The Traditional Fisherman's Forum

Dave Burr wrote:"Wow - I think I'd even buy a fishing magazine that week!" Steady on now Greg, that's a pretty bold statement

Julian wrote:

Blunderer wrote:

Leigh wrote:I have just started reading The Lost Diary by Chris Yates - He comments that he saw the King at Redmire , a fish he had only glimpsed once, yet knew that is was probably the biggest carp in Europe.

Can anyone shed any more light on this leviathan?

Sorry to break the magic, but the problem with the legend of The King is twofold:

All of the big fish in redmire in that era were caught many times, and photographed, weighed and on many occasions named. The pool is tiny and fished very hard by very good anglers, so this is no surprise. But 'the king' was never caught.


However, there is a great photograph from the 60s which just could be it, emerging from a weed bed .You never truly know, Also, in the 1976 drought, the pool dried right up. The entire population of the lake could be seen most days on the top of the pool, and nobody saw or photographed the King.
despite the evidence.

The magic has not been broken.
Your statement starting 'all the big fish in Redmire of that time were caught many times.................' is completely incorrect, and is information put about by anglers who seriously believe that if a water is fished extensively all of the big carp are seen and caught. Just because Redmire is small ( 2.7 acres is not that small) it makes no difference. There are many waters, some as small or smaller than Redmire which contain carp that are never caught and rarely seen. I believe a lot of the belief about all the big fish being caught may stem from comments on the 'Redmire Forever' film, by a few anglers who can't accept not catching or seeing all the big carp in a water.

With regard to the statement that 'in 1976 the pool dried right up' , it just is not true. The level dropped a lot - as did all waters in southern England , and during that period the Bishop was not seen, nor were any of the other giants, but from 1977 onwards they were, and a subsequent netting in 1979? ( I think it was 79) did not produce the Bishop or any carp over 30 lbs, yet in 1980 it was caught at 50lbs.

Snape's posts on this also make it clear that there is a 4ft plus common currently in Redmire that has been seen on occasions over the last seven years but it has not been caught.....................................yet .

Beresford wrote:It's a better story in the long term if the big common(s) don't ever get reported if they are caught.

A recent post on Redmire significantly changed my mind on this subject and I would hope that if these fish are ever caught they aren't made known but are quietly slipped back into their home without another word, as may already have been the case. Were these fish to be all over the angling press I suspect Redmire would get booked solid and the chances of fishing the pool would diminish as the 'carp chasers' would arrive… That would be sad for Redmire and probably everybody here who I suspect is still drawn to the myth of the pool even if they have no desire to actually fish there. Those that can afford it are currently pretty much able to get a slot to fish but that would almost certainly change.

Different in Yates' day as the chances of getting to fish Redmire were next to zero anyway and I'm still somewhat relieved that Kevin didn't catch the King and went as far as to denounce its existence. He he!

A friend of mine caught a very large perch from open to all public water that very few anglers knew about let alone fished. It wasn't a record but then again it probably wasn't that far off it either. Had that fish made the Angling Times our little bit of heaven would have been ruined.

Loop Erimder wrote:When I catch him in 4 weeks time on me new MKIV and I have priority to fish Redmire I'll take each and everyone of you as my treat