|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #179
Plenty of jealousy running through this thread - Burghfield isn’t just about the common, some of the back up fish are fast approaching the 50 mark and its a magical place to angle. Simple really, If you don’t want to donate on any of the auctions running, scroll on, if you want to start dropping insults on some of the blokes - jump into your motor and drive to reading and tell them, most of them are down after after putting in a weeks graft on a normal job. Can’t see what the problem is to be honest, they are only running an auction on the chance to fish with some decent anglers on the complex (gold) have a few beers, chew the fat on angling stuff and then have a mooch around Burghfield.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #164
My point was it must have been stocked in Spitfire quiet big to get to 50lb, that’s a hell of a lot of hand feeding over to years.
The Burghfield common has stacked of history and captures throughout its life and weights, without the common in Burghfield there wouldn't be a waiting list so the owners have to play this safe, if think it’s pretty sad when fishery’s rely on a single fish.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #177
Not sure of the exact stocking history but 90/91 the BC was mid thirty along with another common, shorter and more stocky, about the same weight. Then there was cut-off (or cut tail) again mid thirty....I think they were the largest 3 in lake at the time.....a few more low thirties and mid to upper 20's and the majority of the rest mid double commons.
Never heard of what happened to the other mid thirty common....cracking fish though.
Even back then the BC was the least caught fish in the lake, quite often spotted in the back bays and on the shallows.
Happy days and a beautiful place to fish......sounds a shame it has ended up where it is now...
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #174
Furry muff 
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #175
True dat.
Edit: @Apples, if you are who I think you are, you might be able to shed some light on the stocking/early history of the BC? It would certainly keep the thread on track with regards to history.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #174
It's gone in a better direction than some blokes sluagging off some other blokes who are trying to raise money for an otter fence!
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #173
I agree with you that there are under-the-radar kippers of similar merit, but if we refer to my post 141 which started this discussion I said it was the last of the well known history fish and hence one of a kind. I think that rings true?
Anyway, I'm not even sure where this discussion is going any more. This thread is about the BC lol.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #170
It's a reasonable thing to say considering I'm not fishing for it. From one week to the next I don't know if the big'un where I'm fishing has rolled up dead somewhere.
I'm sure there are others on this board and elsewhere that know of very large carp that are worthy of the crown you've placed on the Burghfield Common's noggin. It's like until the Black Mirror got publicised, people didn't have a clue it existed, you know?
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #1
" if the owners of the lake were that bothered why not get a loan or increase ticket prices to cover it?"
Or you've another option, if there's a 10 year waiting list as you say there's clearly the numbers to form a club, and/or affiliate to one. If the present set up can't look after the waters financially it's the sensible thing to do, must be a few clubs that way big enough.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #28
Post of the week winner. Trophy is in the post
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #169
I fished for when it was 11lb before it took a road trip (if still alive)
So a fish that may or may not exist is better than the BC?
Ok.
As you say, subjective
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #165
Sure, I'm aware of what these fish are about and your points regarding the two fish are sound.
In respect of history, one fish that I can think of which I fished for when it was 11lb before it took a road trip (if still alive) - I won't divulge it's whereabouts simply as there may well be anglers trying to catch it and blow it for the them) has been around the same time as the Burghfield fish (is a common too) and is possibly bigger, to me is more of an epic capture, not only due to its size, but also the implications of actually fishing for it. I could say similar of another fish (mirror) in a similar scenario which is just as mental trying to catch it.
You see, this is why these things are subjective; they mean different things for different people. I've never been fussed about the Burghfield fish as it means very little to me. I hardly raise an eyebrow whenever it gets caught...so what. On the other hand, just the two fish I mentioned, now catching either of those two,.like wow, that's some fishing that.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #151
Mouldy always wanted to backfill would have made him another few millions...cant remember the exact time but probably the 90's when he sold his company to RMC or ARC ? for 5 million with the understanding he was not allowed to operate any company in the area for 5 yrs ..soon as the 5yrs were up he started his buisness again and most of his old staff jumped ship and went back to work for him like he had never been away ...i was on hire to him for awhile and got to go to his house and aircraft hanger where he kept his steam engine collection which was pretty amazing but the truly amazing thing was the man had made millions and could barely read or write ....so for him to stick his hand in his pocket and spend money on something that will not make him money is never going to happen
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #165
Burghfield stockings, besides Donald Leney, it may have been stocked by Leisure sport Angling, or opportunistic ‘drop in stockings’ by various people perhaps, bit like Wraysbury. Who knows for sure.
A rarity these days, a 60 common that got so big by natural diet, in a big pit, Just adds to the mystery of it.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #165
That sums it up rather nicely Yonny!
|
|
General Carp Discussion