‘LET US TALK’ by Angling Publications

Let Us Talk Jim Gibbinson

Let Us Talk Carp angling is undergoing a period of dramatic change. It started with the importation of big foreign fish, and developed further when stock fish were grown to 20 or even 30lb+ in holding-pools before being released. These developments have led to the creation of numerous instant big-carp waters.

otwithstanding the artificiality of such places, many – perhaps most – carp anglers are attracted to them. It would make no difference what sort of waters we chose if we fished purely for our own satisfaction, but carp fishing isn’t like that – there’s a competitive element involved and we are judged according to the size of the fish we catch. In the past, if you caught a 30pounder you knew it was a fish that had reached that size in a natural environment – although perhaps not in the water from which it was caught because a lot of fish were transferred from one fishery to another. 30lb carp were relatively rare; fish of 40lb+ were exceptional. If someone caught a 30 or 40lb carp there was a sort of measureof-worth which could be applied. Such is no longer the case; matters have become much less clear.

Stocked when very small, and grown in the water where it was caught.

Carpworld

Let Us Talk Jim Gibbinson Let’s take two extremes. An angler catches a 40lb carp that was imported and stocked only a few months previously. Another angler catches a similar-sized, but unknown, fish from a sparsely-stocked gravel pit. Are they equal in merit? Many of us would see the pit fish as the more meritorious. But between those extremes are innumerable shades of grey. How would those carp rank, for example, if the newly introduced fish had not been imported, but had been transferred from another UK water? Would it make a difference if the transfer had been illegal? And what if the gravel pit fish was not an unknown specimen, but was a named fish that came out regularly – frequently, even? And what if the imported fish had been stocked, not as a 40-pounder, but as a mid-20, or even a mid-30, and had lived in its new water for several years? Gets complicated, doesn’t it?

Personal Protest In the past, consistent success with big carp was dependent on having exceptional angling ability. Nowadays, this remains the case in some instances – witness the extraordinary success of men like Dave Lane and Terry Hearn – but it is not always so. Anyone who fishes regularly where numbers of big carp have been stocked should, providing they are reasonably competent, amass an impressive total. A few years ago, disillusioned by the ‘weight-is-all-that-matters’ sub-culture, I decided to mount a personal protest by withholding the weights of fish with which I illustrated my writing. Gradually, what started as a mini-protest took on a life of its own and I realised that I was becoming progressively less interested in how much my carp weighed. This struck home quite forcibly when, on examining a batch of slides received back from the processing laboratory, I found I was unable to remember the weights of some of the fish. I figured if I was that indifferent to what they weighed, then why was I bothering to weigh them? Which led to my present policy whereby, if the configuration of the bank allows, most are unhooked in the landing net, in the water, and released immediately.

Main: I withhold the weights of fish with which I illustrate my writing. Below left: What did it weigh? I’ve not the slightest idea. Below right: Unhooked and straight back – with a friend on hand to snap a picture.

A Slippery Slope If we want to see where carp fishing is heading, we should look at what has happened in trout fishing. There are waters where you are unlikely to catch anything smaller than about 10lb because fish are only stocked above that weight! Does this mean that a 15lb

Carpworld

Semi-synthetic reservoir trout fishing back in the days when I had black hair!

stock-rainbow from a diminutive putand-take trout pond is a more notable achievement than a 2lb natural born-inthe-river brownie from an overgrown, neglected stream? Of course it doesn’t; only the daft or the deluded would suggest any such thing. On which subject… I was told something recently that I like to think is apocryphal, but I’ve an uncomfortable feeling that it’s true – and if so, it demonstrates just how appallingly synthetic some aspects of modern trout fishing have become. According to my informant, several fly-fishermen were chatting beside a well-known, very expensive, put-and-take fishery. Their

rods were tackled-up, but no one was making any attempt to cast. A new arrival, puzzled by the inactivity, asked why they weren’t fishing. “We’re waiting for the fish to go in,” was the reply. Seemingly the fishery owner was due to introduce a new batch within the hour! Carp fishing hasn’t yet become as synthetic as modern trout fishing, but we’re on a slippery slope, and some aspects of it are heading in that direction. Already, we’re seeing developments that have more to do with animal husbandry than with angling.

Above left: Caught within a few weeks of being legally transferred from another water – hence the net damage on its flank. Above right: Not very big, but it came on a difficult day and pleased me enormously. Below: I’ve caught enough big carp to know that weight isn’t everything.

Satisfaction I’ve fished for carp for upwards of 40 years, and I feel the same thrill as ever I did when an incongruously large flank slides over the frame of my landing net. But I’ve caught enough big fish to know that size alone doesn’t necessarily make a capture satisfying. How does being the 53rd (or whatever – pick a number) angler to have captured Half-Tail, etc. rank on the satisfaction scale? How much of an achievement is landing a big stock-carp which, until a few months previously, was being pellet-fed in a holding-pool? By attaching disproportionate, and often unmerited importance to what carp weigh, we are allowing our values to become corrupted. I suspect that eventually the whole thing will implode and the angling press will lose interest in artificially reared and oft-caught carp – just as it has with outsize farmed rainbow trout – and aspiring big-carp ‘stars’, denied their metaphorical 15 minutes of fame, will lose interest, too.

Carpworld

Let Us Talk Jim Gibbinson Paradoxical Mullet Having gone on at some length about my relative indifference to what my carp weigh, I now have to admit to an inconsistency. Recent summers I have concentrated on mullet, and most of them are weighed. This is mainly because I’m relatively new at the game so I’m still establishing my parameters and ascertaining what constitutes run-ofthe-mill, what constitutes big, and what constitutes huge. Also, there’s so little interest in mullet that they represent one of angling’s last remaining kudosfree zones! There’s no one to impress, so weighing them becomes a purely personal thing.

but can I make a plea for a bit of linguistic variety? Here are a few suggestions: impressive, amazing, outstanding, peerless, stupendous, fantastic, magnificent, stunning, superior, splendid, wonderful,

marvellous, terrific, unparalleled, overwhelming, superb, great, incredible and, of course, excellent. Any writer who added that lot to his vocabulary would have an awesome edge!

The Edge of Reason Read through any carp magazine and you’ll find assurances that such-and-such a variation in tactics will give you an edge. The Oxford Dictionary gives numerous meanings for the word ‘edge’ including, as you’d expect, a boundary, the sharpened side of a blade, the meeting line of two surfaces, the top of a precipice, etc. It also defines ‘having the edge over’ as ‘having a slight advantage’. Clearly, in the context of acquiring an edge in carp fishing, it is the last-named definition that applies. But so overused is the term, with just about every tactical variation having been described thus at one time or another, it has become meaningless. Here’s an example. Recently I saw an article on early-season fishing in which the author said, “Keep your rigs and baiting simple, and save your edges for later on.” What does that mean? Is the writer suggesting that anglers should hold back on tactical variations that might make their fishing more effective? If so, why would anyone want to do that? I suspect he was suggesting that experimentation be kept in reserve in case our simple procedures become less effective. Put that way it makes sense – “save your edges for later on” doesn’t. And what, for heaven’s sake, is a ‘massive edge’ – apart, that is, from being an oxymoron? By definition it is impossible – it’s like saying “a huge slight advantage.” Maybe it’s a sign that I should get out more, but talk of ‘edges’ in angling features has a fingernails-scraped-downa-blackboard effect on me! I’ve become edge-phobic!

A huge mullet – but no one is impressed!

Not an ‘edge’, just a tactical variation.

Watercraft – far more important than hackneyed ‘edges’.

Awesome! If ‘edge’ is an overused word in carp magazines, ‘awesome’ is right up there alongside it. It’s slang for excellent. As a superlative, it is a legitimate word to use,

Carpworld

The only ‘edge’ that interests me is the one that comprises the margin slope.

How awesome is that!

True Pros I’ve been interested in the little ‘Profile’ pieces that accompany articles in Carpworld’s sister publication, Crafty Carper. Mainly, I’ve been struck by the fact that most of the writers are quite young – their average age being early30s. That’s not a criticism, incidentally – I was writing articles when I was in my 20s, and had my first book published when I was only 27 – it’s just an expression of surprise. Amazingly, our Jules – for so long the carp-angling hero of younger readers – is now, at 42, one of the oldest of Crafty Carper’s contributors! In view of the foregoing, what is the age range of the readership, I wonder? If it’s as young as I suspect, then any time now we can expect Crafty Carper to add ‘Goes Large’ to its title! Something else that surprises me about the writer-profiles is how many describe themselves as professional anglers. The idea of being a professional angler doubtless strikes many readers as being as good as it gets – just imagine, being paid to go fishing! Well, I don’t want to shatter anyone’s dreams but let me tell you, it’s not a living. Yes, if someone lives at home with their

No ‘edges’, I just fish as well as I know how. parents, or is supported by a partner in full-time work, it’s a viable existence – but not otherwise. The revenue from writing angling articles (and possibly books), consultancies and sponsorships will not pay the mortgage and council tax; nor will it cover general living expenses or finance the running of a vehicle. And as for leading any sort of social life – forget it. The disadvantages are not exclusively financial. Improbable though it may seem, most full-time anglers burn out their enthusiasm. When that happens, what next? Unless they have qualifications that enable them to switch to a proper career – or are in a position to obtain such qualifications – there is a very real risk that they’ll end up in a succession of poorly paid, dead-end, tedious jobs. And due to their having become fed up with fishing, they won’t even have that to add a bit of interest and zest to their

I’ve always fished for pleasure; it’s never been my profession.

life. I realise my words will fall, metaphorically speaking, on deaf ears, but my advice would be to acquire qualifications that will lead to a rewarding job and attract a reasonable wage. Fishing is best kept as a sparetime hobby.

Public Enemas No, that’s not a spelling mistake! Recently I received the AGM report/ newsletter from one of the clubs to which I belong – and depressing reading it made, too. Seemingly, one of the farmers from whom the club rent a reservoir came close to terminating the club’s lease. The reason? (Make that ‘reasons’ – plural.) The lock was smashed off a gate (which was subsequently left open), fires were lit on the bank, he found burned-out bivvies (!), club members were being accompanied by non-authorised non-

Teenager-free zone! Deep joy.

Carpworld

Let Us Talk Jim Gibbinson

Not merely ugly, but potentially dangerous, too.

On natural banks, anglers are expected to take reasonable care. members, there was damage to newlyplanted crops, damage to a shed and a pump, a large amount of litter was left, and there was evidence of alcohol and drug use. And all this occurred during a period when the water was closed to fishing! And what age group do you think was responsible? Go on…guess? Hands up all those who answered, “Teenagers.” Spot on. Ironically, this particular club has hitherto actively tried to encourage youngsters with a junior match section, summer evening teach-ins and junior fun-days. Now, having reached the end of its tether following a litany of rule abuse by youngsters, the club has expelled a couple of juniors and refused re-application to three others. The club has also decided that henceforth junior membership will be restricted to adult members’ children and relatives. In addition, no one under the age of seventeen will be allowed to night fish unless accompanied and supervised at all times by a full card-holding adult member. Most members support the club’s new hard-line stance; a few, however, feel an injustice has been done because, as they correctly maintain, not all teenagers behave badly. But sadly, a lot of those who are attracted to fishing are out of control. And due to the nearimpossibility of differentiating between the decent and the unruly, the innocent have to suffer alongside the guilty. To a degree, t’was ever thus, but what has changed in recent years is that the proportion of undisciplined, antisocial juveniles has increased markedly. The problem has become so bad that during the school holidays I try to restrict my fishing to waters that are likely to be teenager-free. Where that

Carpworld

isn’t practical, I confine myself to morning trips because the circadian rhythm of most teenagers is hard-wired to keep them in bed until about lunchtime…

Better Safe Than Sorry A serious matter. A local angling club is being sued by one of its members who suffered an injury whilst on a club water. The matter is currently in the hands of lawyers so it wouldn’t be appropriate for me to give further details. Large clubs and associations doubtless have public liability insurance to protect them against the financial implications of such an action, but I’d be willing to bet that most syndicates and small clubs have never given the matter a moment’s thought. They ought to. In insurance terms, angling waters are deemed to be potentially hazardous environments and, as a consequence, individuals using those waters have a responsibility to take due care. If someone trips over trailing brambles, for example, and suffers a broken arm as a consequence, I doubt that a claim for damages would be successful. In such an instance, the angler should have looked where he was going – brambles, etc. being regarded as a natural hazard. But supposing he slipped on some steps that had been cut into a steep bank to provide access to a swim? Or supposing he hurt himself on a protruding length of scaffolding pole or angle iron? I’ve often banged-on about the ugliness of some constructed swims, but considerations extend beyond the merely aesthetic and could lead to a club being held partly or wholly culpable if someone gets injured or, heaven forbid, is killed. Every club or syndicate should take

professional advice regarding the matter of public liability insurance. To which end, I suggest they contact the NAFAC (National Association of Fisheries and Angling Consultatives) on 01553829411 or 01483-769736). NAFAC will advise on insurance matters – as will the NFA (National Federation of Anglers) and, I believe, the beleaguered ACA (Anglers’ Conservation Association).

The Year Ahead I’m writing this in late February. Within the next few weeks my club memberships and syndicate tickets will expire so I have to consider which ones to renew, which to drop, and which new ones to join. Those decisions, in turn, are dependent on what sort of fishing I intend doing during the forthcoming year. As in the previous four summers, mullet figure high on my list. And while I may be tempting providence by saying this, I really feel I’m starting to get the measure of these frustrating creatures. I caught some very big fish last year, so I’m confident of continued success during the season ahead. The addition of two new pits to my repertoire has rekindled my enthusiasm for tench. Although neither pit is completely virgin, they have been fished so lightly that their tench potential is something of an unknown quantity. The portents are good, though – there are enough rumours and claimed sightings to suggest that while stocks might be low, there are some very large specimens among them. My carp fishing will go one of two ways. A credible report, from someone whose word I trust, of a hitherto uncaught 40lb class common, has stirred my big-carp lust somewhat. I saw it about 15 years ago, when I estimated it to be around mid-20s, so the maths is right – but have I got the determination and resolve to tolerate the numerous blanks that would almost certainly accrue? The water is a big, weedy pit, with a total carp population of only about 10 fish, so it’s a daunting prospect.