|
Viewing 21 to (45 Total) |
|
Fishychris, no you didn't dream it but I am sure it was further upstream of BAA sections. The following linkhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hereford-worcester-52852106,... outlines the issue. There was a similar event in the Shropshire/Hereford area in 2018 and also 2011, which combined with the intervening winters of floods can make the Teme a pretty precarious habitat.
Posted on July 21, 2021 at 7:42 AM
|
|
I've followed this thread with interest and yet again appreciate Fishy Chris's logic and research to inform the exchanges. I was reminded that recently I seem to recall there were reports of 'teams' electro-fishing stretches of canal (possibly in Berkshire?) and culling - on the bank! - any zander which came up. I can find no more except I think it precipitated a somewhat acrimonious dialogue between CRT and AT as it transpires that the 'teams' were sub contractors undertaking this on behalf of CRT and doing so in an unsatisfactory manner.
I do know that the AT were concerned about these reports and work was undertaken by them to 'resolve' the concerns and address the underlying issue which is the subject of this thread. The attached link is instructive
http://anglingtrust.net/2021/06/23/angling-trust-call-for-a-balance...
As is so often the case there is no joined up thinking in law making and where law in one context
exists (Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 Sch 9 and Section 14b re non native species) the implications for individuals in other contexts (e.g. a BAA angler fishing on BAA waters on catching a zander where BAA's terms to it members requires the safe return of all fish caught) cause just this sort of dilemma.
As we all appreciate there is a difference between compliance with the spirit and letter of the law. To zealously follow the implications of the law on non native species would logically require the systematic culling of all rabbits in the UK (a Norman introduction around 1000 years ago) for which I've yet to find an advocate. There is a difference between introductions and measures to reduce. If (as has proved to be the case with zander populations) the ecosystem can accommodate them with few any detrimental consequences, we should,as the AT argue, adopt a generally relaxed approach which we as anglers generally do.
Posted on July 01, 2021 at 10:05 AM
|
|
KenL. You guys in the Midlands obviously don't know your luck - 5 weeks of warning that a swimmer may come past, although an angling friend based in b'rhm tells me that they are a frequent sight on the Arrow
Here in the 'wildwest' South on the Thames, wildswimmers are more numerous than fishermen, even in the depths of winter and have been for 5 or 6 years. Not only can you not see them coming many have little idea that you and your tackle may be around the next bush or tree and appear to swim 'blind'.The evasive action is down to the angler to forestall unpleasantness and perhaps injury.
I first saw this widespread practice on the outskirts of Oxford about 6 years ago when two 2 young ladies arrived on the opposite bank and stripped down to knickers before 'taking the waters. Needless to say the vision caused something of distraction to those of us fishing a match on the opposite bank.
In my own home waters in rural Oxfordshire they are a regular additional hazard. On the Thames they are added to the paddleboarders, dinghies, inflatable canoes and other powered inflatables, narrowboats and floating (or more accurately in many cases speeding) gin palaces. All craft on Thames should be registered, insured and regulated by the EA. I won't bore you with what actually is the case except to say that I fully expect to have to play dodgems with this lot most of whom have neither knowledge of the law nor take any steps to be compliant on Wednesday 16th and hope that the inevitable incident or fatality can be avoided. I do fear that this is increasingly a vain hope.
Posted on June 13, 2021 at 8:32 AM
|
|
My earlier post referred to EA Enforcement Officers, who i understand as a matter of policy will not usually ask you for a BAA or any other identification permitting you to fish a particular water; merely for a document that confirms your legal right to be using a rod- the rod licence. Coarse fishing on rivers between 15 March and 15 June inclusive is not within the terms of the licence. EA Enforcement Officers will check your EA rod licence and sign and date the back of it to confirm the check. They have no right to investigate whether you have a right in law to fish that particular water as that resides with the fishery owner. Fishery owners who find people poaching their water will have to bring a prosecution themselves unless they can involve the police because other offences (trespass, violent conduct etc) have been committed as part of the incident.
If you were asked to show a BAA ticket and given advice on the swim, my guess is that you were seen by a BAA bailiff, not an EA official. FYI I estimate I have fished on all waters an average of 50-60 times a year over the 10 years; so somewhere in the region of 500-600 occasions and have 1 licence check on a commercial in 2013.
Posted on May 26, 2021 at 6:56 PM
|
|
As a BAA member based (close to) London, I am not surprised to read this. My own club where I am secretary has witnessed increased poaching and out of season fishing on our (and neighbouring) stretches of the upstream Middle Thames over the past 5 years and club members based near London report daily infringements in full public view on a regular basis. You can report it but....
The EA is responsible for policing the rules. For various reasons (including massive staff cuts over the past decade, a lack of urgency and inept management) it is not up to the task. I know, am in regular frustrating dialogue with them! The truth is that covid -19 was the last spanner in the works as far as EA enforcement on the angling front is concerned. A nationally known informed angling specialist representing an official angling body described the Thames in 2020 as the 'wild west'. EA enforcement officers rarely check licences on the Thames (or any coarse river) preferring to concentrate on commercials - it keeps the numbers up and looks good. I have no quarrel with individual EA enforcers who do a difficult job and lack the support they need but we have allowed a systematic reduction in resources to facilitate what is now blatant widespread law breaking. Between March and September 2020 EA enforcement officers checked no licences on the Thames. I am not aware of any related prosecutions of angling offences in that 6 month period. Where there is no evidence of consequence, law breaking becomes endemic.
You may think, 'well that's London and here in the Midlands we are safe from the issue'. Remember where London leads the rest follows. When was your licence last checked and when did you last see an EA enforcement officer?
Posted on May 24, 2021 at 6:33 PM
|
