- Joined
- Feb 26, 2009
- Messages
- 277,087
- Reaction score
- 8
Concern over cattle crossings causing damage to river beds and erosion of banks
- Thread starter FishingMagic
- Start date
thecrow
Well-known member
How can farmers "create" a new crossing? maybe if the EA didn't allow rivers to be abstracted to death the depth of the river would prohibit any "new crossings.
By using a digger to scrape the pebbles and rocks into a berm during low-flow summer conditions - the first time I saw this was on a club water 50 years ago - it appeared 'overnight' on one of my favourite swims! I was furious at the time!
A few weeks later - when the rains started - the re-engineered ford became my new favourite feature - it allowed 'welly-wading' to the far bank - previously inaccessible - and the deeper hole created below the crossing became a really good holding area for chub!
theartist
Well-known member
I am confused by this completely, I must admit to not knowing the rivers in question but do cattle crossings cause silt long term? if anything it's the opposite, they create a wide shallow area of river that's usually clean gravel due to the water being faster and the cows keeping it clean, the shallows in turn are usually good for fry.
I could name a few rivers where the cattle crossing was the best swim in an otherwise sparsely stocked bit of river.
I could also name a few more rivers that could do WITH a cattle crossing.
Like I say confused
I could name a few rivers where the cattle crossing was the best swim in an otherwise sparsely stocked bit of river.
I could also name a few more rivers that could do WITH a cattle crossing.
Like I say confused
no-one in particular
Well-known member
Aren't cattle and machinery crossing rivers just part and parcel of country life and just something a farmer has to do. I don't get it really either. Farmers must hate the angling trust and fish legal. What bothers me is I can still fish a couple of places with the kind farmers permission for free yet, they seem to be forever prosecuting them for something or other-when's it going to be they will all just turn against anglers. How often do the angling trust or fish legal try actually working with farmers to solve these problems? I would rather read that, a big meeting took place where on the agenda was pollution, cattle crossings etc and solutions were found or some beneficial compromise even. You would think all the clubs, angling organizations and farmers would all benefit from a bit of this instead of you do what we want or we will sue you. But then no one makes any money; right, is this what it is really about, AT-fish legal paydays; do they really want to solve these problems. Just never feels quite right to me but then I am a simple soul I suppose.
Last edited:
thecrow
Well-known member
It was said on here during the paddler thread that riparian owners own the river bed so isn't it up to them what they do to it in order to improve their farm? We cant have it both ways can we?
sam vimes
Well-known member
Even if their heart is in the right place, I'm not convinced that this is a fight that the Angling Trust should be involved in. Scrapping with your landlords (for those that rent fishing rights) or with those that can obstruct access (for those that buy fishing rights) doesn't seem particularly sensible to me. Strikes me as a job for an overarching department with responsibility for the environment, an Environment Agency, if you will.
thecrow
Well-known member
This bothers me more than any farmer making a cattle crossing its from the Angling Trust site.
The Angling Trust is seeking help to challenge recent proposals by the Environment Agency which could severely damage the ability of angling clubs and others to improve the habitat of their local rivers for fish.
The Agency has published a consultation which proposes increases to the charges for permits to carry out habitat improvement work such as angling clubs and rivers trusts have been doing for years.
For example, a permit to place woody debris into the river channel currently costs £50 but would increase to £764 - more than the work would actually cost to carry out. Similar massive increases are proposed for permits for fish passes and off-channel fry refuges.
The Angling Trust has lodged a formal objection to the scale of the proposed increases but it would be most helpful if as many people as possible replied individually to the consultation, which closes on January 26th.
Lots of work carried out by clubs and river trusts could stop because of the greed of the grasping EA.
The Angling Trust is seeking help to challenge recent proposals by the Environment Agency which could severely damage the ability of angling clubs and others to improve the habitat of their local rivers for fish.
The Agency has published a consultation which proposes increases to the charges for permits to carry out habitat improvement work such as angling clubs and rivers trusts have been doing for years.
For example, a permit to place woody debris into the river channel currently costs £50 but would increase to £764 - more than the work would actually cost to carry out. Similar massive increases are proposed for permits for fish passes and off-channel fry refuges.
The Angling Trust has lodged a formal objection to the scale of the proposed increases but it would be most helpful if as many people as possible replied individually to the consultation, which closes on January 26th.
Lots of work carried out by clubs and river trusts could stop because of the greed of the grasping EA.
B
binka
Guest
Cattle drinks are a favourite spot for me, I would imagine crossings would be good just after they crossed, especially if a few of them have a shyt on the way across river
I first noticed that as a kid when we used to trot the old river at Kelham, when the cows came down to drink they would invariably have a few dumps which seemed to sit especially well with the roach.