• 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...

Petition for the abolition of the closed season on rivers

That won't help any clubs that are struggling at the moment, the strong will get stronger and the weak weaker.
 
Joe Winstanley said:
I would like to think that the survey has been sufficiently well designed to be able to filter out the angling preferences of those completing it - e.g. a simple question asking the person completing the survey if they regularly coarse fish on rivers? Perhaps those who been sent forms could advise ?
Click to expand...
I filled it in , it was well designed containing no inherent bias and asked about your fishing preferences / habits
 
Nick Coulthurst said:
If the closed season is abolished, some people might have to speak to some other people, and an agreement might have to be reached, rents may have to be renegotiated. Really, what's the problem. If clubs can't afford the new rents, they don't have to extend the season, they can keep it as it is, or another club with members willing to pay will take it on. Simples.
Click to expand...
Not sure the whole debate hinges entirely on rental costs though Nick
 
No Alex it doesn't, but I posted that in response to those suggesting renegotiating rental agreements was an insurmountable task. It's not. As for some clubs possibly having to give up some leases, thus enabling other clubs to take them on, I think such occurrences will be rare, but in any case should not be feared. Some waters are leased by very poorly run clubs and would undoubtedly benefit from being run by another club. There is no science to suggest fishing in the CS is detrimental to fish stocks. If there was, it wouldn't have been abolished on still waters. That argument is dead in the water. As for disturbing the banks, don't make me laugh. The only rivers with any number of anglers on them are barbel rivers, and they are dwindling in number as I type. On the other rivers, dog walkers, canoeists, doggers and mermaids, all outnumber anglers, and they aren't subject to a closed season. The argument that anglers on the banks reduce predation and poaching, as well as increase the speed in which pollution incidents get reported, does actually stand up to scrutiny.
 
Nick Coulthurst said:
There is no science to suggest fishing in the CS is detrimental to fish stocks. If there was, it wouldn't have been abolished on still waters. That argument is dead in the water.
Click to expand...

Why didn't they abolish close season on rivers then? Does anybody actually know? You can't compare the two, different environments with different species. Last I heard the science was inconclusive, that's not a result, positive or negative.
 
The EA have next to no resources to enforce the close season on rivers and it will be abolished.
It’s as simple as that, like it or lump it.
 
Rhys, nothing that isn’t already common knowledge! The EA fisheries team are no longer regionally based and are national. Yes, that means a man who might live in Norfolk attending a poaching event in Devon, for example!

If you can’t enforce something that doesn’t really matter, why worry? Put your resource into something that does.

And I’m a rose tinted glasses angler wanting to keep the close season......
 
Hi men,

Funny you mention someone from Norfolk. I reported a poaching incident in Bedfordshire to the EA who passed me to a officer in Norfolk! , who then passed it back to someone nearer the area by which time it was too late . I have reported problems twice now to the EA , its a waste of time .

Hatter
 
I agree with Julian, they don't have the resources to enforce it, there's no science to support it, and an angler survey gives some validity. They don't need to do a survey anyway, many have been done before, most recently by the Angling Times I think, and the result is always the same, anglers want it abolished. The EA survey is a box ticking exercise imo, preceding abolition.
 
I think us anglers need too be careful what we wish for, the close season is there for a reason and we need to respectfully abide by it. I like too view it as a cleansing process for the rivers, most of the popular stretches for example on the Severn and Warks Avon get hammered at the best of times during high season, this would be huge own GOAL in my opinion, I can’t understand it’s even being considered.
 
Anthony Smart said:
I think us anglers need too be careful what we wish for, the close season is there for a reason and we need to respectfully abide by it. I like too view it as a cleansing process for the rivers, most of the popular stretches for example on the Severn and Warks Avon get hammered at the best of times during high season, this would be huge own GOAL in my opinion, I can’t understand it’s even being considered.
Click to expand...

I don't really know where your coming from with that post and what is the reason as you understand it for the close season? Also you seem to be apologising for anglers being on the bank fishing, I think that is a definite own goal for angling.
 
Careful what we wish for Anthony ? What like rivers in terminal decline with ever decreasing numbers of barbel. At least abolishing the closed season will cut down the amount of predator activity and poaching. As for protecting spawning beds, I'm all in favour of clubs controlling that, at least they have some resources to manage it.
 
Clubs could close certain stretches if they wanted that contained spawning grounds for say a month when they spawn.

When I use to do a lot of carp fishing I'd be ringing Baliffs up to ask if they were spawning and stay at home if they were, I've turned up to lakes before and gone home once I'd seen them spawning, in my experience fish don't feed much if at all when in the mood so it's a waste of time.

I think the close season should be abolished, wasn't it only brought in to keep commoners off the rivers so the gentry had the rivers to themselves for the salmon and trout.
 
Anthony Smart said:
I think us anglers need too be careful what we wish for, the close season is there for a reason and we need to respectfully abide by it. I like too view it as a cleansing process for the rivers, most of the popular stretches for example on the Severn and Warks Avon get hammered at the best of times during high season, this would be huge own GOAL in my opinion, I can’t understand it’s even being considered.
Click to expand...
The 'popular' stretches of those rivers are about to get an almighty hammering,because of the close season. The law abiding amongst us being on an enforced 'cold turkey' are most probably chomping at the bit. A mass bombardment just after spawning is not good either is it?

The close season is ok,looking at it through some John Lennon,hippy, rose tinted glasses,but that's it. Life nowadays is unfortunately very different. All resources should be ploughed into helping the fish that are left in the rivers reproduce,that's most important. The predation issue,well I think it's best kept ' in house'. After all there are plenty of people with guns,as it's plainly obvious the powers that be don't give a s***
 
Darren Scott said:
....wasn't it only brought in to keep commoners off the rivers so the gentry had the rivers to themselves for the salmon and trout.
Click to expand...

Kind of, been reading this interesting piece from the canal and rivers trust site. Reading between the lines it was brought in to protect spawning, but at a time when fish were readily taken, but there's also a section that mentions salmon and trout. All seems a bit inconclusive to me.

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/enjo...story/history-of-the-coarse-fish-close-season
 
It has always struck me as a rather blunt and lazy attempt to deliver some benefit to the rivers and as such, lacks any kind of dynamism. Weather patterns and rivers are different meaning in reality that if you accept that keeping anglers off the rivers during spawning is vital to fish welfare/recruitment, then you need a more sophisticated approach if that objective is to be achieved. Surely that can only be achieved if you pass responsibility to controlling clubs and societies. Many have working parties that operate during the close season and as such could observe spawning activity and make a local judgement about whether or not to impose a short fishing ban. Not perfect but it’s far from perfect now.

Ideally, and ignoring the politics etc. I would be happy to pay an additional amount on top of the annual rod licence fee if it went into a ring fenced fund that was used to support local clubs and societies with this aspect of fishery management- providing resources and support. In return clubs could contribute spawning and predation data into a national database accesssable by all.
 
Some good ideas Howard but I wouldn't trust some clubs to implement such sophistication. One from the Birmingham area springs to mind, "Oh great! We can have river matches 12 months of the year now!"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top