no-one in particular
Well-known member
Be nice it was always that easy- Might see a few more on rivers, they would get monitored more and take all that pressure off lake fish, it should be more evenly spread.
Last edited:
Be nice it was always that easy- Might see a few more on rivers, they would get monitored more and take all that pressure off lake fish, it should be more evenly spread.
theartist
Well-known member
Rivers are totally overrated - you'll never get me near one 
sam vimes
Well-known member
In many ways, I rather like it that rivers can be pretty quiet. What I'm not so keen on is anglers slating sections of river, or even entire rivers, when the reality is that some doing the slating simply aren't very good anglers, or at least not good river anglers. You still get busy rivers, or busy sections of river. Unfortunately, busy or quiet can often become self fulfilling prophecies. I can think of two sections of my local river that are much busier than anywhere else. Having fished them both in the past, I'm not convinced that they are any better than anywhere else. Superficially, results do look good, but only because rod hours are massive compared to the quiet spots. It's also notable that both sections have very easy access.
no-one in particular
Well-known member
Didn't the EA do a poll sometime ago or was it the angling trust and questions like how often do you fish rivers/commercials etc in it. Cant recall exactly but were the results ever published?
Found it --- 57.6 still water, 16.2 river. That's a big difference given how many rivers there are.
In the encourage more fishing section, cheaper access comes top and I read day tickets/free on rivers into that, cheaper and access.
http://www.resources.anglingresearc...files/National_Angling_Survey_Report_2012.pdf
Most respondents were coarse anglers and most of those in st
illwaters - 57.6% said that this
was their most common form of angling. The second most
common
first preference
was
coarse river fishing (16.2%) with game stillwater (10
.7%) and game river (8%) following.
However, there are significant numbers of anglers who
also do some sea angling, though
often not their most common practice: 23% (n=6,699) of re
spondents did at least some
shore sea angling for instance, higher total numbers t
han took part in game river fishing
(19.3% n=5,623). The relatively low number of respon
dents who fish in the sea as their first
preference may be due to the fact that the majority of re
sponses were from recipients of an
e-mail from the Environment Agency to Rod Licence holders (i
.e. freshwater anglers).
Found it --- 57.6 still water, 16.2 river. That's a big difference given how many rivers there are.
In the encourage more fishing section, cheaper access comes top and I read day tickets/free on rivers into that, cheaper and access.
http://www.resources.anglingresearc...files/National_Angling_Survey_Report_2012.pdf
Most respondents were coarse anglers and most of those in st
illwaters - 57.6% said that this
was their most common form of angling. The second most
common
first preference
was
coarse river fishing (16.2%) with game stillwater (10
.7%) and game river (8%) following.
However, there are significant numbers of anglers who
also do some sea angling, though
often not their most common practice: 23% (n=6,699) of re
spondents did at least some
shore sea angling for instance, higher total numbers t
han took part in game river fishing
(19.3% n=5,623). The relatively low number of respon
dents who fish in the sea as their first
preference may be due to the fact that the majority of re
sponses were from recipients of an
e-mail from the Environment Agency to Rod Licence holders (i
.e. freshwater anglers).
Last edited:
no-one in particular
Well-known member
Nah - deleted post, too controversial and I fancy a quiet day/life. In fact I might try a bit of fishing later and see if I can avoid drowning myself.
Last edited:
wetthrough
Well-known member
Accessibility is the main one for me. That and a lack of knowledge both fishing and geographical. Of the two rivers (there are more) within easy reach the Weaver is apparently full of Crayfish and the Mersey I would consider too dangerous. The rest I just don't know anything about. By all accounts you need to travel light when fishing rivers. That means taking the minimum and right tackle for the location and I've no easy way of knowing what that is. Yes, I could find out but with a club stillwater I don't have to, there's usually enough info on the club site.
With club stillwaters it's odds on there will be parking within a reasonable distance and more often than not secure and I know the tackle I have with me will get me by.
With club stillwaters it's odds on there will be parking within a reasonable distance and more often than not secure and I know the tackle I have with me will get me by.
I'm not sure where you are in Cheshire, but when I lived within a 30 min drive of Northwich, the Northwich Anglers card, with fishing on the Weaver and the Dane, provided the best and most accessible river fishing I've ever known. Despite having the Trent 5 minutes away, I'd swap back now if I could, as the consistency and year-round variety was so much higher. There are numerous places on both rivers with bankside parking and the Weaver, with the exception of a couple of sections below locks where you approach via steps down, is generally fished from a flat towpath-type bank, a luxury I don't have round here, where picking a peg involves peering down the high bank making a kind of risk assessment. As for tackle and methods, I can't think of a method that won't catch fish there, and the range of swims and species, thanks to the characteristic mix of deep, canalised section and natural flowing stretches, lets you pick the styles you like from groundbait feeder via pole to stick and waggler. A walk around the town stretches or at Vale Royal will soon show you how people fish.
I'm feeling quite nostalgic just writing this! Give them a try - the Weaver and Dane at Northwich are the very opposite of inaccessible and hard to approach. I notice that you can even fish on a day ticket these days - used to be yearly book only.
wetthrough
Well-known member
Altrincham so they're both reasonably accessible. It was only one recent report about the Nantwich section of the Weaver but it is apparently so full of Crayfish it's almost unfishable. The Dane is ~2.5ml stretch. Parking is apparently at the Memorial Hall car park ~600M from the river or at Dane Valley, wherever that is, scant information at all really apart from what fish are in there. I might have a look at the Dane Sunday just to see what's what. With any luck there will be other anglers there to talk to.
Thanks.
Thanks.
Why not, although the Dane, of the two, is the less accessible, with fewer access points and characteristically high banks, once you're out of town, that can be hard to get down - and back up! Nantwich is upper Weaver, where it's a small canal sized meandering river; down around Northwich it's a very different scene. The Dane, too, is more accessible here, with flatter banks and nearby parking options. If you look on Google maps/Google earth, and follow the Weaver from the swing bridge on the A533 in the town centre upstream to Vale Royal locks, you get a sense of the variety it offers, with locks, sluices, boatyards, canalised and natural sections. It's beautiful, too, if you happen to like the combination of water and the architecture of bridges, viaducts, locks etc.
So our rivers are as good as they were say 30 years ago,and because someone says their not might be because they are poor anglers,maybe or maybe not,but if you honestly believe that I wish I was fishing your part of the country...
sam vimes
Well-known member
There's not a single word in my post about rivers being as good as they were, because I don't believe that they are. However, I simply don't believe that many rivers are quite as appallingly bad as some make out. Locally, I see good river anglers still catching, I see quite a few bad river anglers failing miserably and blaming anything but themselves. When the good river anglers start failing as miserably, we'll have a big, big problem. However, we have a problem in that the number of decent river anglers is diminishing year on year. Rivers being rubbish is a self fulfilling prophecy just as much as certain rivers or sections being brilliant is. A similar effect can be seen on some stillwaters too.
The skills are going,but river qualities are much poorer,at least down on my rivers,fish aren't there in numbers and less fish equates to less competition,which means less fish on the hook,I don't about rivers like the Thames,Kennet,Colne etc,as I don't fish them these days,but the Ouse and Ivel are much more difficult,yes fish are there but....
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2009
- Messages
- 9,335
- Reaction score
- 1,692
I keep on hearing anglers round these parts moaning about how much better the rivers fished 30yrs ago....I to fished those same rivers back then and I know they fish better today!
For starters back then there was only a hand full of barbel present in one local river that had only just been sneaked in there.
Some of the local rivers where so polluted there was NO fish life whatsoever!
I do think other species of fish have suffered because of the introduction of barbel. Lets face it, a ten pound barbel is gonn'a eat the food of a small shoal of specimen roach and so somethings gonn'a loose out.....in this case the roach.
No matter how well a river fishes anglers will always look back at years past with rose tinted spec's so fishing was always gonn'a be better back then.
For starters back then there was only a hand full of barbel present in one local river that had only just been sneaked in there.
Some of the local rivers where so polluted there was NO fish life whatsoever!
I do think other species of fish have suffered because of the introduction of barbel. Lets face it, a ten pound barbel is gonn'a eat the food of a small shoal of specimen roach and so somethings gonn'a loose out.....in this case the roach.
No matter how well a river fishes anglers will always look back at years past with rose tinted spec's so fishing was always gonn'a be better back then.
B
binka
Guest
You've hit the nail on the head for me there Ian.
I often think that it's a case that the rivers used to fish better in relation to one's personal preferences eg. the Trent Roach and Chub fishing that was abundant before the Barbel explosion.
I'm guilty of it myself at times and often look back at the days when you could fish a 1.7lb bottom and have most situations covered but that said I fully appreciate the current cycle and I try to make the most of it.
Personally I'm not convinced that rivers in general are fishing better or worse, but more that they are fishing differently and it's those differences which will conflict with some people's ideals.
There will always be exceptions of course, such as the former polluted waterways which now hold reasonable stocks of fish.
O
O.C.F.Disorder
Guest
I think the people moaning about rivers fishing better 30 years ago just put in more work 30 years ago. I do wonder if decades of catch and release has made the fish wise to our shenanigans...?
thecrow
Well-known member
I reckon the fishing on all rivers has changed, its the nature of the beast as far as rivers are concerned, some are better some are worse, one in this area is better others are worse, some stretches of the same rivers are the same all for lots of reasons.
Ian,for those who don't know,what rivers do you fish,I haven't got many who fish the Ouse and Ivel on FM,as I say dace are returning,as are roach in several areas,chub and barbel are present,but in lower numbers than most can remember,making catching quality fish very difficult and I'm afraid 3-4" dace doesn't interest me at all, 'silver's (Alex')fished the Ouse and I think sees the river similarly,when the barbel slowly fade from your venues it leaves a gap which is hard to fill,I hope it doesn't happen to others...
Much as Alan said re. The Great Ouse. I’ve fished the river above Bedford since the early 80s. When I started out a 3pound chub was a big fish .... the average stamp was 1:12 to 2 pounds. By the early nineties those were 3 pounders and from then on the numbers dwindled. There was a huge boom in Tiny dance and roach in the early 90s. You could catch double figures off every peg, but they faded away and by the turn of the century it was feast or famine .... a few pegs with a handful of chub and not much else. Ten years later the dace and roach started to come back.
But although Most venues on the upper river followed a similar trend, they happened at different rates.
As a match angler I don’t Mind catching bits ... as long as there are enough of them!
theartist
Well-known member
The Great Ouse is a good example of river (hopefully) in transition but lets be blunt it's been totally screwed of late. There's no doubting Barbel have declined and a big survey a few years back revealed only small pockets of Barbel remained in areas where they were common, Chub too were rare but even more disappointing was the numbers of the other species. The upper river also had pollution recently in Buckingham. These things are cyclical but I fear there's too many smaller rivers struggling mainly due to their diminishing water levels especially in East Anglia and the South East. Pollution Isn't a thing of the past it's just not as regular but it only needs one hit to screw a river for decades
I'd disagree totally though with the assumption that specimen roach suffer as a result of Barbel numbers as they are often found together in most the rivers I fish
I'd disagree totally though with the assumption that specimen roach suffer as a result of Barbel numbers as they are often found together in most the rivers I fish