to others the name calling starts?

If anyone wants to persuade others to their way of thinking then sensible debate with each side putting their points forward for discussion without name calling should be IMO the way forward.
Click to expand...

That's fair enough Graham. What frustrates me though is that often when a suggestion is made and the debate starts, the responses can often be pulling the suggestion apart, arguing why it won't work and so on. Rarely do I see someone offer an alternative or even a brand new suggestion. That doesn't mean the arguments against what has been proposed are invalid, it would just be nice sometimes if folk could offer something positive. I think it's the lack of that mentality which can create a sense of general gloom and doom.

So in that spirit, and accepting your observations about the spawning survey- do you think there is value in anglers submitting data to a central register or organisation and if so, what data would you see value in collating?
 
I think you're reading that in the wrong context Graham. Read it with a smile on your face and it completely changes. Perhaps I should've put a smiley face in there somewhere thinking about it :D
If you read it through again you'll see that I completely agree and understand the other side of view. Maybe I should have written it as "indeed Neil, goes without saying. Always nice to encourage the others who are willing though".....Shall we get back on topic now or are we going to have to go through every sentence with a fine-toothed comb?...Personally I think the benefits are quite obvious but due to the reasons listed above I can see why people wouldn't want to engage in the spawning survey. Hopefully those views will change in time or be the concerns of the minority. Right, I'm off.
 
Last edited:
Ade Reynolds said:
Bobby, so you want me to give my time and participate in something I, as a multispecies angler will get no direct benefit from. Personally I think I will let this generous offer pass through my grasp.
Click to expand...

Here's my tuppence worth. Perhaps, after contributing his valuable information, Ade is asking if it is possible to see the outcome, without having to be in the "Society" or, knowing someone that knows someone else, that can tell him :confused: Not unreasonable in my opinion. As for the analogy, helping some old dear across the road with heavy bags, is that not a leap and more?

Stephen
 
Howard Cooke said:
That's fair enough Graham. What frustrates me though is that often when a suggestion is made and the debate starts, the responses can often be pulling the suggestion apart, arguing why it won't work and so on. Rarely do I see someone offer an alternative or even a brand new suggestion. That doesn't mean the arguments against what has been proposed are invalid, it would just be nice sometimes if folk could offer something positive. I think it's the lack of that mentality which can create a sense of general gloom and doom.

So in that spirit, and accepting your observations about the spawning survey- do you think there is value in anglers submitting data to a central register or organisation and if so, what data would you see value in collating?
Click to expand...




Very difficult to accurately gather information about a creature that lives in an environment where they are mostly free to move in that environment, having said that I see no harm in collecting the information and who knows once a few years have been collected there may be some information that is of use, on the other hand it may not who knows? at the moment I cant see what use it will be but as I said I am always open to being persuaded.

As for what data I think would be valuable, difficult one to answer, perhaps dye marking/tagging of fish with different colours used for fish from different parts of the river, this could (not saying it would) identify whether fish keep to their own group or mix with others to widen the gene pool, do fish need to do this as mammals do?

As for some posts being seen as pulling an idea to pieces saying why it wont work, it will always happen although some posts asking questions are not done to pull things apart merely to find more out. I have no doubt that the suggestion I made above can be questioned but that's life, we all have different views at times.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top