Human Cormorants?

[Guest Wordbender]

Please pardon me if this subject has already been aired on AN, but I reckon there's something going on that's a flat-out scandal.

 

I was called this morning by my mate Barry Hearn - Terry's dad, not the snooker bloke - and he told me that he went to the Thames at Richmond to do a bit of eel fishing, at around 9p.m.last night (Saturday).

 

He saw a line of 'anglers' all of foreign extraction, about half a mile long, fishing multi-rod set ups, rod tips high, bells attached, all catching whatever they could for the pot. He saw keepnets of tiny fish emptied into buckets and fish carried away by the dozen.

 

Could someone please enlighten me on a point or two, here? What is the legal position on this - and if action is required, what's plod or anyone else doing about it? Obviously, the gentlemen involved will all have the required amount of licences or don't they need them?

 

Final point - this has apparently been going on for months. The mind boggles - or am I way off line, here?

 

Take It Easy,

 

Terry

[Guest eddie turner]

heard a bit about this last year with the grand union..and various park lakes being fished in this manor....alot of local tackle dealers complained to the nra but i think they looked the other way! It was becoming a real problem...perhaps some else could enlighten us.

[Guest Keith]

Originally posted by Wordbender:

Could someone please enlighten me on a point or two, here? What is the legal position on this - and if action is required, what's plod or anyone else doing about it? Obviously, the gentlemen involved will all have the required amount of licences   or don't they need them?

 

 

They do need licences - and whatever other permits are necessary to fish that piece of water - and basically the police (and the EA) should be dealing with them as lawbreakers - "politically incorrect" or not.

 

 

 

------------------

Keith

 

Blyth,

Northumberland

 

mailto:keith@go-fishing.co.ukkeith@go-fishing.co.uk

http://www.wacac.co.uk

[Guest Bruno Broughton]

Each person would require a rod licence, and that issue is one for the EA (and, if necessary, the police) to enforce.

 

The owner of the fishery will or should have rules governing how fishing is conducted and the fate of any captured fish. Legally, the act of fishing is treated as 'taking' fish (i.e. taking them into your posession). Unless the rules attached to the permission to fish state that all fish must be returned to the water (or something similar), the removal of the fish, dead or alive, is perfectly legal. If the rules clearly state that fish may not be killed and/or removed, the reported action was in contravention of the Theft Act.

 

 

------------------

Bruno

[Guest RobStubbs]

I think it is permissable to remove fish, where no club rules state otherwise, but I think there is a limit as to how many can be removed.

 

However you don't state whether the EA and or police were called, if it looked as you describe I would have been straight on the phone.

 

Rob.

[Guest Steve Burke]

As I understand it the fish in rivers and canals that connect to them, even stocked by a club that holds the fishing rights, are classed as wild. Thus they belong to no one and can't be stolen. This is one reason why I believe that such waters need the protection of a closed season.

 

However, a club may hold the fishing rights and thus permit anglers who buy a ticket to walk the land and fish in the river.

 

So I assume that anyone who has both an EA rod licence and a ticket from the controller of the fishing rights (and who obeys the fishery rules) can both fish a river or canal and legally take fish from it. This includes fish of any size now that size limits have all but been abolished.

 

The only sanction that a club etc would appear to have would be to refuse to sell the angler (fishmonger?) a ticket.

 

I checked this issue when started Wingham, and it also came up in a meeting last year with the police as part of the Waterwatch anti-poaching scheme. Of course I may have got it all wrong, especially as I was concerned only with gravel pits. I also gather that the law is different on tidal waters which I believe the Thames at Richmond is. So does anyone with a legal background know if this interpretation is correct?

 

------------------

Wingham Fisheries

http://www.anglersnet.co.uk/fisheries/wingham.htm

 

[This message has been edited by Steve Burke (edited 25 June 2001).]

[Guest Matt P]

Yes, as a London angler I’ve often heard talk of this ‘problem’ in the last year or two. Passersby – usually non-anglers – often up to me when I’m fishing in the parks or canals and mention with disgust that they’ve seen “Albanians” or “Kosovars” or “Romanians” or “Poles” taking fish home to eat.

 

It’s an emotive subject and tied in with political issues about asylum seekers and immigration etc. so we should tread carefully.

 

Surely the first thing to do is to try to contact the gentlemen concerned and explain to them the coarse fishing etiquette in this country – ie. that you put fish back, on the basis that if we didn’t, there wouldn’t be any fish left in the long term. I don’t know how you’d contact them, perhaps through asylum agencies or charities or outreach workers or something. If they are taking the fish home out of ignorance, this might stop them.

 

But maybe I’m being naïve – they probably know the score and either don’t care (thinking how crazy these English are, putting the fish back!) or, perhaps more worryingly, are so skint that fishing for the pot is actually a practical solution to the problem of getting something to eat.

 

In that case, maybe the only solution is to catch them and prosecute them, if the law allows. (And in the long term, give asylum seekers better support - but I'm not going to get into politics here.)

 

But let’s put things into context. There’s not a lot of people doing it, and possibly they’re a bit more considerate than people make out – ie. not fishing in the close season, and not taking fish out of the park lakes anymore (I haven’t heard rumours of that for a year or so). Let’s face it – the tidal Thames is a big river and hardly anyone fishes it, certainly downstream of Richmond, although god knows why because it’s stuffed with fish and taking out a bucketful of skimmers now and again is hardly going to harm the fishing.

[Guest kev7dags]

With regards to the taking of fish.I live at present in Cyprus which has a large Russian immigrant population.They take everything they catch from as small as two inches on up.As most of the resevoirs out here are full of mainly carp these seem to be the preferred catch.Recently I was accosted by a group of about 5 Russians who wanted me to stop returning the fish back to the water and instead give them to them to take away.I tried to explain that I view fishing as a sport and that if we were to take all the fish out there would soon be none left.The result of there "requests" was that I cut short a normally relaxing day and returned home rather stressed.

I assumed this to be a particular problem in this part of the world and as I am moving back to the UK at the end of the year thought I would be spared this kind of thing back home.So you can imagine my concern to find out that this sort of behaviour has started to occur in the UK.As one of the posts states that there doesn't seem to be too much of this going on at present I feel something should be done to try to nip it in the bud sooner rather than later.Again using my present locale as an example the fish stocks in some of the dams are dwindling as so many young fish are being taken(mainly carp)but also trout roach and bream.

Sorry to go on but this latest incident really hs put me off fishing alone anymore as I was quite intimidated by the Russians and if this sort of behaviour is starting to take off in UK I for one am quite concerned.

[Guest mpbdsnu]

Originally posted by Matt P:

or, perhaps more worryingly, are so skint that fishing for the pot is actually a practical solution to the problem of getting something to eat.

 

Hi matt. Just picking up on something you have written here: if they were so skint that they have to fish to feed themselves, then it prompts the question "why were they able to fish with 'multi-rod' set ups?"

 

[This message has been edited by mpbdsnu (edited 26 June 2001).]

 

[This message has been edited by mpbdsnu (edited 26 June 2001).]

[Guest trent.barbeler]

"Fish that live in running waters or waters such as canals and lakes which are integrated with, or are connected to, a river system are considered to be wild creatures that belong to no one".

 

"Where ownership of the fish can be PROVED then any person who takes them without permission will have committed theft, which is an offence under the Theft Act 1968".

 

"Section 1 (1) of this act defines theft as "the dishonest appropriation of property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it".

 

"Where a person is given permission to fish, i.e. a fishing club membership, that person is then legally bound by any rules or code regarding the taking/killing of fish. This is infact a contract between the club and the angler whereby the latter agrees to observe the rules in exchange for the right to fish. If the angler breaks any of the rules by taking/killing any or more fish than he/she is entitled to then the angler, through breech of contract automatically forfeits his/her right to fish and becomes a trespasser.

 

This is a CIVIL not a CRIMINAL offence and applies to both wild and other fish covered by a breech of contract. Only if the angler refuses to leave when asked by the fishery owner/tennant does he/she become deemed as unlawfully fishing whereby the provisions of the Theft Act apply.

 

Unless an offender in these circumstances has been asked to leave before hand by the fishery owner/tennant and refuses to do so, then it is highly unlikely that the EA or the police will become involved.

 

It is also highly unlikely, that any fishing club unless they are very wealthy would undertake a civil action against an offender as a trespasser.

 

As a general rule, there are hardly any "private" fisheries in tidal waters. In reality, fishing clubs that control the fishing in such places have purchased the "access" from ajoining landowners. Therefore, in most cases in tidal waters the Theft Act cannot apply. However, in those exceptional places where a private fishery can be shown to exist, then the provisions of the Act will apply.

 

Confused? You should be. Angling law is very complex and most of it has evolved over many centuries through ancient rights and local interests.

 

At the end of the day, failure to hold/produce a current rod licence is the best hope in these circumstances.