• You need to be a registered member of Barbel Fishing World to post on these forums. Some of the forums are hidden from non-members. Please refer to the instructions on the ‘Register’ page for details of how to join the new incarnation of BFW...

BFW poll on close season lift or extension.

Would you like to see the close season remain?

  • Yes, keep it as it is.

    Votes: 101 41.2%

  • No, a complete lift on ban.

    Votes: 79 32.2%

  • No, but a new one put in place with more suited start and end dates. (discuss options)

    Votes: 65 26.5%
  • Total voters
    245
there are times when both anglers and fish need time out ? Maybe not the outdated dates ;)
 
Paul Boyle said:
Im not jumping the gun am i or missing something But for those who voted for an 356 day fishing season do you think fishing while spawning is taking place is wise ?i thought the 3 month break covered mostly all species.

Quite suprised some folk who have posted on here for years now would vote for a 356 day season..perhaps minds have changed over the past few years.

Thoughts please -
Click to expand...

Paul, can I have a pint what of ever it is your drinking.............:D
 
right off the subject i saw a photo of a fully grown otter sunning itself on the towpath of the regents park canal!
 
Seriously though, i think the third option is confusing things, there may be people from both sides ( in different proportions ) choosing this option. A straight forward " keep " or " get rid of " would have given a better indication of how people felt, just my opinion. :)

I did vote for the third option, but if there had been just two, i would have chosen get rid. My reason. If i,m lucky, i get to fish a river for barbel/chub etc, maybe a dozen times a year, the extra 3 months may give me a few more opertunities. Unlike people who live on, or very close to the waters edge, and can fish when they like.

If you,ve got the opertunity to fish every day for 9 months, then yes, you may welcome the 3 month break, just to recharge the batteries or try for other species. Wherehas the likes of my self and others, would appreciate being able to fish as the weather gets warmer, and the fish start to bite. That may sound selfish. But i would " always " put fish welfare first, if i arrived at the river and they were spawning, " i would not fish ".

So i think peoples views, also depends, on how accesible a river is to them.
 
Last edited:
Derek Funcks said:
Seriously though, i think the third option is confusing things, there may be people from both sides ( in different proportions ) choosing this option. A straight forward " keep " or " get rid of " would have given a better indication of how people felt, just my opinion. :)

I did vote for the third option, but if there had been just two, i would have chosen get rid. My reason. If i,m lucky, i get to fish a river for barbel/chub etc, maybe a dozen times a year, the extra 3 months may give me a few more opertunities. Unlike people who live on, or very close to the waters edge, and can fish when they like.

If you,ve got the opertunity to fish every day for 9 months, then yes, you may welcome the 3 month break, just to recharge the batteries or try for other species. Wherehas the likes of my self and others, would appreciate being able to fish as the weather gets warmer, and the fish start to bite. That may sound selfish. But i would " always " put fish welfare first, if i arrived at the river and they were spawning, " i would not fish ".

So i think peoples views, also depends, on how accesible a river is to them.
Click to expand...

You say the third option is confusing yet you ppted for it, are you sure its not you that's confused Derek? :D
 
Nick Anderson said:
You say the third option is confusing yet you ppted for it, are you sure its not you that's confused Derek? :D
Click to expand...

Hi Nick, a couple of days off work, so just finished my second bottle of red vino :D. If there were a choice between a total " keep " ," get rid of " and a " stop fishing while the fish are spawning " option, i would choose the latter. If there was just a choice between the 2, keep, or get rid of, again i would choose the latter, but would not fish if they were spawning. :)
 
For comparison does anybody no what the laws are in European countries like Germany France and Spain? Im sure I remember something like in Germany to fish you have to pass a test first??

Your thoughts/knowledge please gent's.
 
Im think that in Germany you can not return any fish that you catch,and in Italy there could be a total ban on night fishing.
 
Well John that's not helpful really about the french, from videos ive seen the french version of the EA seem to be effective. If only tests were mandatory over here. There would be better anglers on the bank.
 
France has strict laws that are well enforced, no night fishing on public waters in France, if you get caught, you face fines and maybe worse, Germany, you have to take a test.
 
Nick Anderson said:
Well John that's not helpful really about the french, from videos ive seen the french version of the EA seem to be effective. If only tests were mandatory over here. There would be better anglers on the bank.
Click to expand...
Without people to check then a bit pointless.:eek:
 
David Hall said:
France has strict laws that are well enforced, no night fishing on public waters in France, if you get caught, you face fines and maybe worse, Germany, you have to take a test.
Click to expand...



The "guard de Peche " are not to be messed with, BIG fines and confiscation of tackle can / will happen if they catch you doing wrong.

Rather puts the EA and the cash they spend on enforcement to shame.
 
they religously inspect permits in spain and the penalties really sting
in some areas its on the spot,
in germany so i am reliably told there is constant inspections too
 
Bob Roberts has written an interesting piece on this subject for the Angling Trust. It appears on his website and echoes a lot of the anti Closed Season arguments included in this thread .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top