Redmire's Real Monster - The King

[Beresford]

Netting will never catch all the fish in a water, even one as small as Redmire. The big fish may well have been holed up in Pitchford's pit for all we know or in the silt of the centre channel. However, I agree that it is more than strange that the biggest fish disappeared during 1976. I'd also agree that it is very difficult to be sure of what we are seeing in the water for certain.

However, there is the question of the 58lb mirror that Walker claimed to have netted. That fish was never caught with rod and line unless it went backwards in weight, which I guess is possible even in Redmire. Equally it may have been caught and not reported but I think that to be unlikely. It's also possible that it became one of the group Yates named after chess pieces. The reality is that there are only two explanations: either Richard Walker was a liar and made the whole thing up or a 58lb mirror carp lived in Redmire and was never caught with rod and line… If the latter is the case then I'd suggest that it is just as possible that other big fish were never landed. At least two were hooked and lost; a four foot common by Jack Hilton at the net and the so called Black Queen by Yates. Alternatively the only other explanation is that both of those men have also lied and have committed fictitious stories of their time at Redmire to print.

[Snape]

Netting will never catch all the fish in a water, even one as small as Redmire. The big fish may well have been holed up in Pitchford's pit for all we know or in the silt of the centre channel. However, I agree that it is more than strange that the biggest fish disappeared during 1976. I'd also agree that it is very difficult to be sure of what we are seeing in the water for certain.

However, there is the question of the 58lb mirror that Walker claimed to have netted. That fish was never caught with rod and line unless it went backwards in weight, which I guess is possible even in Redmire. Equally it may have been caught and not reported but I think that to be unlikely. It's also possible that it became one of the group Yates named after chess pieces. The reality is that there are only two explanations: either Richard Walker was a liar and made the whole thing up or a 58lb mirror carp lived in Redmire and was never caught with rod and line… If the latter is the case then I'd suggest that it is just as possible that other big fish were never landed. At least two were hooked and lost; a four foot common by Jack Hilton at the net and the so called Black Queen by Yates. Alternatively the only other explanation is that both of those men have also lied and have committed fictitious stories of their time at Redmire to print.

I always thought it odd that no photo of the 58lb'er netted by Walker seems to exist.
There are of course other stories:
Walker had a huge fish take his floating crust but it spat it out before he could tighten up. He was convinced it was a lot bigger than the 44 and nearer 60lb
Pete Thomas hooked a giant fish but lost it when the hook eye broke or straightened again it was seen and was a lot bigger than the 44.
Fred J Taylor recounted a story of seeing the Redmire carp spawning in the shallows and was convinced there were 40, 50 and even 60lb fish in full view. They went amongst the fish with the punt and could touch them with a rod tip. He said afterwards " Now I know there are sixty pounders in Redmire"
Gerry Berth-Jones said he had seen fish which weighed in excess of 60lbs and noted that fish seen in the water and then caught usually weighed more than they were estimating.
Bob Jones saw a fish at least 4 feet in length on his first visit.
Bill Quinlan and Pete Cranstoun were fish spotting and saw two 30lb'ers which were then dwarfed by a huge black fully scaled mirror which was at least 50lbs.
Rod Hutchinson spotted a known 40lb fish from a tree which was the smallest fish in a group with the largest being at least 60lb
Jack Hilton was watching fish in the shallows which were between 20 and 40lbs when a huge fish swam into view which at first he thought was two fish but realised it was one and "every inch of four feet long". He watched it for over half an hour and at time a full two feet of its back was out of the water.

Given the size that carp attain nowadays and the unique, undisturbed (until 1951) nature and food rich waters of Redmire surely these claims are not unreasonable but the question of what became of these fish is another one altogether....

Imagine seeing this in the Redmire shallows....

[Blunderer]

Netting will never catch all the fish in a water, even one as small as Redmire. The big fish may well have been holed up in Pitchford's pit for all we know or in the silt of the centre channel. However, I agree that it is more than strange that the biggest fish disappeared during 1976. I'd also agree that it is very difficult to be sure of what we are seeing in the water for certain.

However, there is the question of the 58lb mirror that Walker claimed to have netted. That fish was never caught with rod and line unless it went backwards in weight, which I guess is possible even in Redmire. Equally it may have been caught and not reported but I think that to be unlikely. It's also possible that it became one of the group Yates named after chess pieces. The reality is that there are only two explanations: either Richard Walker was a liar and made the whole thing up or a 58lb mirror carp lived in Redmire and was never caught with rod and line… If the latter is the case then I'd suggest that it is just as possible that other big fish were never landed. At least two were hooked and lost; a four foot common by Jack Hilton at the net and the so called Black Queen by Yates. Alternatively the only other explanation is that both of those men have also lied and have committed fictitious stories of their time at Redmire to print.

Walkers story is interesting, as he did claim to have weighed it I seem to remember. But he was known for exaggeration as I said. I dont think yates is a liar, but it's not uncommon for anglers to believe fish they have lost to be bigger than they are. There are stories in all of his books about things he saw/believed which turned out to be different. A barbel which he and members of the golden scale club saw him playing which was a chub when landed. A carp which took an hour to land which he thought was the record and turned out to be 27lb.

I'm playing devils advocate a bit here of course. I believe there's a much higher chance of there being a mystery fish 40 years ago which accounted for all the various sightings, than of there being one today. Tackle, methods, photography and netting have moved on so much since then that I find it hard to believe that there anything close to national significance in there now.

[Barbulus]

I wonder if those are the 20lb Chub in Redmire ?
Anyway, I know where my long held view and belief still resides on the various Key Chess Pieces in Redmire whether past or present; original or subsequent. History supports a dynasty when the conditions are right and bloodline is strong.....Snape accurately reflects the views of some well respected and experienced folk but, regardless, I would just take a moment to look again at the earlier post by SK above - it might be worth a reflective moment......just a quiet reflection fellow TFF Members.........the truth is indeed "Out There"......

[Julian]

I wonder if those are the 20lb Chub in Redmire ?
Anyway, I know where my long held view and belief still resides on the various Key Chess Pieces in Redmire whether past or present; original or subsequent. History supports a dynasty when the conditions are right and bloodline is strong.....Snape accurately reflects the views of some well respected and experienced folk but, regardless, I would just take a moment to look again at the earlier post by SK above - it might be worth a reflective moment......just a quiet reflection fellow TFF Members.........the truth is indeed "Out There"......

So, is the truth that the Redmire King and/or the long common have been caught, and all but a few close friends of the anglers who were there do not know?

If its yes but you are sworn to silence just indiscretely mention to us the weight- please

[Beresford]

The lack of a photograph of Walker's netted 58lb is indeed an odd one. I am aware that once he'd given up Redmire and carp fishing he tended to debunk all sorts of things in print that he had previously claimed and I'm sure he wrote that there 'never was a 60lb or four feet long carp in Redmire.' Why he was like this I have no idea.

I've been quietly told a of a few significant fish that were caught that were never reported including an Essex 52lbs fish (back in the day when that was a monster) and what I like to beleive is more than a rumour of the large Redmire common being caught… as they say the truth is out there. To me it's a bit like the Sasquatch mystery – very real to some folks, there's some photographic evidence that really still remains conjectural, lots of hoaxes and no conclusive DNA sample that we know about and yet the US government apparently lists it as a protected species. Odd that they would bother if it doesn't exist.

The Redmire monsters, all of them, are an equally alluring story.

My own monster tale is of another Essex lake in which I have seen a group of severn large carp. I've watched them through binoculars at about 30' range and I was well up above them. I wouldn't like to suggest how big the two largest commons were, they were so large I just couldn't tell. Not only were they long fish but also ridiculously thick set over the shoulders. They were well aware they were being watched! But for me it does illustrate just how hard it is to be certain of the weight and size of fish, even with a clear view. As I've written before I've caught a 38" carp of just 14.5 lbs so it's entirely possible that the 48" Redmire fish may not be anywhere near the weight that some might hope for. I've also seen a brown trout rolling about 20' away from me in Grafham that was truly stupendous and I know a 25lb trout was netted and returned. I'd suggest a trout of that size is probably beyond what most would expect, even in a very rich water like Grafham and I guess that why we go fishing as the unbelievable is out there, perhaps…

[Julian]

The lack of a photograph of Walker's netted 58lb is indeed an odd one. I am aware that once he'd given up Redmire and carp fishing he tended to debunk all sorts of things in print that he had previously claimed and I'm sure he wrote that there 'never was a 60lb or four feet long carp in Redmire.' Why he was like this I have no idea.

I've been quietly told a of a few significant fish that were caught that were never reported including an Essex 52lbs fish (back in the day when that was a monster) and what I like to beleive is more than a rumour of the large Redmire common being caught… as they say the truth is out there. To me it's a bit like the Sasquatch mystery – very real to some folks, there's some photographic evidence that really still remains conjectural, lots of hoaxes and no conclusive DNA sample that we know about and yet the US government apparently lists it as a protected species. Odd that they would bother if it doesn't exist.

The Redmire monsters, all of them, are an equally alluring story.

My own monster tale is of another Essex lake in which I have seen a group of severn large carp. I've watched them through binoculars at about 30' range and I was well up above them. I wouldn't like to suggest how big the two largest commons were, they were so large I just couldn't tell. Not only were they long fish but also ridiculously thick set over the shoulders. They were well aware they were being watched! But for me it does illustrate just how hard it is to be certain of the weight and size of fish, even with a clear view. As I've written before I've caught a 38" carp of just 14.5 lbs so it's entirely possible that the 48" Redmire fish may not be anywhere near the weight that some might hope for. I've also seen a brown trout rolling about 20' away from me in Grafham that was truly stupendous and I know a 25lb trout was netted and returned. I'd suggest a trout of that size is probably beyond what most would expect, even in a very rich water like Grafham and I guess that why we go fishing as the unbelievable is out there, perhaps…

Hi Beresford
Walker was not one of the anglers who claimed to have saw the four foot common known as the King.
He did see some exceptionally large fish but he certainly never claimed to have a clear long view close up of the King - which more than a dozen other anglers did. It may simply be that because he did not see it and had strong convictions that it was not possible for carp to reach that size, that he dismissed it.
Walker was proved wrong on this noted scientific claim regarding carp - he claimed that it was not possible for a carp to grow to four feet or longer - and now many have been caught abroad at that size.

As for other huge fish caught in other countries -true crucian carp to 8lbs have been caught in Scandinavia, perch over 8lbs have been caught, true roach over 5 lbs in a river in Germany, tench I think have been caught to 20 lbs , rudd well above our record , pike to around 60 lbs, the cuurent common carp record is just over 100 lbs , and I am certain that brown trout have caught overseas to well over 20lb.

[Barbulus]

Oooops ! Sorry ! I think that the myth that then becomes part of the legend is important in forming an element in the mystery that we all need in our lives and something I celebrate. Oh. I also now anticipate a very very special "Gift" that is kindly being sent to me to celebrate The King next month ! I shall post a photograph to celebrate in a few weeks. ! What a fantastic Forum this is !

[Beresford]

..

[Dave Burr]

Discussing giant fish is a bit like guessing the odds of winning the lottery. You will be told that you are more likely to be hit by lighting a couple of times in the same week that win it yet many weeks pass where nobody gets hit by lightning once yet alone twice and still somebody wins several million pounds by picking six random numbers. Whatever the odds, it can happen.