The Traditional Fisherman's Forum

I'll have a moan at him for not at least weighing that fish Bob. Regardless of how he caught the fish, it is still a true record of what one could expect. Sure is a interesting pit with many surprises for those brave enough to try for its inhabitants. is there actually anyone having a go for anything other than carp there Bob?

Shaun Harrison wrote:I'll have a moan at him for not at least weighing that fish Bob. Regardless of how he caught the fish, it is still a true record of what one could expect. Sure is a interesting pit with many surprises for those brave enough to try for its inhabitants. is there actually anyone having a go for anything other than carp there Bob?

Shaun,
I am pretty sure that the record size rudd AND perch go unmolested!

Such a waste.

Try macaroni, not over over cooked. It'll stay on the hook longer. A bit of flavouring like vanilla won't hurt either.

That's the trouble with out & out carpers - not anglers!

If you're planning to fish in winter you might want to read Fred.J.Taylor Angling in Earnest. Some useful Rudd tips there.

Olly wrote:That's the trouble with out & out carpers - not anglers!

Olly,
Although I would certainly have weighed and photographed the fish myself, I must defend my son's reasons for not doing so. Although a carp fisherman 'by trade', he does fish for other species and enjoys doing so. He did not think that the manner of capture was worthy of the fish, so he opted not to 'record' it. I think that is to his credit rather than his detriment.

Just the other side of the same coin. As I said I would have flipped the coin over, but would never have claimed a record if it were caught on a 3.25TC rod. I know many would have!
Bob

What a good thread.

I found myself nodding in agreement to many of the posts and gazing in amazement at the photo's... quite exceptional.

A Rudd of any size is beautiful fish, I wish you well in your endeavours Bob.

Olly wrote:That's the trouble with out & out carpers - not anglers!

I too must defend Stuart as he certainly does target other species and successfully too.

I have several friends who wont weigh fish if not fishing for that species. Some of these have caught some truly monstrous fish. It frustrates me they don't take a weight recording but also see where they are coming from. I have had a few accidental captures in my time. I never hide them as being anything else but still like to know what they weighed and what is possible from a venue so I choose to weigh them.

A friend of mine has had some truly remarkable chub whilst barbel fishing which have gone back un-weighed yet he fishes for chub and several of these were most certainly larger than what he has recorded as his personal best. Similarly I had a big barbel last winter whilst chub fishing and my friend was astounded that I weighed and photographed it. I can live with nuisance 12 lb plus barbel.

Each to their own I guess. Live and let live. But I'm still going to give Stuart a 'naughty word' when I see him next

The other side of the coin shows that most anglers are very eager to pose for a photo of a large fish taken whilst targeting something smaller. That is regarded as a fine feet of their angling prowess.

Once our bait is in the water - unless sight fishing at close quarter - we have little control over what picks it up. Be that our chosen species or a bonus/nuisance fish they all count as fish caught on rod and line. We may prefer to count those targeted but that's just a personal categorisation in my opinion.