Chris Turnbull
Senior Member
I bet those poor buggers in Misratah wish they had something so trivial to get upset about!
-
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...
The river closed season debate
- Thread starter Lee Poultney
- Start date
Ian Hugo Arnott
Senior Member
I could not have put it better myself........
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHWX2YTolwQ&feature=related
watch until the very end.
And of course......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWKBSYqtu7M
Such fun!
Regards
Hugo
Last edited:
Colin Gordon
No Longer a Member
I'd say no own goal by Craig at all.
If you'd bothered to even attempt too understand the point Craig was making about increased nutritional availability prior to spawning then it may have dawned on you, what Craig was suggesting is a common practice used in agriculture, called flushing and yes it works!
(Google flushing prior to mating and read-on)
So feel free to make a comment on this concept instead of your preferred tact of picking up on one perceived flaw in a post, very clever of you, NOT!!
I think it needs pointing out at this time; most barbel resident in UK rivers are stocked fish or the off spring of stockies..... "Wild fish", well I guess but easily likened to a hill sheep; roams free but if it wasn't for mans needs, just wouldn't be there.
Reading your posts makes me wonder how on earth you can morally justify fishing at all but I guess that's a quandary you've mulled over?
Last edited:
Richard Parsons
Senior Member
There's a lot of twaddle being talked on this thread, particularly in the latter pages. Surely time to put this one to bed, and agree to disagree? It's a pretty fatuous argument anyway, as (as far as I know) there's no move to change the current laws......
Dave Gaskell
Senior Member
Going fishing for Brown Trout tonight, I hope the Barbel and Chub leave me alone
D
Deleted member 36
Guest
Adrian,
I realise the Severn and the other large rivers are different propositions, but if we are to just throw our hands up to everything we disagree with then quite quickly the fabric of our society will fall apart. We should foster a positive attitude to try to protect what we believe in. How do you think various lobbying conservationists would get on if they reacted with negativity to the extent of giving up, on those occasions when they came upon something they disliked intensely?
If passing angling over to your younsters Adrian, what would you like your legacy to be?
I know that I can't protect our lakes and canals from year-round assault, but I will do what I can to protect our rivers!
Regards
Damian
I realise the Severn and the other large rivers are different propositions, but if we are to just throw our hands up to everything we disagree with then quite quickly the fabric of our society will fall apart. We should foster a positive attitude to try to protect what we believe in. How do you think various lobbying conservationists would get on if they reacted with negativity to the extent of giving up, on those occasions when they came upon something they disliked intensely?
If passing angling over to your younsters Adrian, what would you like your legacy to be?
I know that I can't protect our lakes and canals from year-round assault, but I will do what I can to protect our rivers!
Regards
Damian
Adrian Williams
No Longer a Member
A few years ago Damian I would also have been defending the close season but when you take away the dogma and apply a bit of logical thought to it it soon becomes clear that the close season has outlived it's original purpose.
If we can agree that the close season was originally brought in to protect spawning fish at a time when anglers routinely killed everything they landed for the pot, then simply by following the logic that in this day and age people routinely return everything they catch it's clearly obsolete, insomuch as the condition surrounding it's original raison d'etre no longer exists.
Add to that the fact that the only people who are likely to kill their catch today are recent visitors to this country, who come from a culture where there is no close season and it is normal to kill your catch, then all we are doing by continuing with this outdated ruling is making sure that these people can operate without the army of native anglers on the bank to advise them of the British way of doing things.
I suppose what I'm trying to say is that this law which was put in place in a more respectful gentler age to protect stocks of gravid fish from the pot hunters of the day, is in this modern age counter productive, making it easier for the minority of those who are either ignorant of the law, or choose to ignore it, for the lure of a free fish supper.
Having said all that, ironically I have not wet a line since the end of the season while the chairman of an organisation which campaigns for the retention of the close season for fish conservation reasons has been parading his recent catches of gravid perch from a stillwater, far be it from me to point out the hypocrisy of that.
If we can agree that the close season was originally brought in to protect spawning fish at a time when anglers routinely killed everything they landed for the pot, then simply by following the logic that in this day and age people routinely return everything they catch it's clearly obsolete, insomuch as the condition surrounding it's original raison d'etre no longer exists.
Add to that the fact that the only people who are likely to kill their catch today are recent visitors to this country, who come from a culture where there is no close season and it is normal to kill your catch, then all we are doing by continuing with this outdated ruling is making sure that these people can operate without the army of native anglers on the bank to advise them of the British way of doing things.
I suppose what I'm trying to say is that this law which was put in place in a more respectful gentler age to protect stocks of gravid fish from the pot hunters of the day, is in this modern age counter productive, making it easier for the minority of those who are either ignorant of the law, or choose to ignore it, for the lure of a free fish supper.
Having said all that, ironically I have not wet a line since the end of the season while the chairman of an organisation which campaigns for the retention of the close season for fish conservation reasons has been parading his recent catches of gravid perch from a stillwater, far be it from me to point out the hypocrisy of that.
Last edited:
Adrian Williams
No Longer a Member
repeated post deleted.
Last edited:
Colin Gordon
No Longer a Member
Ade, so good a post you felt the need to put it up twice?
"Having said all that, ironically I have not wet a line since the end of the season while the chairman of an organisation which campaigns for the retention of the close season for fish conservation reasons has been parading his recent catches of gravid perch from a stillwater, far be it from me to point out the hypocrisy of that."
Yeah but was said spawn laden perch a "wild fish" in need of a well deserved break, as opposed to what I don't know, any suggestions Damian?
"Having said all that, ironically I have not wet a line since the end of the season while the chairman of an organisation which campaigns for the retention of the close season for fish conservation reasons has been parading his recent catches of gravid perch from a stillwater, far be it from me to point out the hypocrisy of that."
Yeah but was said spawn laden perch a "wild fish" in need of a well deserved break, as opposed to what I don't know, any suggestions Damian?
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 36
Guest
I don't know to whom you refer Adrian, and don't really care for that matter. The supposed hypocrisy of some is not what we're debating here is it?
Does the fact that it is quite probable Adrian that the country's population was half what it is now make any difference?
Does the possibility that there are most likely many thousands more, if not tens of thousands more anglers out there now than there might have been people looking for the pot at the turn of the last century?
Forget the argument of the eastern europeans Adrian, I don't think it does your cause any good. If that is a strong point in your case then you are arguing in favour for the retention of the close based upon it's principle reason for it's conception - 'we should abolish the close season so we can police it', it is a nonsense Adrian. In my years angling and spending time on the banks during the close season, I have never had to ask a foreigner fishing illegally to leave, but I understand wholly that it won't be the case everywhere, besides if it was the case that our rivers were plagued by those from elsewhere looking for the pot then the original concept behind the close season is still valid is it not?
As anglers, particularly on our nation's rivers, the only thing that we can positively bring to the table that benefits the wider community is the health of those rivers and the species which live in and around it. Whichever case you put for the abolition of the close season Adrian you lose that argument.
Does the fact that it is quite probable Adrian that the country's population was half what it is now make any difference?
Does the possibility that there are most likely many thousands more, if not tens of thousands more anglers out there now than there might have been people looking for the pot at the turn of the last century?
Forget the argument of the eastern europeans Adrian, I don't think it does your cause any good. If that is a strong point in your case then you are arguing in favour for the retention of the close based upon it's principle reason for it's conception - 'we should abolish the close season so we can police it', it is a nonsense Adrian. In my years angling and spending time on the banks during the close season, I have never had to ask a foreigner fishing illegally to leave, but I understand wholly that it won't be the case everywhere, besides if it was the case that our rivers were plagued by those from elsewhere looking for the pot then the original concept behind the close season is still valid is it not?
As anglers, particularly on our nation's rivers, the only thing that we can positively bring to the table that benefits the wider community is the health of those rivers and the species which live in and around it. Whichever case you put for the abolition of the close season Adrian you lose that argument.
Paul Boote
No Longer a Member
The Chairman on Black Friday
Such fun? [Calm down, dear...]
No, Hugo, mere age-old, public-school prefect cockiness. Put down our own grannies with similar quips if it will make us a pile of unearned money, or win us a vote or get a guffaw from People Like Us.
Only fun to seriously outdated and out of touch types like Ourselves.
Anyway, back to lobbing handgrenades at the Upper Hamster's last few wild, brown trout (in season and quite within Hamster, Peddle & Yah A.A. and Rivers Trust rules), a lot of quaffing and, of course, a bit of canoodling.
As ever,
B.B.
Last edited:
Adrian Williams
No Longer a Member
Damian,
I know you are not a stupid man so can only assume you were being deliberately obtuse with your last post.
I know you are not a stupid man so can only assume you were being deliberately obtuse with your last post.
Ray Walton
Senior Member
So what about the conservation side of things relating to wildfowl, wildlife, birds, etc. close season breeding and recovery of bankside vegetation that anglers have demolished throughout the year.
It is not and was not all about fish spawning in the close season and is only part of the bigger picture. Let the river environment and its inhabitants recover leaving everything undisturbed.
I also find it hard to believe that many coarse anglers who are ‘pro’ close season still trample the same banks in pursuit of salmon and trout on the same closed coarse venues!
Some, I hate to say deliberately target the very same coarse fish with a fly or other and some wade and trample on coarse fish spawning grounds destroying laid eggs and fry etc.
There is also a contentious issue of close season work parties especially on protected SSSI and non-protected areas. Trees chopped, bankside vegetation cut back to make way for the coming anglers on the 16th June. All this disturbance and continuous damage while everything is trying to recover from the previous year.
Sorry, but in my eyes it does not show angling in a good light to the public, conservation bodies and regulators, although I think most, including the majority of anglers, don’t give a **** or understand the necessity for a successful recovery period for everything related to the river or riverbanks.
It is not and was not all about fish spawning in the close season and is only part of the bigger picture. Let the river environment and its inhabitants recover leaving everything undisturbed.
I also find it hard to believe that many coarse anglers who are ‘pro’ close season still trample the same banks in pursuit of salmon and trout on the same closed coarse venues!
Some, I hate to say deliberately target the very same coarse fish with a fly or other and some wade and trample on coarse fish spawning grounds destroying laid eggs and fry etc.
There is also a contentious issue of close season work parties especially on protected SSSI and non-protected areas. Trees chopped, bankside vegetation cut back to make way for the coming anglers on the 16th June. All this disturbance and continuous damage while everything is trying to recover from the previous year.
Sorry, but in my eyes it does not show angling in a good light to the public, conservation bodies and regulators, although I think most, including the majority of anglers, don’t give a **** or understand the necessity for a successful recovery period for everything related to the river or riverbanks.
Last edited:
Steve Williams
Senior Member
That would be fine Ray, if 'everyone else' was kept off the rivers and banks too, but sadly walkers, boaters, canoeists, fly fishermen etc can all access the river and its banks while we sit at home, obeying an outdated pointless rule.
Steve
Steve
Adrian Williams
No Longer a Member
Hi Ray.
Imo there is far more disturbance life to wildlife caused by dog walkers and boaters than is ever the case from a few anglers. Having been both during my life and seen the distress caused to nesting ducks by a loose dog or when a boat passes between a swan and his/her brood I feel I do have some authority on the subject.
I have also many times been privileged to sit within a few feet of nesting birds on still waters and watched the adults raid my maggots for an easy meal.
My personal take on the conservation side is that the wildlife will soon accustom themselves to bank side disturbance and the more shy creatures will simply retire to the less busy or accessible parts of the river of which there are many miles.
Also no close season would mean no close season work party and essential maintenance, if there is such a thing, could be scheduled for less sensitive times of the year when nature truly is dormant.
Imo there is far more disturbance life to wildlife caused by dog walkers and boaters than is ever the case from a few anglers. Having been both during my life and seen the distress caused to nesting ducks by a loose dog or when a boat passes between a swan and his/her brood I feel I do have some authority on the subject.
I have also many times been privileged to sit within a few feet of nesting birds on still waters and watched the adults raid my maggots for an easy meal.
My personal take on the conservation side is that the wildlife will soon accustom themselves to bank side disturbance and the more shy creatures will simply retire to the less busy or accessible parts of the river of which there are many miles.
Also no close season would mean no close season work party and essential maintenance, if there is such a thing, could be scheduled for less sensitive times of the year when nature truly is dormant.
Hi men,
I agree Ade , we had experts advising us on the lake when closed season fishing was being discussed . It made no difference what so ever , with the people who recorded wildlife looking idiots with their forecasts of doom . In fact the fishing pressure was speed out , and now even those people have to admit they got it wrong. When the carp were spawning in late June the comittee closed fishing , nobody moaned .
It's a bit irelivant really as it ain't going to change, but it's a good discussion, just seeing how many still want the closed season , but fish lakes. I had this the other day where I shamed a two faced angler , who was trying for tench , and then looking forward to wandering round with a fly rod on a trout beat ?.
Hatter
I agree Ade , we had experts advising us on the lake when closed season fishing was being discussed . It made no difference what so ever , with the people who recorded wildlife looking idiots with their forecasts of doom . In fact the fishing pressure was speed out , and now even those people have to admit they got it wrong. When the carp were spawning in late June the comittee closed fishing , nobody moaned .
It's a bit irelivant really as it ain't going to change, but it's a good discussion, just seeing how many still want the closed season , but fish lakes
. I had this the other day where I shamed a two faced angler , who was trying for tench , and then looking forward to wandering round with a fly rod on a trout beat ?.Hatter
Last edited:
Paul Boote
No Longer a Member
1) But gamefishers don't dig in and trash both banks and vegetation as coarsefishers often do.
2) At least the period of recovery on a good many coarse waters, waters that seldom or never see a club's work parties, allows riparian vegetation to re-grow and hide the godawful mess so many leave behind.
We're - have become - a blinkered, self-serving, selfish lot.
Richard Parsons
Senior Member
I would have to say; the anglers who fish my local river do very little damage, in any, to the bank side vegetation or the general environment. I guess there are rivers where that's not the case, though I've yet to see one.
Blinkered, self-serving and selfish? I don't agree that's more true now than it's ever been, and IMO river anglers tend to buck the trend by being conscientious and sensitive to their environment. I use the word 'tend' advisedly..... Also I don't think one can discriminate between coarse and game anglers on this issue.....
Blinkered, self-serving and selfish? I don't agree that's more true now than it's ever been, and IMO river anglers tend to buck the trend by being conscientious and sensitive to their environment. I use the word 'tend' advisedly..... Also I don't think one can discriminate between coarse and game anglers on this issue.....
D
Deleted member 36
Guest
There is no case with the eastern europeans Adrian, nor the canoeists or the dog walkers. You must argue for the principle of the close season if you are to use something other than it's principle for it's abolition, it's a case of simple logic. If you disagree with the principle of the close season you must argue against that principle, not against something unrelated.
Like I said, if you argue that eastern europeans are the issue in taking fish for the pot, you are actually arguing for the close seasons overiding principle, and, therefore must logically look to have it policed, not abolished!
It's akin to having an offence removed from legislation on account of there being too many committing the offence - well, it's not akin is it, it's precisely the same! We don't require the police to remove offences from law do we, we ask them to get out there and catch some criminals!
We pay our taxes to the fund the NHS but we still donate to causes relating to our good health! We still pay our licence fees to fish, yet we still donate to causes relating to the upkeep of our rivers. Here, in this situation, with little alternatives coming to mind, we need to act ourselves to protect our fishing.
Regards
Damian
Like I said, if you argue that eastern europeans are the issue in taking fish for the pot, you are actually arguing for the close seasons overiding principle, and, therefore must logically look to have it policed, not abolished!
It's akin to having an offence removed from legislation on account of there being too many committing the offence - well, it's not akin is it, it's precisely the same! We don't require the police to remove offences from law do we, we ask them to get out there and catch some criminals!
We pay our taxes to the fund the NHS but we still donate to causes relating to our good health! We still pay our licence fees to fish, yet we still donate to causes relating to the upkeep of our rivers. Here, in this situation, with little alternatives coming to mind, we need to act ourselves to protect our fishing.
Regards
Damian
Adrian Williams
No Longer a Member
Ok you win, I give up, life is to short to get dragged into a battle of talking bollock$ with you, for one thing I type too slow and for another you have far more experience.