THE ULTIMATE ANGLING BUCKET LIST

fens way back in the 1930's. Beneath its inclusion are the words "list closed" which I take to mean no
further claims will be considered.
In truth, no further claims are likely ever to be made anyway, as according to John McAngus who was
a member of the Great Ouse River Board team responsible for introducing our current stock of European
zander to the Fens in 1963, the fish in question was seemingly an accidental stray in amongst a failed
experimental introduction of American black bass where its presence was over-looked, so as a never to
be repeated one-off, it shouldn't be included in the list anyway.
The game fishing record list isn't immune to anomalies either. Rightly or wrongly, the grayling is
considered in some anglers eyes as belonging on the coarse fish list, yet in common with all the other
freshwater game species, because it has that small fleshy bump known as an adipose fin in front of its
tail, it quite rightly appears in the game fish list.
Why not then the schelly, which also has an adipose fish, yet somehow finds itself residing amongst the
coarse fish species. And why is the sea trout Salmo trutta listed as a separate species from the brown
trout Salmo trutta. Wouldn't it make more sense simply to have one Salmo trutta with migratory, non
migratory, and ferox options. After all, the ferox stands at least half a chance of coming out of the
ongoing science relating to brown trout genetics as a separate species, while the migratory version of
the brown trout never will.
My final comments on the current
state of fish recording are political.
The Welsh and Scots have their own
record lists, and rightly so, with fish
caught in their territorial waters also
qualified to appear in the British
record fish list which covers the entire
United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northern Ireland.
Northern Irish fish can also appear in
the combined Irish record list which
goes across borders, and again, rightly
so. But what about English fish.
Ferox – a separate species or not.
Following on from the failed
devolution referendum in Scotland
during 2014, the prospect of England going it alone in specific instances has suddenly become a very
hot topic, and once again, rightly so. This then raises the question of when are English anglers also
going to get their own records in addition to the current list they share with the rest of the UK.
There would still by a joint British record list. But to make this work, the four contributing countries
need to sit down and thrash out an agreed set of rules that are adhered to by all concerned, so that where
applicable, records from any of the four member nations can automatically be promoted to the overall
British record list, which currently is not the case.
In theory they already can. But a tope record from Wales which has either been estimated or weighed
aboard a boat, as is currently the case, can't make it on to the British record list as the current BRFC
rules stand.
The sunfish, smoothhound and anglerfish anomalies would also need to be addressed. Meanwhile,
anglers will continue to catch record fish and refuse to make claims, as I have done myself for species
492