->

INDIANANGLER

India fishing forum for all the information you require on angling, equipment, locations and trip reports.
It is currently Sat Jul 22, 2017 10:17 am

All times are UTC+05:30




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 33 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Jul 22, 2006 10:10 am 
Offline
Fishaholic

Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2006 10:55 pm
Posts: 116
Location: Bangalore
www.fishing-worldrecords.com/photo_gallery5.htm

Was browsing and the world record for golden mahseer is listed at 90 lb or 40.82 kg. according to the url above.

If thats the case, its probably been broken a couple of times at Galibore and I thought the record was 118 lbs.

My question to the forum
Assuming someone catches a large mahseer whats the procedure for recording the event and weighing the fish for a "record"?

Best,

Ryan


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Jul 22, 2006 11:07 am 
Offline
Fishaholic

Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 11:26 am
Posts: 1479
Hi Ryan,

I hear the 118lb record too would have been broken, had there not been a mess up of the scales used for the fish captured at crocodile rocks in 2004, so your question is indeed a very valid one.

From what i know, this is what is required to be done:

1. Your scales needs to have a calibration certificate that is valid. Most calibrations done are only valid fora fixed period of time and records the error in the scales, which needs to be taken into account when declaring the final weight of the fish.

2. You need to get confirmation of the weight on atleast one more pair of scales, preferably one kept with Sundar at Galibori camp.

3. Suffecient witnesses who will sign a document to the effect that they were present during the capture and weighing of the fish.

4. JLR's concurence on the same.

Good luck guys, i have been trying to accomplish this feat for over 20 years now, and have lost 15 fish over the years that could have done the trick!

Tight Lines
Owen
quote="Wolf"]www.fishing-worldrecords.com/photo_gallery5.htm

Was browsing and the world record for golden mahseer is listed at 90 lb or 40.82 kg. according to the url above.

If thats the case, its probably been broken a couple of times at Galibore and I thought the record was 118 lbs.

My question to the forum
Assuming someone catches a large mahseer whats the procedure for recording the event and weighing the fish for a "record"?

Best,

Ryan[/quote]


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 22, 2006 11:17 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 5:37 pm
Posts: 1932
Location: Bangalore
Hi Wolf,

The IGFA all tackle record for the mahseer is listed at 95 lbs caught by Robert Howitt, March 26, 1984


Image

The IGFA rules and record application can be downloaded from here,

www.indianangler.com/IGFABookRule2004.pdf
www.indianangler.com/IGFARecApp.pdf

Cheers
Bopanna


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 22, 2006 11:38 am 
Offline
Fishaholic

Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 11:26 am
Posts: 1479
Hi Bops,
Most of the big fish don't get registered on the IGFA. Why should anyone have to pay 60 dollars to register their catch with them. Must be desperate, would rather invest in more gear, and hang a picture on my wall!
Regards
Owen
IndianAngler wrote:
Hi Wolf,

The IGFA all tackle record for the mahseer is listed at 95 lbs caught by Robert Howitt, March 26, 1984


Image

The IGFA rules and record application can be downloaded from here,

www.indianangler.com/IGFABookRule2004.pdf
www.indianangler.com/IGFARecApp.pdf

Cheers
Bopanna


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 22, 2006 11:57 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 5:37 pm
Posts: 1932
Location: Bangalore
Hi Owen,

I doubt if there is any other organisation in the world which promotes the sport of angling as much as the IGFA does. Where else can one register a World Record? IGFA has continuously supported scientific tagging and other data collection programs, and works closely with fishery biologists in order to exchange information and relay to anglers the particular needs and results of research and conservation efforts.

They would have to charge anglers for registering world records else where will the money come from for their conservation efforts. One of the reasons why our fishing grounds in India are being desecrated is because we do not have a global organisation, like the IGFA, backing conservation efforts here on a larger scale. As Hotshot said in an earlier post, it is very evident that the fishing in angling hotspots like Galiborai and Bheemeshwari has deteriorated due to over fishing and commercialisation.

I guess each one is entitled to their own opinion [smilie=romanjury.gif]

Tight lines!
Bopanna


Top
   
 Post subject: Thanks
PostPosted: Sat Jul 22, 2006 7:10 pm 
Offline
Fishaholic

Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2006 10:55 pm
Posts: 116
Location: Bangalore
Thanks guys,

That was most informative.

Heres to one of the forum reeling in the dream fish...

Ryan


Top
   
 Post subject: Re: Thanks
PostPosted: Sat Jul 22, 2006 9:05 pm 
Offline
Fishaholic

Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 7:43 am
Posts: 708
Location: Bangalore, India.
Wolf wrote:
Here's to one of the forum reeling in the dream fish...


I'll drink to me. :mrgreen:

Mock not, as I have beginners luck on my side. ;)

Rustam


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Jul 22, 2006 9:08 pm 
Offline
Fishaholic

Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 7:43 am
Posts: 708
Location: Bangalore, India.
Owen Bosen wrote:
I hear the 118lb record too would have been broken, had there not been a mess up of the scales used for the fish captured at crocodile rocks in 2004, so your question is indeed a very valid one.


Owen,

Any more details regarding this?

Rustam


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 9:34 am 
Offline
Fishaholic

Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 11:26 am
Posts: 1479
Hi Rustam,
If my memory serves me right, there have been 3 fish in the last 5 years that were captured at crocodile rocks that were very close to the record (within a pound or two), and one of these should have broken the record by a pound or more, unfortunately the second scale used to verify the weight had serious errors, and brought the average weight of the fish down.
Also of interest is a news paper cutting of a Masheer captured in a net by fisherman, somewhere on the Kabini that weighed 75 Kg's. The fish was laid out on a table (dead no doubt), and the 5 guys that pulled it in were standing side by side behind the fish. The fish was a little larger than all of them put together. Sundar has this cutting at Galibori camp, check it out if you haven't already done so.
By the way Bops the record for Masheer is credited to Van Ingen if i am not mistaken, and is refered to in almost every angling book worth its salt. However the IGFA only considers the fish to be a record if some one is ready to donate money to them. I'll be damed if i ever have to do that. Struggle all your life and pay someone to recognise your struggle ! Not a chance mate !
Regards
Owen
quote="Rustam Bana"]
Owen Bosen wrote:
I hear the 118lb record too would have been broken, had there not been a mess up of the scales used for the fish captured at crocodile rocks in 2004, so your question is indeed a very valid one.


Owen,

Any more details regarding this?

Rustam[/quote]


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 3:34 pm 
Offline
Fishaholic

Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 7:43 am
Posts: 708
Location: Bangalore, India.
Thanks, Owen.

I am told JvI is still going strong at 92/93. Hat's off to him!

Rustam


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 4:22 pm 
Offline
Fishaholic

Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 11:26 am
Posts: 1479
Hi Rustam, He must have some great tales to tell. Pity we can't get guy's like him at our get together mate! Is the family still Mysore based ?
Regards
Owen
Rustam Bana wrote:
Thanks, Owen.

I am told JvI is still going strong at 92/93. Hat's off to him!

Rustam


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 5:56 pm 
Offline
Fishaholic

Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 7:43 am
Posts: 708
Location: Bangalore, India.
Owen Bosen wrote:
Hi Rustam, He must have some great tales to tell. Pity we can't get guy's like him at our get together mate! Is the family still Mysore based ?
Regards
Owen


Yes, Owen, he is still in Mysore but I am told they recently sold most of their property. He does frequent Shivsamudram - comes in his own jeep, coracle, et al.

Regards.

Rustam


Top
   
 Post subject: regarding VI
PostPosted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 11:09 pm 
Offline
Fishaholic

Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2006 10:55 pm
Posts: 116
Location: Bangalore
On another note the VI apparently came by with his own coracle etc and used squidgies to land 3 murral. Good for him at his age.


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 29, 2006 1:16 pm 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 4:12 pm
Posts: 956
Met the younger vI about 10-12 yrs ago at their Mysore 'complex', I was blown away by the vastly 'reduced' taxidermy collection.Wonder what it would have been like in their heyday??
Thought he was about 90+ then!Indestructible man!!
the elder was hobbling around and not in the best form...

Have a great trip Rustam,
Best
Axx


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 2:19 pm 
Offline
Fishaholic
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 3:17 pm
Posts: 776
Given the new found IGFA status of Bops, I'm bumping this thread back up to the top.

Bops, can you shed any new light on the state of play with IGFA records for Indian mahseer species other than Tor Tor ? Rules regarding witnesses and scales (do the scales need to have a certificate before you take them fishing ?)) and what the situaltion is with line class records ?


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 3:06 pm 
Offline
Fishaholic
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:01 am
Posts: 698
Location: Dubai
Hi guys,

Usually, while dealing with classification societies, the calibration for any kind of instrument (no matter if mechanical, infra red etc) is valid for 6months only, except if it is a distance measure like a tape or foot scale (life long). The distance measure also has to be of a certain standard & comes with a (II) mark on it to be valid. All measuring instruments should be callibrated before using them.

Not too sure what IGFA standards are, but it should be something on these lines.


Top
   
 Post subject: Big Galibore fish
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 7:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2007 10:18 pm
Posts: 45
Location: Wiltshire, UK
Hi Owen and friends.

I'm not sure if these are any of the fish you have referred to above but here's what I know. Sorry it's a bit lengthy.

Brothers Phil and Tim Crew caught two huge fish on 7th March 2001 from the Croc Rocks area during a morning session on one of Dave plummers trips. Tims fish was weighed on their own scales (which I believe read up to 112lbs) at 94lbs. After a scales check in camp it was upgraded to 95lbs. I was on this same trip but unfortunately not present at the capture.

Phils fish bottomed out their 112lb scales so the camp scales were fetched and it was recorded at 118lbs weighed by camp staff as far as I know.

In the afternoon it was decided to check the camp scales accuracy as it was close to the 120lb Van Ingen record (not the IGFA one!) and could have broken the record if weighing light.
We did this using rocks in the sling so that we got a reading of 118lbs. We then weighed the same sling full of rocks on other sets of scales and the camp scales were found to be weighing over by a huge margin. A weight for Phils fish was finally settled on at 105lbs which included deducting the weight of the sling which they had not apparently done already.
Also the camp scales were already reading 1kg when they should have been at zero! It's no wonder so many supposed 70, 80 and 90lb fish were caught at Galibore as a great many were weighed on these scales. The captors would not have been aware of the inaccuracy.

What can't be explained is the fact that Phils own 112lb scales were bottomed out by this fish and found to be accurate to within 1lb when we checked them. Phil graciously accepted the weight of 105lbs but we will never know what it really was. If you look at the photo of Tim and Bola (I think it was Bola) holding the two fish Phils mahseer appears to be much, much bigger. However the camera can distort the truth a bit at times so this can only be used as a guide, fish can appear very different according to how they are held and the size of the person holding them. I've seen video of this capture and this doesn't give any clues as to actual size. My gut feeling is that it was probably about 115lbs.

I think the important points here are:-

1 - use accurate (tested) scales
2 - have someone detached from the capture take over the weighing (providing they know what they are doing!) as they are less likely to make mistakes which may happen when the adrenaline is flowing and you are shaking like a leaf
3 - deduct the weight of the sling - preferably zero the scales with the wet sling if possible first
4 - use a sling with adequate drainage holes to let the water out as a little bit of water can add lot of weight
5 - for a fish of huge size tie the scales to a piece of wood (branch or similar) which can be supported between two pairs of shoulders. This will make it easy to lift and get a stable reading on the scales
6 - scales must be suspended from the handle ie don't hold them by the body as this will give an inaccurate weight
7 - make sure the sling is off the ground and not touching anyones leg etc when lifted
8 - make sure whoever reads the weight off from the scale actually knows what they are doing, knows the difference between pounds and kilos on the dial and can read!
9 - weigh fish regularly, that way you know what you are doing and so can do it quickly and accurately when it really counts

Unfortunately I have witnessed many cock-ups with weighing fish and some by people who should have known better over the years.
It is a quick, safe and simple procedure when you know what you are doing and you are practised at it, even with very big fish. The key is to get everything organised while the fish is resting on a stringer (including cameras, video cameras, etc) making sure each person involved knows their particular role then the actual weighing is easy.

The next one is a fish of 118lbs caught in 2002 by James Heggie in the Croc Rocks area. I do not know of any discrepancy with the weighing procedures but I do know that Dave Plummer was present so I'm sure this weight can be regarded as an accurate one. I've just looked at this one on video and it looks like it could well be the claimed weight.
A 107lb fish was also caught on the same trip from Mushelli Hala but this doesn't look that big even though it probably was.

I don't think the IGFA world records mean a great deal in many cases because they aren't necessarily the biggest recorded just the biggest reported to IGFA. Whatever good IGFA may do for fishing this will remain to be the case.

Finally, are there different records for Northern and Southern mahseer? Are these classed as different species? What is a Deccan mahseer that I have seen mentioned? Can anyone tell me please?

Regards


Andy


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 11:18 am 
Offline
Fishaholic

Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 11:26 am
Posts: 1479
Hi Andy,
Thanks for sharing those details.
Very unlikely that there will be another 100 lb mahseer in the near future.
All those big fish would have been Tor Mussullah, which seem to be rapidly vanishing from the Kaveri, and the Deccan Mahseer "Tor Kudhree" or the Blue fin mahseer which has been wrongly stocked in my opinion, is now dominating the river.
They will not grow to the size of Mussullah.
Howevere i think there could be just a couple of grandmothers left on the Galibori stretch that frequent the croc rocks area, so there is a very slim chance that someone could have a shot at the record before they die out.
Regards
Owen


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 5:19 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 5:37 pm
Posts: 1932
Location: Bangalore
Keyur, the answers to your questions can be found at the following two links.

http://www.igfa.org/BookRule2004.pdf

http://www.igfa.org/ScaleCertificationInfo.pdf


Now that we are on the topic, are there any IA members who would like to become members of the IGFA? Please let me know.

Cheers
Bopanna


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 6:31 pm 
Offline
Fishaholic

Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 6:22 pm
Posts: 1658
Location: Kolkata,India
you got PM, Prong-Man :lol:


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 6:37 pm 
Offline
Fishaholic

Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 4:55 pm
Posts: 2142
Location: Just outside New Delhi
IGFA!!!! For sure. Please give me a chance, Sirji.


Top
   
 Post subject: Deccan mahseer
PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 2:48 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2007 10:18 pm
Posts: 45
Location: Wiltshire, UK
Hi Owen

I presume that the Deccan and blue fin (or are they both the same?) are not indigenous to the Cauvery in which case what on earth have they stocked them for and where are they from in the first place? This may mean the end of Mussalah as the numbers seem to be decreasing, presumably they can't compete with the newcomers. A tragedy if the mussalah disappear, why didn't they stock these?

What do you think have happened to all the grandmothers? I suspect they were mostly one or two year classes and were old. Two successive years of poor monsoon and very low water and oxygen levels may have finished them off. Poor recruitment and being out competed by Deccan mahseer may account for the lack of mussalah throughout the size range so no more grandmothers on the horizon. Very sad.

A happier alternative may be that they have taken up permanent residence in the water below croc rocks, maybe spread all the way down to Ontigundi (not sure how to spell it!) as a reaction to the low water for two consecutive years. They would possibly also move due to the increased fishing pressure seen since the Jungle Lodges camp was set up and just become a bit wiser to fishing tackle, ragi etc. Fish over here do this a lot. I think they're mostly probably dead though.

On a positive note I was talking to Dave Plummer about this recently and he said he saw some very big fish rolling below croc rocks this year but they didn't catch them.
It makes me very grateful to have fished it when I did but sad that I may never get the opportunity to catch another massive mahseer.

By the way is there a book or guide for the different types of mahseer any where. I hadn't heard of deccan mahseer before I joined this site even though I must have caught a few thinking they were just silver mahseer. Are the Deccan mahseer the ones with the "beard"?

Regards
Andy


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 4:08 pm 
Offline
Fishaholic

Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 11:26 am
Posts: 1479
Hi Andy,
Yes the blue fin are part of the deccan mahseer tribe.
The deccan mahseer fingerlings originally came from Lonavala and from Harangi i hear, and were initially introduced unfortunately by some of the WASI members unknowingly years back. I don't think any fresh stocks of Mussullah were introduced into the kaveri in the last 20 years, and therefore the mussullah have nearly died out.
Dave is right, i too have seen a couple of monsters at croc rocks in april this year, but they show no interest.
The fish at Ontigundu, and all the way down to Ajibora seem to be mostly deccan mahseer with a variety in colouration, but i was happy to see some baby mussullah at Hiara last december, so evedintely there are still a few around.
I hope awareness spreads, and future stocking are from the mussullah variety.
Regards
Owen


Top
   
 Post subject: Cauvery fish
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2007 3:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 1:01 am
Posts: 16
Hi guys & gals

In the Uk there was a couple of published article reporting fish of 128lbs & 129lbs, Ill try to find & post on here


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 13, 2007 12:07 pm 
Offline
Fishaholic

Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 11:26 am
Posts: 1479
More like 118 and a touch below that in the last couple of years


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 13, 2007 10:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 1:01 am
Posts: 16
No this was going way back around the time of the Raj, if I remember the story correctly, the 128 stood for a long time as the unofficial record & was later beaten by 129, After I mail this ill hunt the story down and post it

Br
Paul


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 13, 2007 11:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2007 10:18 pm
Posts: 45
Location: Wiltshire, UK
Hi Paul

These could have been handline caught fish as I've heard of huge mahseer caught by this method. I'll be interested to see the report if you can find it.

Andy


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2007 2:36 am 
Offline
Fishaholic
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 7:39 pm
Posts: 336
Location: Islamabad
Weather handline or rod, 129 lbs is a huge fish. :shock: Do post the story if you can, Paul
Cheers
Sualeh


Top
   
 Post subject: Found the story
PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2007 11:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 1:01 am
Posts: 16
Hi Guys see history section of text below.

The Himalayan Legends (barbus tor putitora)

These Mahseer attain sizes of as much as 85 lbs, and a 20 to 40 lb fish is often had on spinning. Often the figures are not found to be impressive, at least for the as anglers who get into a comparison of the Himalayan Mahseer with the Humpbacked Mahseer found in the Cauvery river system in the south of India, which off course do not take to lures and flies as fondly as the Himalayan monsters do.

The two fish are quite different in physical features as well as other aspects and are to be found in rather different terrain and landscape. The Humpbacked Mahseer, the so called larger Mahseer limits it self to only two river system of in southern India, the Cauvery River, which is the hub of commercial fishing trips in India, and the other - the Kabbini now is more or less extinct, following the construction of a dam on the prime fishing section some years back.

The waters of the Cauvery River are only limited and quite heavily fished. The river has amazing accessibility - which perhaps is also another reason for it being so well frequented by anglers.

Some of the most significant Mahseer accounts have focused primarily on the Mahseer of the Himalayas, as the scope is vast and as its not always just the fishing element that makes a trip, a number of other effects are associated with getting into the far outback of the Himalayas, the rich culture - the traditional diversity - the thick forests in the base of the Himalayas and the feel of an expedition. The whole experience is far more satisfying than going to a fleet of popular Cauvery resorts to fish for Mahseer in the midst of very active fishing beat.

Though still pound for pound the fish found in the Himalayan Rivers are a better bet, which is simply due to the rugged terrain they are found to be in, the turbid rivers of the Himalayas are a tough place for any fish to live in.

History

Some of the preliminary mentions of large Mahseer caught on rod and line were back in 1870, by Mr. Sanderson, author of " Thirteen Years Amongst the Wild Beasts of India", with the capture of a Mahseer, which was said to be over 130 lbs. Though this was not confirmed since there were no weighing scales. Over the next fifty odd years there were frequent reports of some of the largest Mahseer primarily from the river Kabbini in Southern India. All of these fish were taken either on live bait or paste - bait, a technique to which Mahseer fishing has always been associated with. The two largest Mahseer, the records of which still stand, are the 119 lbs fish caught by Col. J.S. Rivett-Carnac on 29th Dec 1919, and a 120 lbs fish caught by J. Wet. Van Ingen on the 22nd March 1946, from the Upper Kabbini.



Spinning and fly-fishing for the Himalayan Mahseer, barbus tor putitora, found in the Northern Himalayan Rivers was very common during the times of the British Raj in India. The early twenty-century saw numerous expatriate anglers fish the waters of the River Ganges, the Beas, the Sarda, the Ramganga, including several of their tributaries, for the Himalayan Masheer. The largest specimen heard of was a 140 lbs fish landed by an angler in 1939 from the river Beas - however there are no pictures to confirm this report. Such large fish were reported in the past even from the Himalayan Rivers. Mr. A St J MacDonald author of "Circumventing the Mahseer: & Other Sporting Fish in India and Burma", himself had a number of fish over the 50 lbs range including a 75 lbs fish caught from the Irrawadi river in Burma.


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2007 10:02 am 
Offline
Fishaholic
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 5:22 pm
Posts: 202
Location: Thane
Interesting read. Shows what a dam can do to the ecosystem.


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2007 2:51 pm 
Offline
Fishaholic

Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 11:26 am
Posts: 1479
If you can get a copy of In search of a legendry fish, there is a section at the beginning on the history of mahseer angling, that has records of some amazing fish caught in days gone by. There is one that was caught at Srirangapatnam where a stone was erected, but is now missing. The weight of this fish was overrated by more than 10 lbs. It was thought to be the record fish for some time (Is this Sandersons fish) ??
The record as you say, stands at 120lbs to Van Ingen. Since then, only 2 fish from the Kaveri have come close to it.
However I have seen a news paper cutting of one that was caught by net that weighed in at 75 kgs and lay on a table. There were 5 people standing side by side behind the fish, and they barely covered the fish lip to tail. It was a Barbus tor Mussullah of course.
Regards
Owen


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2007 3:02 pm 
Offline
Fishaholic

Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 6:22 pm
Posts: 1658
Location: Kolkata,India
OMO - Any chance of getting that paper cutting ??


Top
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2007 3:27 pm 
Offline
Fishaholic

Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 11:26 am
Posts: 1479
I saw it at Galibori camp, Sundar showed it to me. It was from a Kannada newspaper.


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 33 posts ] 

All times are UTC+05:30


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited