Coarse closed season to remain

[steve2]

Now let's bring back a closed season on all waters especially on those commercial ponds where the fish get hammered day after day.

 

[Ray Roberts]

For me it's not solely about breeding fish. Water birds and other wildlife are also breeding, plus the banks need a break too. The close season also helps the banks recover, and allows work to be carried out while we're not fishing.

Personally, I think the rise of the commercial day ticket waters is taking us down a path, and not a good one, but that's another discussion.

The banks on my fisheries don’t need time for recovery. Just before the start of the season the landowner at the clubs request chop back the grass right up to the fence separating the river bank to the field the bank is then strimmed back. Surely this creates more disturbance than lightly trod grass that would indicate the swims if there wasn’t a close season.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jeff Woodhouse]

Key words int the EA statement "The responders were invited to provide evidence to support their view". There lies the rub.
The EA, typical Civil Service people, tried to make the 'consultation' (in quotes because they didn't really want to know) all far too complicated and too long as they do many other 'consultations' they run. They know what's best and you don't, is their maxim.

It was never going to change, even if the vote had been a landslide in favour of scrapping the CS.
The EA simply don't have the money, staff or resources to administer the complexities of a change.

I agree with the first paragraph wholeheartedly, but the second - they really don't need the staff or resources, just scrap it. We'll do all the rest, eyes on the bank. The real reason is, they DO NOT LIKE CHANGE! Or worse still, being overruled.

Back in June I had a report or Romanians (Oh yes they were!) fishing the river in Oxford out of season. I phoned our local Enforcement Officer who had been there in the early morning and was in Swindon. He managed to get back in time and nabbed them in flagrante delicto and now they will go to Court, but just how many get away with it because WE are not there to keep an eye on the rivers?

 

[Jeff Woodhouse]

A classic example or corrupting opinion polls. Not that the EA needs this, they just ignore your views anyway.

 

[nottskev]

The banks on my fisheries don’t need time for recovery.

Exactly. Two months and more into the season and the majority of swims on rivers I fish are so overgrown as to be inaccessible. Indeed, many former swims are lost through lack of people making space amongst or through bushes, trees and vegetation. That's how it is now - and the number of anglers won't be increasing as the year goes on! There may well be areas of the country where too much angling footfall damages banks - but the situation is the opposite in many others, and it goes to show that a blanket close-season and no local discretion leads to anomalies.

 

[theartist]

When everyone mentions their fisheries as an example do they have a portfolio of waters representative of the whole of Britains rivers? - I think not somehow.

I know plenty of waters where there could be no harm in fishing for breeding fish whereas others where it could be a total disaster, I think the EA have to look at the whole picture and not just whats in someones backyard

Notice the word 'could' None of us know for sure maybe it's best if they do scientific studies and a consultation with anglers across the nation before making a decision? Oh hold on mg:

 

[nottskev]

When everyone mentions their fisheries as an example do they have a portfolio of waters representative of the whole of Britains rivers? - I think not somehow.

I know plenty of waters where there could be no harm in fishing for breeding fish whereas others where it could be a total disaster, I think the EA have to look at the whole picture and not just whats in someones backyard

Notice the word 'could' None of us know for sure maybe it's best if they do scientific studies and a consultation with anglers across the nation before making a decision? Oh hold on mg:

Recognising the differences between places is exactly why my post mentioned "local discretion". Looking at the whole picture need not lead to a one-size-fits-all policy.

 

[theartist]

Recognising the differences between places is exactly why my post mentioned "local discretion". Looking at the whole picture need not lead to a one-size-fits-all policy.

Last thing angling needs is more different byelaws around the country therefore it has to be a one size fits all policy surely?, hence the simplified yes/no/move consultation

 

[nottskev]

I believe a "consultation" on road safety is set to impose a 30mph limit everywhere - on the basis that it's needed in some places and the alternatives are too complicated to administer.

Why "surely"? There are stillwaters near me that continue to apply a close-season. It doesn't seem to be a problem; everybody knows which places are open and which not, and the general idea - devolving decisions to the owners - beats mushroom-management from the centre.

We none of us, anglers or authorities, know quite what impact abolition would have, and we don't know what use the current close season serves, as we don't have evidence, rather a jumble of beliefs and opinions to support our different views, where we play scissors, rock, paper with totally different kinds of point: he says let the banks grow back; I say keep an angler presence on the bank all year etc etc.

It's a pity we don't show the courage to undertake an experiment in lifting the close season, with he option to re-instate it in the light of evidence that we should have one. Keeping the law without the evidence just maintains an irrational situation.

 

[theartist]

Why surely? Well there would be boundary issues for starters, where would the close season apply and where would it stop

You've countered that with "Everyone knows which places are open or not" How do you know that? I couldn't tell you what waters are open all year round here, with the club waters it's easy but the day ticket and free venues, nah no chance. Given the geographical spread of rivers and their many riparian ownerships this would be chaos unleashed.

Any decision also has to be permanent how would a temporary trial work? How would reinstating a close season work? It would take a decade before any negative impact on rivers would be felt so would it be a long term trial?

Anglers on banks? What do they do again, stop cormorants? stop poachers? The latter benefit from well trodden easy access and seem pretty unperturbed by our presence

The fact that your post Kev has left so many questions would imply that it has to be one size fits all and permanent, or left as it is, just for simplicity if nothing else

If it ain't broke...

 

[theartist]

Back in June I had a report or Romanians (Oh yes they were!) fishing the river in Oxford out of season. I phoned our local Enforcement Officer who had been there in the early morning and was in Swindon. He managed to get back in time and nabbed them in flagrante delicto and now they will go to Court, but just how many get away with it because WE are not there to keep an eye on the rivers?

This is a great example of how the close season helps. These people would not be breaking any law if there was no CS after you can't report someone because they are Romanian. There's many non anglers who report anglers coarse fishing rivers in May and June :thumbs:

 

[rayner]

I agree with steve2 commercial fisheries should have a closed season.
Not to give the fish a few months off, sod the fish. I need a sodding rest, hauling fish week in week out is tiring me out. Even feeding my swim is a pain.

 

[nottskev]

Why surely? Well there would be boundary issues for starters, where would the close season apply and where would it stop

You've countered that with "Everyone knows which places are open or not" How do you know that? I couldn't tell you what waters are open all year round here, with the club waters it's easy but the day ticket and free venues, nah no chance. Given the geographical spread of rivers and their many riparian ownerships this would be chaos unleashed.

Any decision also has to be permanent how would a temporary trial work? How would reinstating a close season work? It would take a decade before any negative impact on rivers would be felt so would it be a long term trial?

Anglers on banks? What do they do again, stop cormorants? stop poachers? The latter benefit from well trodden easy access and seem pretty unperturbed by our presence

The fact that your post Kev has left so many questions would imply that it has to be one size fits all and permanent, or left as it is, just for simplicity if nothing else

If it ain't broke...

Scissors paper rock...... same old points exchanged. We can leave the EU, enable Sunday trading, de-regulate vast swathes of the economy....... but the close season is writ in stone, the fixed centre of the ever-changing world.

I'm not a fundamentalist on the issue - I think we need evidence to move past the ritual arguments between people who have made their minds up.

I think the key point is we don't know and should be interested to find out. Anybody can raise a long list of questions, and claim any reform or trial is impossible to administer; equally, there are lots of questions to be asked about laws that were established in the foggy past and for which even the current authorities cannot adduce a sufficient rationale. We'll just have to agree to differ.

 

[theartist]

We'll just have to agree to differ.

Absolutely, I'd actually go with the change if it was the other way round always kept an open mind, not saying i'd like it, but lots of things are set in stone for good reason and change doesn't always work.

Hugging a hoodie worked for knifecrime though

 

[sam vimes]

The idea of the closed season being set in stone, or based on any kind of scientific evidence is laughable. It exists because a bunch of matchmen realized that killing fish at an approximate time of breeding might just have an impact on their future sport. That was absolutely fair enough at the time. However, the dates for this closed season were always a fudge and the routine killing of netfuls of fish, at least by those with any genuine fishing interests, went out with the arc. The fudged dates have been fudged and fudged again since the original fudge.

History of the coarse fish close season | Canal & River Trust

The reality is that the coarse closed season would need to last from February through to August to genuinely cover the nationwide spawning periods of all coarse fish. The rivers would also need to be shut into autumn/winter to cover the salmonids.

 

[theartist]

The reality is that the coarse closed season would need to last from February through to August to genuinely cover the nationwide spawning periods of all coarse fish. The rivers would also need to be shut into autumn/winter to cover the salmonids.

Face it the only fish everyone seems to care about on rivers is barbel, they may not admit it but look at barbel threads, look at the two rod anglers 'carbelling' for them. Has anyone mentioned the breeding times for Dace and Pike in any close season abolishment arguments? Even the EA are fixated with barbel due to our fixation with them, that's the reality and species breeding outside the Cs that are bye the bye, or they may as well be in the eyes of many.

I like barbel but cant get my head round how anyone would want to fish for them whilst they are breeding, or advocate others doing so. They take the high ground that they would leave them alone and their club would enforce a blanket ban at that time of year. Hmm really? Look at the self imposed barbel ban last year due to the low water levels? I was roach fishing and the banks were empty until I packed up just before dark, yet every time come nightfall they all came out ironically to fish for barbel when the oxygen levels are lowest thinking no one will know they are there, selfish barstewards! Part of me has that shadenfruede element hoping the CS would go just so that all the summer anglers who fish for them would restore those rivers back to the chub and roach fishing by their own inadvertant making, but then you think they would just blame it on the otters and go back to fishing commercials

 

[108831]

I have my opinion on the close season,but one thing I do believe,all anglers that believe in it,should not fish on still waters,as a matter of conviction,I know Peter doesn't and admire his strength on the subject,others,well,they just say one thing and do another,because it's allowed,if the closure were to be changed,would they then fish unworried???

 

[barbelboi]

I like barbel but cant get my head round how anyone would want to fish for them whilst they are breeding,

I can.....................

 

[108831]

How many fish get caught when actually spawning,can't see them stopping having sexual relations to start eating,I've thrown bait at them,barbel included,the EA had a poll,then ruled against opinion,that's fine,but why have it at all....

 

[Keith M]

Last thing angling needs is more different byelaws around the country therefore it has to be a one size fits all policy surely?, hence the simplified yes/no/move consultation

Not if it was up to the land owners and clubs to decide whether a closed season is needed on their own waters.

I am in favour of having a closed season on rivers especially where it can interfere with spawning and the other wild life in and around the water but I also know of quite a few stretches of deeper river that are constantly being disturbed by boaters and picknickers and walkers and runners and bikers etc. etc. and in these sort of places a closed season is often a quite futile exercise as far as the wildlife and bankside vegetation is concerned plus spawning gravel and weed beds are either non existent or in side streams or in off stream weedbeds (that’s if they did exist at all).

Keith