Proposed legislation.

[lutra]

I don't buy any of the weeklies Tweek, they don't really have anything I find interesting. Did they seem for or against it?

 

Rich

You can read it here.

[Jeffwill]

I take the odd fish for the pot. Other than trout and sea trout, I take the odd grayling (two last year), perch and jack pike. All pefectly delicious fish. To lump all coarse fish (including grayling) into a no-take basket would pi55 me off in the extreme.

 

The legislation is obviously aimed at our foreign cousins with slightly different fish tastes to ours so, this is a perfectly good opportunity to upgrade the water bailiff system, get some bodies on the beat and make a bloody difference.

 

As well as preventing poaching/fish theft, water quality/bank erosion/fly-tipping issues would be observed by the officials and something would be more likely to happen as a result.

 

10 million quid on river improvements was mentioned in another thread. Spend the 10 million employing hundreds more water bailiffs and water quality will very rapidly improve!

 

Yours, Mr. Fuming-Gently, Herefordshire.

 

 

Taking the odd grayling, perch and pike is what our eastern european friends like doing.

Surely we cant complain about them taking fish if "responsible" anglers take a couple like them.

 

I skimmed over the EA consultation as its getting late and I dont think they mention the "eastern european" problem by name but they stress the Theft Law on stillwaters and rivers, its pretty obvious who they are referring to and the problem they are trying to remedy.

 

Whats worrying is when the hand full of fish taken regularly soon mounts up and if the fish are specimen size breeding stock. Then again Otters take more but thats okay

[Kappa]

I didn't waste my time reading past the first sentance...

 

Archaic byelaws that allow thieves to steal precious fish stocks from the nation’s rivers are finally on the verge of being changed

 

Rich

Edited July 6, 2009 by Richard Capper

[Worms]

Taking the odd grayling, perch and pike is what our eastern european friends like doing.

Surely we cant complain about them taking fish if "responsible" anglers take a couple like them.

 

I skimmed over the EA consultation as its getting late and I dont think they mention the "eastern european" problem by name but they stress the Theft Law on stillwaters and rivers, its pretty obvious who they are referring to and the problem they are trying to remedy.

 

Whats worrying is when the hand full of fish taken regularly soon mounts up and if the fish are specimen size breeding stock. Then again Otters take more but thats okay

The problem with fish thefts is the indiscriminate nature of the number, size and species taken. Any healthy river can withstand the removal of a few fish by anglers. Trout rivers frequently have more fish taken than coarse fish and still continue to retain high levels of fish without damage. The taking of a few fish per angler per season is and always has been sustainable and probably totals much less than natural wastage. Whereas theft of fish stocked for anglers i.e. carp in stillwaters is a problem and netting for fish on rivers is reported with increasing regularity. I suspect that most if not all of these fish are taken illegally.

 

As I made the point on otters, if a few fish are taken on a healthy river there is no problem. There is a stock of smaller fish ready to move into the vacated niches and grow rapidly on the available food supply.

[Steve Walker]

I don't buy any of the weeklies Tweek, they don't really have anything I find interesting.

 

Same here, stopped buying the AT regularly 20 years ago.

[Worms]

Taking the odd grayling, perch and pike is what our eastern european friends like doing.

Try telling that to the owners of an ornamental pond that has recently had the entire stock of carp removed by eastern European migrant workers! Others regularly used the bridges near here to congregate and dangle handlines etc whilst enjoying a few beers. Righteous indignation from the locals has slowed that but has just pushed them off the beaten track.

 

Surely we cant complain about them taking fish if "responsible" anglers take a couple like them.

"Responsible" anglers have fishing licences and use legal methods. Ergo it is not fish theft.

 

I skimmed over the EA consultation as its getting late and I dont think they mention the "eastern european" problem by name but they stress the Theft Law on stillwaters and rivers, its pretty obvious who they are referring to and the problem they are trying to remedy.

I agree. The theft law is down to the police to uphold. As they seem to spend all of their time doing paperwork these days I'm sure they'll be overjoyed at tackling fish theft as well.

 

 

Whats worrying is when the hand full of fish taken regularly soon mounts up and if the fish are specimen size breeding stock. Then again Otters take more but thats okay

As I mentioned originally I take fish very occasionally and most coarse anglers return all fish. I would no more think of eating a roach, chub, barbel, carp, tench etc than most UK anglers. What I consider to be ridiculous is to lump grayling in with coarse fish. I see the reasoning in including them in the coarse close season (as this is when they spawn) but to call a salmonid a coarse fish as regards edibility is a little strange.

 

I take it that you don't eat fish at all, whether from sea or freshwater. Don't forget sea anglers have been taking fish for the pot for as long as angling was invented with no known detrimental effects on the stocks. So why not with acepted edible freshwater fish (such as the three I mentioned) in sustainable natural unstocked waters (such as those round here, crammed to the gills with otters).

 

As I suggested before, spend some money on water bailiffs and stop the poaching/illegal fishing. The problem will then go away. If we as anglers can apply enough pressure with the help of the Angling Trust and others to limit legislation on sea angling then why not on freshwater angling?

[lutra]

Try telling that to the owners of an ornamental pond that has recently had the entire stock of carp removed by eastern European migrant workers! Others regularly used the bridges near here to congregate and dangle handlines etc whilst enjoying a few beers. Righteous indignation from the locals has slowed that but has just pushed them off the beaten track.

 

 

"Responsible" anglers have fishing licences and use legal methods. Ergo it is not fish theft.

 

 

I agree. The theft law is down to the police to uphold. As they seem to spend all of their time doing paperwork these days I'm sure they'll be overjoyed at tackling fish theft as well.

 

 

 

As I mentioned originally I take fish very occasionally and most coarse anglers return all fish. I would no more think of eating a roach, chub, barbel, carp, tench etc than most UK anglers. What I consider to be ridiculous is to lump grayling in with coarse fish. I see the reasoning in including them in the coarse close season (as this is when they spawn) but to call a salmonid a coarse fish as regards edibility is a little strange.

 

I take it that you don't eat fish at all, whether from sea or freshwater. Don't forget sea anglers have been taking fish for the pot for as long as angling was invented with no known detrimental effects on the stocks. So why not with acepted edible freshwater fish (such as the three I mentioned) in sustainable natural unstocked waters (such as those round here, crammed to the gills with otters).

 

As I suggested before, spend some money on water bailiffs and stop the poaching/illegal fishing. The problem will then go away. If we as anglers can apply enough pressure with the help of the Angling Trust and others to limit legislation on sea angling then why not on freshwater angling?

Yep i agree with all that.

 

Especially the bit about, who is going to police these new laws? No one.

 

I cant help but to think the EA would save more fish if it spent a bit of time on trying to get better laws/big fines against polluters.

[Dick Dastardly]

There are allready laws and punnishments for breaking them in place.I dont see that simply bringing in new laws or punnishments will make any difference at all if the EA cant do just one thing................and thats enforce them!

 

Simple as that it makes no difference at all what the laws are or arn't or how heavy or light the fines etc are if there is no one on the bank in the first place to catch em! Why cant people see this?

 

You think that they are on the bank? then take a look at the " How long,how often have you fished and how often have you had your rod licence checked" thread I did on here a few years back...................................

[Retiarius]

I have found this a very interesting topic - and thanks should go to Gozzer for bringing the consultation to light on the forum. I, for one, will respond to this EA consultation, as well as to the one specifically covering eel fishing and elvering.

 

I have to say, however, that describing the way the EA does these things as 'bringing them in by the back door' reminds me of peoples' annoyance at 'stealth taxes', you know, those unknown taxes of which we are all, miraculously, aware.

 

To be aware of these, and other consultations, one simply has to visit the EA website regularly and navigate to the area covering open consultations, register, and follow the instructions. It's really not that difficult. Doing this is, surely, a responsibility we should all undertake as anglers who wish, presumably, for our sport/hobby, or whatever you want to call it, be administered by some kind of central body (and while I admit that some anglers may, for various reasons, be unable to do this, the majority will).

 

I can get annoyed as much as the next man/woman about the EA , but let's be honest - how better could it be done? The cost implications of administering an e-mail/mail shot have already been highlighted by others in this thread.

 

Yesterday I bought a membership for a club in Gloucestershire with water on the Avon and Severn. I have been a member of this club on and off for nearly 40 years and believe me when I say that its ethos could hardly be described as radically progressive. However, on the front cover of this association's licence it states "All Coarse Fish Must be Returned to Water"; it was not ever thus. The BAA, to which I also belong, has rules which severely limit the taking of coarse fish. These bylaws, too, have changed over the years. It's not just the EA that is concerned about anglers taking fish.

 

In the end we, as anglers, have two options: respond to the EA, stating any problems we have with the process, or don't respond and go unheard. It seems to me, as they say, a bit of a no-brainer.

 

Having said all that I agree with what BUDGIE has to say:

 

"I no longer care what rules or bans etc they bring in.I will see my days out fishing as I always have done and spread the word as well!"

 

Just don't get caught...

 

Regards,

 

Retiarius.

 

http://www.retiarius-angling.blogspot.com/

[Kappa]

There are allready laws and punnishments for breaking them in place.I dont see that simply bringing in new laws or punnishments will make any difference at all if the EA cant do just one thing................and thats enforce them!

 

Simple as that it makes no difference at all what the laws are or arn't or how heavy or light the fines etc are if there is no one on the bank in the first place to catch em! Why cant people see this?

 

You think that they are on the bank? then take a look at the " How long,how often have you fished and how often have you had your rod licence checked" thread I did on here a few years back...................................

 

 

Pretty much exactly what I put in my questionaire!

 

Rich