Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Canoes spoil sport on Tweed.

  1. #1

    Default Canoes spoil sport on Tweed.

    Oh no they don't.

    Despite increased kayaks, canoes and rafts the Tweed in 2011 had it's 2nd best year of salmon catches. So all the ranting about how paddlers scare the fish from the rivers the facts say otherwise.

    http://news.rivertweed.org.uk/blog/_...7/5005988.html

    Terry

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Lincs
    Posts
    737

    Default

    Well well well
    --
    Andy

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    North Devon
    Posts
    2,078

    Default

    So if I read that correctly the anglers were responsible for the killing of 5,338 Salmon in one year. I reckon that's around 5,338 more than were killed by paddlers
    Paul
    Just goin with the flow

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Bristol
    Posts
    706

    Default P,f,l,o,p

    So 2011 was the second best year on record, the best being 2010, maybe we can now be absolved from blame

    for falling catches, that argument always seemed unproven.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Lincs
    Posts
    737

    Default

    These catch and release figures always seem pure plucking numbers out of the air to me. Not everyone will declare how many they have taken (I think you pay to take x number) so may well pocket another one, not everyone will admit that they didn't catch and some people will go on the quiet and no one knows what they caught or released, therefore exact figures would appear meaningless. However the important thing is that catches are up and it appears it is as good now as it has been in most people's living memory.

    As a fisherman myself, anyone can kill a fish or damage a habitat (who hasn't killed a perch because it swallowed a hook? - I've also had the same problem with a trout) and it is generally accepted that fisherman don't damage the environment (beyond what is considered acceptable). Canoes, even if because there are not as many of them as fisherman and because there is no intent at catching / disturbing fish surely cause as little or even less damage.

    The argument has always been about "it's our river and not yours, we pay you don't" - deaths and damage to wildlife / fish are just excuses thrown in to muddy the water and paint the other side as the bad guys. Same with landowners, it's mine not yours.

    Like everything in life it boils down to money, very few land owners would refuse you access if you paid them a big lump of dosh.

    The Norfolk broads is considered a very important area yet the argument for boats damaging the place was forgotten about in favour of "we want your tourism money, bring as many boats as possible". The argument against building 3000 houses becomes a "oh, and you'll build us a new village hall will you and beef up our roads for us?, thank-you, please go ahead and build on the green belt"

    I don't know how much you have to pay to go Salmon fishing on the tweed per day but many course fishing places are between 5 and 20 per day, if we all paid that to put a canoe on every river a lot of the arguments would go....you hear the same arguments about cyclists on the roads because they don't pay road tax...

    Most canoeing money from the official bodies is put into sport, training etc - if a load more money was directly given to landowners with rivers life would be much easier.

    The problem as I see it is that fisherman are an organised bunch who form a club and focus a lot of money (membership and day ticket money) into a small local area. They only need to fish a few miles of river or a lake. Sport canoeists do the same which is why they tend not to be part of the access debate. Recreational canoeists tend to be individuals who want to go all over the place and canoe large stretches since we don't want to paddle the same 2 miles of river every time. We can't form clubs and give our collective money to a local landowner.

    To argue with the fisherman, or debate with them is a wrong tactic. Our aim is more like the ramblers, it isn't about ownership or use of a little bit of river it is about a fundamental right to access the environment.

    To debate each each river one at a time, to debate why this or that spawning ground has deteriorated or improved means arguing thousands of times, once for each situation. Far better to concentrate on the one fundamental issue...access in general to the environment, in this case water and ignore the day to day issues.
    --
    Andy

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by paulsmith View Post
    So if I read that correctly the anglers were responsible for the killing of 5,338 Salmon in one year. I reckon that's around 5,338 more than were killed by paddlers
    Paul
    The put them back mostly these days as true wild salmon are virtually extinct, i've heard.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    greenside just west of newcastle
    Posts
    17

    Default canooing and fishing

    Just another twist to this debate, Iam new to canooing but have fished for salmon and trout for many years on the river Tyne and numerous Scottish rivers. the whole point of trying to catch a salmon or sea trout in a river is to annoy it by passing various flies , spinners etc in front of them to provoke a take as they do not actually feed in the river and are only there for one thing only. that is to make their way upstream to their spawning grounds where they mate then either die from exhaustion or make their way back to sea if they are lucky. Whilst fishing you are guessing that fish in a particular area, but after so many casts and no fish to show for it i would either A . move to another place on the river B. Just carry on hoping fish would move into the pool from downstream orC. hope a canooe would come past and if not disturb a fish in my pool would certainly disturb a samon or two downstream which then has a good chance of coming into my pool and be angry as well . Just what any decent angler wants , so i would dismiss any complaining anglers as to my mind they havnt got a clue what they are doing.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    near Newcastle
    Posts
    2,616

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by Brig View Post
    Just another twist to this debate, I am new to canoeing but have fished for salmon and trout for many years on the river Tyne and numerous Scottish rivers. the whole point of trying to catch a salmon or sea trout in a river is to annoy it by passing various flies , spinners etc. in front of them to provoke a take as they do not actually feed in the river and are only there for one thing only. that is to make their way upstream to their spawning grounds where they mate then either die from exhaustion or make their way back to sea if they are lucky. Whilst fishing you are guessing that fish in a particular area, but after so many casts and no fish to show for it I would either A . move to another place on the river B. Just carry on hoping fish would move into the pool from downstream or C. hope a canoe would come past and if not disturb a fish in my pool would certainly disturb a salmon or two downstream which then has a good chance of coming into my pool and be angry as well . Just what any decent angler wants , so I would dismiss any complaining anglers as to my mind they haven't got a clue what they are doing.



    Well said Brian lad!

    this from a bloke who has fished for anything that swims since we were both mere nippers.

    If only more anglers would be open and honest about the so called "issues" and act like the adults they are supposed to be.

    nice one

    Steve


    Now paddling Either a Gumotex Palava 400 Or a Gumotex Solar Pro 410c and LOVING IT!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    North Devon
    Posts
    2,078

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wavecloud View Post
    The put them back mostly these days as true wild salmon are virtually extinct, i've heard.
    Not according to the report. Anglers caught 16682 fish and returned just 68% so 5338 were killed. Assuming 50% were hen fish that's 5338x8000 (the average number off eggs each fish could have layed) that's 42,704,000 eggs not layed. If they stopped fishing there would be an awful lot more salmon in the rivers. (I'm not anti angling, I've done a lot of game fishing in the past and would do more if it wasn't so flippin expensive).
    Paul.
    Just goin with the flow

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    533

    Default

    Canoed the Tweed in early November 2011. We must have passed about 100 anglers (quietly and keeping out of their swim) of whom two objected to our presence; most of the others gave a friendly greeting and several we chatted with. We didn't mind sharing the river, but I don't suppose many appreciated that trying not to disturb their sport probably added an hour a day to our journey. Two said they had caught fish, while we saw five dead fish lying on the river bed - they may have died from natural causes.

    Chris

  11. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by paulsmith View Post
    Not according to the report. Anglers caught 16682 fish and returned just 68% so 5338 were killed. Assuming 50% were hen fish that's 5338x8000 (the average number off eggs each fish could have layed) that's 42,704,000 eggs not layed. If they stopped fishing there would be an awful lot more salmon in the rivers. (I'm not anti angling, I've done a lot of game fishing in the past and would do more if it wasn't so flippin expensive).
    Paul.
    Ah yes. But.... without salmon anglers you would not have the investment in breeding programs, salmon netsman would buy back the netting rights for the estuaries, and they don't work the 'catch and release' method. Rivers in general would not be as well managed.

    I think the 'let's all play nicely together' policy is far better than raising negative points about anglers.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Downriver from the Bywell bridge over the Tyne
    Posts
    3,323

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Izzetafox View Post
    Ah yes. But.... without salmon anglers you would not have the investment in breeding programs, salmon netsman would buy back the netting rights for the estuaries, and they don't work the 'catch and release' method. Rivers in general would not be as well managed.

    I think the 'let's all play nicely together' policy is far better than raising negative points about anglers.
    Yeppers, quite a few of us do both, fishing and canoeing. Only thing I object to are money grabbing estate fisheries hogging whole parts of rivers, claiming they are "theirs" !

    "Der Hirsch springt hoch,
    Der Hirsch springt weit.
    Es macht ja nichts........
    Er hat ja Zeit"

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    North Devon
    Posts
    2,078

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Izzetafox View Post
    Ah yes. But.... without salmon anglers you would not have the investment in breeding programs, salmon netsman would buy back the netting rights for the estuaries, and they don't work the 'catch and release' method. Rivers in general would not be as well managed.

    I think the 'let's all play nicely together' policy is far better than raising negative points about anglers.
    Totally agree I wasn't having a go at anglers as such (do a bit myself) compared to the numbers that 'don't make it' for other reasons the number of fish that meet their end at the hands of an anglers must be tiny. I was just pointing out that whilst claiming to operate a catch and release policy they are in fact only releasing around one third of fish caught. Brilliant news that numbers are around record levels, and credit should be given to everyone who walks along, swims in, paddles on, and of course fishes in all rivers, as we all love the rivers and we all keep an eye on the general condition of the water and surroundings. Just a shame we don't seem to be able to get on enough to be able to do it at the same time.
    Paul
    Just goin with the flow

  14. #14

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •