What is it with match anglers and fish care … 😡

[Jon Frisby]

I watched Dave Harrell, catch a barbel and he had a suitable sized net...
In flood on the wye, if your gonna win a match, it's Bleak or Barbel... he certainly wasn't after Bleak with a feeder rod.. FGS a third of its body was hanging out his landing net...
Mat men ain't bothered about fish welfare, only the paycheck...

 

[Graham Elliott]

He's got about 6 in his Keepnet in the photo

 

[Steve Jeffery]

If that fish was foul hooked and he put it in he’s keepnet to be weighed that tells you more about that angler than anything

(As a former match angler myself, there is nothing in match rules to say that a foulhooked fish should not count. Having spent a long time playing the fish he was always going to weigh it in. It was a big match with a lot of money at stake. No one has suggested that it should be returned and not weighed in.

Yes, I agree perhaps the organisers should have a process to weigh large barbel immediately then release them, but suspect that wasn't practical on a big match pegged over miles of the river as it would need numerous stewards and scales.

 

[Richard Isaacs]

If barbel are have a reasonable chance of being caught in matches they should be weighed separately and returned with care and the weight can be added to the anglers total. They do this frequently on Trent matches and the barbel are rested and returned properly while the match angler carries on.
Whether it counts or not isn’t the issue here. It shouldn’t go in a keep net

 

[Terry Harman]

(As a former match angler myself, there is nothing in match rules to say that a foulhooked fish should not count. Having spent a long time playing the fish he was always going to weigh it in. It was a big match with a lot of money at stake. No one has suggested that it should be returned and not weighed in.

Yes, I agree perhaps the organisers should have a process to weigh large barbel immediately then release them, but suspect that wasn't practical on a big match pegged over miles of the river as it would need numerous stewards and scales.

How can you count a foil hooked fish might as well cast a lure and wind in quickly see what you get
I had a good double earlier in the year hooked in the pec couldn’t tell you its weight it went straight back after resting

 

[Mark Swaby]

I saw another video from that match of a famous angler holding up a Barbel vertically with his hand gripping the fish across the gills to unhook it. The video quickly cut away so did not see if it was just dropped into the keepnet but suspected it was. I used to match fished myself before the carp puddles opened up. Fish care seems to have gone out of the window with most match anglers these days. When 100 plus lb's are needed to win its all about speed and the same bad practices seem to have transferred from carp puddles to rivers.

 

[Chris Jones]

I remember a time when some matches would not allow foul hooked fish to be weighed in. However, it usually relied on the honesty of the individual angler. It should be a big surprise that it was regularly ignored. With the rise of commie match angling, any hint of foul hooked fish being disallowed seemed to vanish. I guess it's largely a pragmatic thing. There's no point in having rules that there's no real chance of enforcing.

 

[Ben Marr]

When there's good money at stake, everything goes out of the window, especially these days....

 

[Ian Woods]

I'm a fan of drennan, so im not slating them by putting this video up on this thread.
It appears that the anglers in the video seem to like using small landing net heads.

 

[Richard Isaacs]

I'm a fan of drennan, so im not slating them by putting this video up on this thread.
It appears that the anglers in the video seem to like using small landing net heads.

It’s the technique they use with the small net being very light and nimble. Match anglers rarely guide a fish over a waiting net. Quite often that fish barely breaks the surface before they plunge in the small light net and whop it straight out.

 

[Ian Woods]

It’s the technique they use with the small net being very light and nimble. Match anglers rarely guide a fish over a waiting net. Quite often that fish barely breaks the surface before they plunge in the small light net and whop it straight out.

Yes, but the fish hardly fit in the nets, I mean the tail half of the fish is often sticking right out same as the barbel in the opening post.
So if its a bad thing to do with a barbel.....

 

[John Newman]

Whenever money is involved, scruples go out of the window!

A heck of a lot of venues only allow keepnets for matches which does seem unfair for pleasure anglers and the argument for match anglers only keeping fish for 5-6 hours could be countered by pleasure anglers stciking to the same time limit if they wish to use a keepnet.

 

[Graham Elliott]

Whenever money is involved, scruples go out of the window!

A heck of a lot of venues only allow keepnets for matches which does seem unfair for pleasure anglers and the argument for match anglers only keeping fish for 5-6 hours could be countered by pleasure anglers stciking to the same time limit if they wish to use a keepnet.

As mentioned earlier. Pleasure anglers Hereford 6hr limit

 

[Mike Hodgkiss]

Whether we like it or not this is the nature of competition angling . Yes a bigger landing net would have helped , but in a huge match like this you would need a lot of folks to be running up and down weighing individual fish like this specimen and then releasing them , not practical really ,although I understand that they have Barbel only matches where they have runners to do this .Where does it stop though ,do we apply the same rules to big Bream , Chub, Carp ? Angling is a broad church, match fishing is one aspect of our sport , the only way round it is to ban the weighing in of Barbel in matches or just ban match fishing , it ain't going to happen ....

 

[Richard Isaacs]

Whether we like it or not this is the nature of competition angling . Yes a bigger landing net would have helped , but in a huge match like this you would need a lot of folks to be running up and down weighing individual fish like this specimen and then releasing them , not practical really ,although I understand that they have Barbel only matches where they have runners to do this .Where does it stop though ,do we apply the same rules to big Bream , Chub, Carp ? Angling is a broad church, match fishing is one aspect of our sport , the only way round it is to ban the weighing in of Barbel in matches or just ban match fishing , it ain't going to happen ....

It is practical to weigh barbel separately and return them straight to the water because it is done on matches on the Trent.
It takes more organization and more people involved yes but that doesn’t mean it’s not practical.
And to answer your question of where it stops that’s quite simple also.
There are just afew specific fish that simply cannot tolerate being caught without a little more care afterwards before being returned to the water. They need a recovery period.
Barbel pike and grayling would be the 3 to show a bit more care towards if they are caught and count in matches.
It’s for the benefit of the match anglers also. If these fish die through poor handling, the only way match weights are going to go on rivers is down.

 

[Steve Jeffery]

There has been a similar debate on Facebook where the a few video clips of the match have been posted.

I agree that ideally weigh and release would be undertaken, but suspect on the Wye this might not be easy as the pegs are spread out over several miles.

Was interesting that a couple people defended the use of properly sized and staked out keep nets, including Dave Harrell who was one of those filmed landing one (and who has caught his fair share of barbel over the years in matches). Someone also pointed to the fact that the known Hereford barbel pegs keep continuing to produce catches of barbel without any apparent decline in numbers or fish health.

I remember witnessing early Middle Severn matches where huge nets of barbel were caught, and they are still being caught today. Admittedly back then they were smaller fish of 2-5 lbs average. Think this debate gets more heated when big specimens are being caught in marches, as was the case on the Wye.