The Angling Trust and the Rivers Close Season is it time for some answers?

Titus

Banned
Banned
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
2,225
Reaction score
3
Second time you’ve said this so let unpick it eh? Across many European countries there are close seasons based on individual species, where you are not allowed to fish for them during a given point.

Half the UK doesn’t have a close season. NI doesn’t have indigenous stocks of dace, chub, barbel and grayling. The salmon/seatrout seasons are enforcing stringently there.

Scotland doesn’t have a close season on the above either, true, but you be hard pressed to find a river up their where they allow you coarse fish during the Salmon Season as salmon/seatrout fishing on its rivers are dominant.

You are clearly unaware and/or are choosing not to acknowledge it that on all AONB, RAMSAR, SSSIs, SBIs, land owned by Government Agency, Local Authority, County Council, Parish Council, Conservation Area designated under Planning Law, Royal Arboriculture Society, Arboricultural Association (Code of Practice) the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, the European Habitats Directive 1992/Nesting Birds Directive there is a General moratorium on work being carried out between the 1 March to 1 September for this very reason.
Where work can’t be avoided, an emergency, there has to be a pre-work survey carried out by a suitably competent person. E.g. Ecologist, Ornithologist, Bird Biologist.
Therefore any club or landowner carrying out such work during this period could well be falling foul of any or all of the above.

Any Work Party Organiser worth his/her salt should know all this and adhere to all of it. And if they don’t they fully need to avail themselves of it to avoid dropping themselves and the club in the courts.

Outdated as much as you think the CS is, the Conservation Laws of the UK are not! Any club landowner who disregards them, does so at their own peril.

So Titus would you like to tell us all the clubs who are not compliant with the laws please?

The reason I repeated myself is because Ray clearly did not see it the first time round.

You could start with the biggest club in the land, PAAS, very keen on the chainsaw are that lot. I have also been on plenty of barbel society work parties where tree mangling is carried out, on one of them someone thought it would be a good idea to use a big log tied to a bit of rope and thrown into the crook of a limb on a crack willow, the idea being that the combined weight of several people hanging on the rope would snap the limb and remove the obstruction. Thal little adventure resulted in the Secratary at the time being airlifted to hospital so dont try preaching to me about the great and the good and what should and should not be done, just because you have no idea who I am does not mean I have not been around a bit.

As well as those two examples every club I have ever been a member of holds work parties between April an the end of May and to the best of my knowledge none of them have ever sought permission from anyone.


You said "NI doesn’t have indigenous stocks of dace, chub, barbel and grayling" which is true but they do have plenty of bream, roach, tench, rudd, pike and (god help us) carp, which all seem to do fine in the absence of a close season.
With regard to Scotland you started in with some anecdotal opinions about where you can and cannot fish during the salmon season. As soon as you start talking about the salmon and trout seasons I swich off as that is irelevant to this discussion which only concerns the coarse season. However, seeing as you have brought salmon and sea trout into the discussion it is worth mentioning that they alone of all the game which is hunted are the only ones who are specifically targeted as they head for the spawning grounds which makes the conservation argument a bit difficult to defend.

The continent does have a few close seasons for certain fish species but they tend to be centred around the ones they traditionally eat and not the chub/ide/orfe type and certainly not barbel.

I have also yet to see any of the retentionists answer my main objection for it's retention which is the undeniable fact that due to changes in angling practice in this country i.e the universal adoption of catch and release (even among our game fishing brothers who are fishing for wild fish) the conditions which prompted it's adoption no longer exist.


The thing which really surprises me about this is the energy which you, as an educated man who clearly cares deeply about the environment, are willing to put in trying to protect something which probably makes very little difference to the welfare of the rivers as a whole when your obvious knowledge, passion and talent for rhetoric could be better utilised fighting something which really does cause a problem such as over abstraction, creeping urbanisation, building on floodplains, red signal crayfish, myton crabs pollution from road runoff untreated effluent, polluted groundwater or any number of other menaces to the rivers and the future of our sport.


Dinner last night was spectacular thank you Ray.

If the fish in our rivers were pursued relentlessly I would probably be standing with you but the fact is for a large portion of the coarse season as it stands it is not possible to get near many of the rivers and even of you did you would be wasting your time,
Comparing the coarse fishing season with any other field sports season is also a bit like comparing apples with pears as the glaringly obvious difference is we do not kill our quarry but return them alive which is not the case with other sports.
 
Last edited:

The bad one

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 8, 2008
Messages
6,131
Reaction score
2,136
Location
Manchester
The reason I repeated myself is because Ray clearly did not see it the first time round.

You could start with the biggest club in the land, PAAS, very keen on the chainsaw are that lot. I have also been on plenty of barbel society work parties where tree mangling is carried out, on one of them someone thought it would be a good idea to use a big log tied to a bit of rope and thrown into the crook of a limb on a crack willow, the idea being that the combined weight of several people hanging on the rope would snap the limb and remove the obstruction. Thal little adventure resulted in the Secratary at the time being airlifted to hospital so dont try preaching to me about the great and the good and what should and should not be done, just because you have no idea who I am does not mean I have not been around a bit.

As well as those two examples every club I have ever been a member of holds work parties between April an the end of May and to the best of my knowledge none of them have ever sought permission from anyone.


You said "NI doesn’t have indigenous stocks of dace, chub, barbel and grayling" which is true but they do have plenty of bream, roach, tench, rudd, pike and (god help us) carp, which all seem to do fine in the absence of a close season.
With regard to Scotland you started in with some anecdotal opinions about where you can and cannot fish during the salmon season. As soon as you start talking about the salmon and trout seasons I swich off as that is irelevant to this discussion which only concerns the coarse season. However, seeing as you have brought salmon and sea trout into the discussion it is worth mentioning that they alone of all the game which is hunted are the only ones who are specifically targeted as they head for the spawning grounds which makes the conservation argument a bit difficult to defend.

The continent does have a few close seasons for certain fish species but they tend to be centred around the ones they traditionally eat and not the chub/ide/orfe type and certainly not barbel.

I have also yet to see any of the retentionists answer my main objection for it's retention which is the undeniable fact that due to changes in angling practice in this country i.e the universal adoption of catch and release (even among our game fishing brothers who are fishing for wild fish) the conditions which prompted it's adoption no longer exist.


The thing which really surprises me about this is the energy which you, as an educated man who clearly cares deeply about the environment, are willing to put in trying to protect something which probably makes very little difference to the welfare of the rivers as a whole when your obvious knowledge, passion and talent for rhetoric could be better utilised fighting something which really does cause a problem such as over abstraction, creeping urbanisation, building on floodplains, red signal crayfish, myton crabs pollution from road runoff untreated effluent, polluted groundwater or any number of other menaces to the rivers and the future of our sport.


Dinner last night was spectacular thank you Ray.

If the fish in our rivers were pursued relentlessly I would probably be standing with you but the fact is for a large portion of the coarse season as it stands it is not possible to get near many of the rivers and even of you did you would be wasting your time,
Comparing the coarse fishing season with any other field sports season is also a bit like comparing apples with pears as the glaringly obvious difference is we do not kill our quarry but return them alive which is not the case with other sports.
Very easy to snipe at the biggest club in the land from the keyboards, but its that big for various reasons - The landowners have trust in the club to manage it’s members as they would like. Trust that they’ll manage their waters correctly and within the law. They feel it’s well run and has a good reputation amongst fellow landowners who lease to them. To list just 3 of the many reasons.

Nothing wrong with using chainsaws in the right place, at the right time, with the appropriate qualifications, training and owners consent (leased waters) to carryout the work in a safe manner, all of which PAAS users do and have. Just so there’s no misunderstanding here from your comment above.
Unless of course you are hinting that’s not the case?

And may be, if the injury you write about above, had had a qualified, trained chainsaw person and saw present, along with the right equipment for safe working, the injury could have been avoided.

All of the above…. I’ve been on X number of work parties, doesn’t negate the fact that those are the laws that govern work around the nesting season. And ignorance of them is no excuse as far as the law’s concerned if it’s reported to them.
I’ve supervised and been on at least a 100 WPs for several clubs where the work is done during the winter period Only! I’ve also been the surveyor and “suitably competent person” on at least 20 emergency WPs who does the assessment and paper trail so that the clubs are law compliant.

As to NI as I think you know, the species they have, have different spawning requirements and habitat for it to the species I referenced. All their species spawn in and on weed or vegetation. So the Herring you are waving there is rather red!

The angling pressure is also far less - Sport NI states there are 30,000 game, coarse and sea anglers in the province. 40% of which are reported as coarse anglers. As to visiting anglers, its miniscule, in 2012 458 coarse licenses were sold to them. Therefore, even accounting for an under estimation of 50% that’s still less than 1000. In how many 100s of miles of rivers? I’ll bet that rivers like Wye, Severn, Trent, Ribble see almost that amount each per year visiting them. So the fish you talk about in NI aren’t in reality under much pressure at all!

As to close seasons on the Continent it is not as clear-cut as you state, Holland for instance has a closed season for Dace, Chub, Barbel, Ide and others 1st of April to May 31st. Estonia similar and on regional basis. Russia spanning two continents a fish species close season, Hungary again similar. Denmark no close season for coarse fish.

As to your point about S & ST of all the angling sections the Game Anglers more than most have recognised the need to conserve the fish they fish for and have agreed grudgingly in some instances to reduced season take limits over the last 10-15 years. The Ribble catchment is now down to 2 fish a season that can be taken legally and has a catch and release of 89% Lune, Eden 4 fish limit and a C&R of 80%. Oh and that club you had a go at, has a club bag limit of 2 fish per season irrespective of what region or river you’re fishing in. And to police it you have to place a club issued tag (2 of per season) on a retained fish. Caught with a fish with no tag and your feet won’t touch on the way out of the club. Whilst you may think the conservation argument is poor because they target fish heading for the spawning grounds, the above figures show game anglers are putting their house in order and taking the conservation of the species they fish for very seriously indeed. The S&TRA also recommends to it members a 100% C&R.

As to my passion, rhetoric, etc being put into protecting rivers. And as you don’t know me personally, you haven’t a clue what I do in this respect. Which is hilarious really to me, given the many consultation submissions, meetings, public inquires, etc, etc, etc, I’ve attended down the years and continue to do in this regard.
 

Judas Priest

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 8, 2008
Messages
1,292
Reaction score
2
A few points in relation to your post TBO.

Firstly you cannot get over the FACT that salmon anglers ARE targeting fish on their way to their spawning grounds and even if retaining JUST 2 they are keeping 2 more than any coarse angler I know.

Secondly, PAAS do net and move fish during the coarse Close season, the very time you say anglers can cause most damage.

thirdly. You can count on one hand how many rivers in this country you could call pressured from angling and even then only certain sections.

Fourthly. Until you control other water users eg canoeists who paddle through shallow areas during the period mentioned, boaters ploughing up and down, walkers trampling the flora etc etc the conservation bit doesn't add up.

What adds up about this is anglers self flaggilating about an archaic outdated unscientific law.
 

Titus

Banned
Banned
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
2,225
Reaction score
3
TBO, I was a member of PAAS for a few years, so I know what goes on and don't need a lecture.
The point I was making about the injury was that even an organisation which purports to be the voice of all barbel anglers cuts corners during it's spring work parties.

You can change the subject and pontificate about what you have and have not done as much as you wish but you have still not answered the question, why do we still need a law which was brought in to prevent coarse fish being banged on the head by match anglers while they are carrying spawn when that practice is not a part of modern angling?

Until you answer that question in a straightforward manner without deviation I'm done discussing it with you.

So far as I'm concerned the close season law has as much relevance to modern angling as the law preventing cabbies from feeding their horse openly in the street had to modern cab drivers.
 

The bad one

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 8, 2008
Messages
6,131
Reaction score
2,136
Location
Manchester
A few points in relation to your post TBO.

Firstly you cannot get over the FACT that salmon anglers ARE targeting fish on their way to their spawning grounds and even if retaining JUST 2 they are keeping 2 more than any coarse angler I know.

Secondly, PAAS do net and move fish during the coarse Close season, the very time you say anglers can cause most damage.

thirdly. You can count on one hand how many rivers in this country you could call pressured from angling and even then only certain sections.

Fourthly. Until you control other water users eg canoeists who paddle through shallow areas during the period mentioned, boaters ploughing up and down, walkers trampling the flora etc etc the conservation bit doesn't add up.

What adds up about this is anglers self flaggilating about an archaic outdated unscientific law.
Oh I get that about salmon fishing and don't kid yourself I don't. Salmon fish and most game anglers did in the past fish for the pot but to a greater extent that's changed in recent years with a move to C&R. Ergo the figures I quoted. The move to a conservation of the species and sustainable take rates is to be applauded in my view. Like it or not salmon fishing is legal and legitimate to target them when running the river.
Guess you don’t know many pike anglers then that load up their freezers with coarse deads during the summer months then eh?

This statement “Secondly, PAAS do net and move fish during the coarse Close season, the very time you say anglers can cause most damage.” IS A BLATANT LIE and probably libellous as well against the club. Which for them would be easy to prove, as they’d have all the Section 30s records, which are dated, from where they came and went.
So I challenge you to substantiate it by stating where and when (date please) you witness any PAAS fisheries team carrying out this in the CS. Or withdraw it!

Answered you third point in a pervious post and what would happen as it does on Stillwater now.

Agree to most of your forth point

---------- Post added at 01:56 ---------- Previous post was at 01:43 ----------

TBO, I was a member of PAAS for a few years, so I know what goes on and don't need a lecture.
The point I was making about the injury was that even an organisation which purports to be the voice of all barbel anglers cuts corners during it's spring work parties.

You can change the subject and pontificate about what you have and have not done as much as you wish but you have still not answered the question, why do we still need a law which was brought in to prevent coarse fish being banged on the head by match anglers while they are carrying spawn when that practice is not a part of modern angling?

Until you answer that question in a straightforward manner without deviation I'm done discussing it with you.

So far as I'm concerned the close season law has as much relevance to modern angling as the law preventing cabbies from feeding their horse openly in the street had to modern cab drivers.
No you don't know what goes on in PAAS or else you wouldn't have made the snide comment and I'd have not had to explain to you all of the above.

I haven't change the subject I've answered the points you've made and there's no pontification on my part. You made a statement I'd be better engaged (Para Phrase) fighting for better rivers. Clearly not knowing what I do and have done over the last 25+ years. Simple statement of facts that!

I've answered above in other posts why I believe the CS should stay. Might want to look back at them to see why eh!
 
Last edited:

Judas Priest

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 8, 2008
Messages
1,292
Reaction score
2
TBO

Firstly let me clarify that I have the utmost respect for PAAS and if I had more time on my hands I would re join tomorrow, it's probably the best Society in the country for anglers and angling.
Up until a few years ago I was a member for many years and spent a lot of Close seasons working on the netting team so I do know what I am talking about in relation to movements of fish from stock ponds and stillwaters.

You cannot get away from the undisputable fact, no matter how creditable latter attempts at conservation are and it being legal to do so, that salmon anglers target fish on their spawning routes. Wether they ONLY keep 2 is irrelevant, it's the targeting of those fish that is the point, legal or not. You cannot say it's ok and applaud one section of angling for doing so whilst condemning another section.
 

Titus

Banned
Banned
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
2,225
Reaction score
3
I've answered above in other posts why I believe the CS should stay. Might want to look back at them to see why eh!

The question I am asking and you are avoiding is,

"Why do we still need a law which was brought in to prevent coarse fish being banged on the head by match anglers while they are carrying spawn when that practice is not a part of modern angling?".
 

caelan

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 29, 2015
Messages
399
Reaction score
0
Location
hatfield herts
leave it CLOSED never fished in closed season never will
old school maybe but so be it martin/caelan
 

The bad one

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 8, 2008
Messages
6,131
Reaction score
2,136
Location
Manchester
TBO

Firstly let me clarify that I have the utmost respect for PAAS and if I had more time on my hands I would re join tomorrow, it's probably the best Society in the country for anglers and angling.
Up until a few years ago I was a member for many years and spent a lot of Close seasons working on the netting team so I do know what I am talking about in relation to movements of fish from stock ponds and stillwaters.

You cannot get away from the undisputable fact, no matter how creditable latter attempts at conservation are and it being legal to do so, that salmon anglers target fish on their spawning routes. Wether they ONLY keep 2 is irrelevant, it's the targeting of those fish that is the point, legal or not. You cannot say it's ok and applaud one section of angling for doing so whilst condemning another section.
You may well have the utmost respect for PAAS, not sure the club would take the same view after the blatant lie you’ve made against them, then going on to compound it in your next post. So if you were as you claim a member of the netting team that carried out nettings in the close season some time in the past, you’ll have no objection to saying when, approx years you claim it happened, identifying your real name, pm if you must, and who was the Fisheries Officer at the time. Initials will do on here, as I’ve work with every FO over the last 25 years, so I’ll know who you are referring to.
From this I can check back through S30s to see whether there’s any validity to your claim, which at this moment looks very unlikely.

Salmon and ST are anadromous fish, ergo they enter freshwater to spawn at some point in their lifecycle and they can have two runs Spring and Autumn. Springers can be in the river for 7 months before they head for the upland spawning redds. Thankfully in most regions any fish caught before the 16th June must be returned alive to the river.
So the argument you’re exposé is a moral one, which is in my view a dangerous one when it comes to angling.
The case could well be made within coarse angling about targeting several species as they gather near their spawning grounds (Stillwater particularly) pre the physical act of spawning, Titus’s generic term for it. Pike and Perch this time of year, Bream, Roach, Rudd late May, Tench in June. And heaven forbid Carp around the same time. Then Dace, Grayling last 2 weeks of the season most seasons and if it’s been a very mild winter and a warmer than average last month of it, chub, as they would have started to gather near their spawning grounds.
Nop the moral argument gets kinda quite messy when examined in detail!

Titus I’ve said above why I think the CS is still relevant today on rivers. And based on that I will always insist on the EA following the precautionary principle. You may not like that but tough!
 

Ray Wood 1

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 2, 2009
Messages
384
Reaction score
0
Location
East London
Hi All,
I'm not quite sure how a topic I started trying to gain both answers and information from the Angling Trust has drifted so far off topic? I asked where the At was in relation to talks it is having with the EA or what if any proposals it was putting to the EA and was it time for some answers.

An EA statement was placed on the AT website but not on FM where the debate started, it was then copied and placed here.

The statement doesn't tell us much other than talks will continue over the next two months. The AT say they have no particular options to place before the EA. It will therefore be interesting to see how they represent the interests of each side of the argument. It would be reasonable to presume that out of it's 1200 individual members that there will be those both for the retention of the CS and those against.

It is also reasonable that the majority of anglers who are not members of the AT will have differing views, how will the AT represent those differing views fairly?

The topic now seems to be about two members arguing the toss about fish movements S30's and what ever else they choose to throw into the melting pot. Talk of what happens on work parties with chain saws, accidents happening a result. An organisation that purports to represent all barbel anglers cutting corners during the CS. I have no idea what that organisation does and could not care less that's for it's members to worry about.

They may also want to worry that their interest in keeping the CS may not be fully represented due the head of that organisation being among those wanting change. Hard to see how both personal interests and membership interests can be represented when a different outcome is the aim?

For me this topic has served it's purpose, answers were gained although no real conclusions can be drawn from them? Personally I have no more to add to things now. So I leave it to the moderators to either close or let this topic run.

Kind regards,

Ray
 
B

binka

Guest
The statement doesn't tell us much other than talks will continue over the next two months. The AT say they have no particular options to place before the EA. It will therefore be interesting to see how they represent the interests of each side of the argument. It would be reasonable to presume that out of it's 1200 individual members that there will be those both for the retention of the CS and those against.

Did you mean 12000 Ray? :)
 

Judas Priest

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 8, 2008
Messages
1,292
Reaction score
2
TBO

If, as you claim you are privy to all sect 30's for the PAAS over the last twenty five years, then I would suggest you check the dates on them for I can categorically state that I worked on netting teams at Rossmere, stock ponds at Davenport, the Isle and many others. I will not correspond with you via pm or e mail as I have absolutely nothing to say that I cannot place on here.
Wether the PAAS think I'm a nice chap or not is also irrelevant to my holding them in high regard for the way they are run and conduct themselves and I have nothing but fond memories of fishing their waters, helping improve matters during the work parties and netting team, and of the vast majority of members I came into contact with.

Back on topic.
At no time have I said I would fish should the Close season be abolished as that is my choice, more that I find it strange how some of its greatest supporters are quite happy to target landlocked waters during that same period for the fish they contain knowing full well that those fish stand a very good chance of carrying spawn.

The Close season needs looking at there is no doubt on that, and wether that is different dates or total abolishment is debatable.
It needs looking at as can be seen by how few anglers in the bigger picture of coarse angling actually fish rivers these days when it's in flood for a few months just before it then shuts down for three months. It's a basic choice of economics for the EA, do they keep pumping money into river systems that fewer and fewer anglers are fishing or do they channel effort and monies into stillwaters that are open all year so generating income.
 

black kettle

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2014
Messages
143
Reaction score
0
Whilst I cannot speak on any of the fisheries arguments concerning PAAS, simply because I've never been a member, I can absolutely confirm that I have carried out, and been involved in, fisheries work and netting parties "during" the close season in the past when all fisheries were covered by a close season prior to the close season on stillwaters and canals being abolished.

Some of you might know that the GAA (Grantham Angling Association) have their own stock ponds where they buy in fish under license to grow on for later use in restocking programes on their own waters. The club also own a comprehensive set of netting equipment so much so that local EA fisheries officers often borrow it. As one might imagine, the GAA enjoys a very good relationship with EA fisheries.

Salmon are targeted and caught whilst making the long journey to their spawning grounds in the same way they have been for hundreds of years all around the world. For many years Atlantic salmon numbers continued to fall to a point where many rivers failed to have any salmon running up them at all. Now, through the determined efforts of the S&TA, EA, and many more organisations and trusts all working together salmon are returning to our rivers once again. Cleaner rivers undoubtedly proved highly beneficial but so did C&R and the amazing work that many of the salmon trusts undertook when releasing juvenile salmon into the upper reaches. This is a conservation success story and a branch of our sport still enshrined with a close season.

The whole point of any close season is its put in place to protect and preserve wild creatures. It doesn't matter if its fish, birds or animals. Every wild creature that is hunted by man deserves a close season so that man does not pursue wild creatures relentlessly. Once we endorse relentless pursuit, we can no longer claim to be sportsman. No amount of scientific research, surveys, or anglers claims that abolition of close seasons does fish and wild creatures no harm, holds not one iota of sway among the none angling public or the millions of people in membership within wildlife and conservation organisations right around the world.

If this issue is won by majority votes alone, the anti close season view is already in the minority within its own sport already. The AT's own survey of 2012 says that. In a much wider context of public opinion I feel that the anti close season lobby will find itself massively outnumbered.

Regards,

BK.
 
Top