Is the British Record Fish List dead in the water? Probably so. It’s outdated, and not an accurate reflection of this country’s finest.
Take that recent huge pike caught from Pitsford Water – that could well have been over the record. It was returned without weighing for the safety of the fish. Then there’s Dave Lavender’s 5lb 3oz rudd, reported recently. Not interested in a record, just wants to enjoy his angling. The 70lb-plus carp caught by Wayne Mansford a couple of years ago? Same story.
As a youngster I could name almost all the records, their weight, who caught them and where. Nowadays, many potential records go back without a thought.
People simply don’t seem to be interested. The record list isn’t as important any more, either to the anglers or indeed the general angling public. And that’s a shame.
YOU NEED A PROPER ROD TO LAND A RECORD FISH. CHECK OUT OUR BUYER'S GUIDE TO THE BEST.
Is it that the BRFC hasn’t moved with the times? Could it be that attitudes have moved on and records are no longer important? May it even be that the definition of a record has changed in people’s eyes?
Complicated criteria, lack of news, red tape, hanging on to history and all manner of other reasons have led to the quite simple fact that most people – and I’m sort of ashamed to say this now, as I include myself in this category – are not particularly bothered.
If we have a list it should be up-to-date, accurate and in tune with public opinion. If said opinion is that
people are not bothered, then why have one at all?
FIND A RECORD FISH BY VISITING ONE OF THESE AWESOME FISHING VENUES NEAR YOU.
This page is a free example of the amazing content Angling Times Members get every single week. Becoming an Angling Times Member gives you access to award-winning magazine content, member rewards, our back issue archives, bonus content and more! Join our fishing community and find out more today!