Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 61 to 120 of 173

Thread: Dangerous barrier erected by Dee Valley Fishing Syndicate

  1. #61

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robbo11 View Post
    Why haven't more barriers been erected over rivers without a PRN?
    Could be because all rivers have a PRN...

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Bucks
    Posts
    6,631

    Default

    Could it be because there is a law which specifically prohibits it.

  3. #63

    Default

    Tin hat on.

    Can anyone tell me how many active paddlers there are in the UK? The reason I ask is to ascertain the potential income to the Environment Agency if all paddlers had to purchase a 27 annual licence.

    I suggest that if paddlers had a licence this would deem them to have a right of access on the same level as anglers as well as a reasonable expectation of maintained access points and portages where needed.

    Anglers have to contribute in excess of 20million annually (http://www.statista.com/statistics/5...land-wales-uk/) most do it reasonably happily although there has always seemed to be a disproportionate amount of the income on supporting salmon fisheries.

  4. #64
    Crow's Avatar
    Crow is offline こんにちは。私はカラスと私はスコットラ ンドの出身で す。
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Third stone from the sun
    Posts
    15,708
    Journal Entries
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by N1mr0d View Post
    Tin hat on.

    Can anyone tell me how many active paddlers there are in the UK? The reason I ask is to ascertain the potential income to the Environment Agency if all paddlers had to purchase a 27 annual licence..
    I think you should be asking how many people actively paddle in England or Wales.

    This is not a UK-wide problem. There is already free access to water in Scotland.

    "Your everlasting summer, you can see it fading fast. So you grab a piece of something that you think is gonna last."

    Crow Trip Log

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    The rainy side of the Lakes.
    Posts
    825

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by N1mr0d View Post
    Tin hat on.

    Can anyone tell me how many active paddlers there are in the UK? The reason I ask is to ascertain the potential income to the Environment Agency if all paddlers had to purchase a 27 annual licence.

    I suggest that if paddlers had a licence this would deem them to have a right of access on the same level as anglers as well as a reasonable expectation of maintained access points and portages where needed.

    Anglers have to contribute in excess of 20million annually (http://www.statista.com/statistics/5...land-wales-uk/) most do it reasonably happily although there has always seemed to be a disproportionate amount of the income on supporting salmon fisheries.
    As far as I'm aware, the law doesn't allow the highest bidder to set man traps and dictate the rights of others.

    Maybe it's time to get back under your bridge.
    Cheers, Michael.


    Brute Force and Ignorance is Vastly Underrated.

    "There is magic in the feel of a paddle and the movement of a canoe, a magic compounded of distance, adventure, solitude, and peace."
    -Sigurd Olson

  6. #66
    Crow's Avatar
    Crow is offline こんにちは。私はカラスと私はスコットラ ンドの出身で す。
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Third stone from the sun
    Posts
    15,708
    Journal Entries
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Cumbrian. View Post
    As far as I'm aware, the law doesn't allow the highest bidder to set man traps and dictate the rights of others.
    But I thought all that was in this government's manifesto and will be on the way soon??


    "Your everlasting summer, you can see it fading fast. So you grab a piece of something that you think is gonna last."

    Crow Trip Log

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Bucks
    Posts
    6,631

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by N1mr0d View Post
    Tin hat on.

    Can anyone tell me how many active paddlers there are in the UK? The reason I ask is to ascertain the potential income to the Environment Agency if all paddlers had to purchase a 27 annual licence.

    I suggest that if paddlers had a licence this would deem them to have a right of access on the same level as anglers as well as a reasonable expectation of maintained access points and portages where needed.

    Anglers have to contribute in excess of 20million annually (http://www.statista.com/statistics/5...land-wales-uk/) most do it reasonably happily although there has always seemed to be a disproportionate amount of the income on supporting salmon fisheries.
    Sorry Tim but you will have to put up with the long rehearsed answers to your questions. No I don't know how many active paddlers there are. I would be in the region of 100,000. They do not need a licence. The EA do not control many of the rivers so would be unable to grant licences for them. The money gathered in from angling licences is less than the money the EA spends on fisheries so the tax payer is subsidising their sport.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Posts
    1,584

    Default

    If a licence was introduce on the same basis as for the anglers I think it would be acceptable, but they would need to dedicate all the money raised to the benefit of paddlers. The link below and the statement from the EA clearly show that all the current fees are spent on angling so we should feel no guilt about not paying into the present system and it would be wrong to ask us do so.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/e...licence-images

    Sarah Chare, head of fisheries at the Environment Agency, said:
    All the money raised from rod licence sales is used to protect and improve fish stocks and fisheries benefiting anglers.
    "Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men"
    Grp Cpt Sir Douglas Bader CBE,DSO,DFC,FRAeS.

  9. #69

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adrian Cooper View Post
    Could it be because there is a law which specifically prohibits it.
    Diceys 2nd postulate; what law please and who enforces it?

  10. #70

    Default

    I think this has already been mentioned higher up the thread:

    Quote Originally Posted by KeithD View Post
    ...contrary to the evidence of public navigation rights, provocatively dangerous and in contravention of the 1984 Occupiers Liability Act ...

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Southport, really in Lancashire, UK
    Posts
    1,846

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robbo11 View Post
    It wouldn't stop me if I was allowed to paddle there and as someone has already said, it is soon remedied with some croppers. It does raise an interesting question though. Why haven't more barriers been erected over rivers without a PRN? If this person really wanted to keep people off, why didn't he just drop a couple of trees across the river? The riparian owner is responsible for removing timber from the river now, so no one else would remove them if some trees were felled.
    I'm sure they've already done that. The felling, that is!

    Doug
    When there's trouble on shore, there's peace on the wave,
    Afloat in the White Canoe.
    Alan Sullivan


  12. #72
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Southport, really in Lancashire, UK
    Posts
    1,846

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by N1mr0d View Post
    Tin hat on.

    Can anyone tell me how many active paddlers there are in the UK? The reason I ask is to ascertain the potential income to the Environment Agency if all paddlers had to purchase a 27 annual licence.

    I suggest that if paddlers had a licence this would deem them to have a right of access on the same level as anglers as well as a reasonable expectation of maintained access points and portages where needed.

    Anglers have to contribute in excess of 20million annually (http://www.statista.com/statistics/5...land-wales-uk/) most do it reasonably happily although there has always seemed to be a disproportionate amount of the income on supporting salmon fisheries.
    The EA licence is for fishing and as a canoeist that gave up fishing long, long ago. I never learned to outwit a fish, .

    The EA spends substantial funds (the licence revenue does not cover this) assisting anglers with fish stocking and access to river banks, etc. The Riparians and Fisheries are their to extract more money from anglers and express that they provide exclusive access, .

    Bye for now.

    Doug
    When there's trouble on shore, there's peace on the wave,
    Afloat in the White Canoe.
    Alan Sullivan


  13. #73
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Stone , Staffs
    Posts
    1,792

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by N1mr0d View Post
    Tin hat on.

    Can anyone tell me how many active paddlers there are in the UK? The reason I ask is to ascertain the potential income to the Environment Agency if all paddlers had to purchase a 27 annual licence.

    I suggest that if paddlers had a licence this would deem them to have a right of access on the same level as anglers as well as a reasonable expectation of maintained access points and portages where needed.


    I would happily pay a license of 27 a year if the money was used to improve access to the river parking put ins and gets outs ...


    I'm just back from Slovenia and they have a permit system you pay for to access the River Soca and in return you get way marked access points and get outs toilets and changing shelters ... You only access at these points and have to be off the river by 6pm it works a treat should imagine local land owners are paid for access routes and parking areas set aside ...They have a balif who checks you have a permit at random locations and if you haven't it's a on the spot fine simple ...
    The Soca is a very popular heavily used river with commercial rafting and recreational paddlers that travel from all over Europe and is a big part of the local community paddlers are made very welcome ... Much like the Dee lots of tourist boater plus commercial rafting companies I would pay for a Dee valley permit or North Wales would this keep everyone happy I don't think so ...

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Posts
    1,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robbo11 View Post
    Diceys 2nd postulate; what law please and who enforces it?
    It is quite clear from the Government advice on Riparian ownership that the river should be kept clear, to intentionally block a river with a tree would at the least land the culprit with a big bill for the EA to remove it. So in practice it would be the EA who would enforce it by giving notice for the obstruction to be cleared or pay them to clear it.

    https://www.gov.uk/guidance/river-ma...and-landowners
    "Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men"
    Grp Cpt Sir Douglas Bader CBE,DSO,DFC,FRAeS.

  15. #75
    Crow's Avatar
    Crow is offline こんにちは。私はカラスと私はスコットラ ンドの出身で す。
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Third stone from the sun
    Posts
    15,708
    Journal Entries
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pipster3 View Post
    I would happily pay a license of 27 a year if the money was used to improve access to the river parking put ins and gets outs ...


    I'm just back from Slovenia and they have a permit system you pay for to access the River Soca and in return you get way marked access points and get outs toilets and changing shelters ... You only access at these points and have to be off the river by 6pm it works a treat should imagine local land owners are paid for access routes and parking areas set aside ...They have a balif who checks you have a permit at random locations and if you haven't it's a on the spot fine simple ...
    The Soca is a very popular heavily used river with commercial rafting and recreational paddlers that travel from all over Europe and is a big part of the local community paddlers are made very welcome ... Much like the Dee lots of tourist boater plus commercial rafting companies I would pay for a Dee valley permit or North Wales would this keep everyone happy I don't think so ...
    I prefer a free access system like we have up here. Much simpler for all.

    "Your everlasting summer, you can see it fading fast. So you grab a piece of something that you think is gonna last."

    Crow Trip Log

  16. #76

    Default

    I suggest that if paddlers had a licence this would deem them to have a right of access on the same level as anglers as well as a reasonable expectation of maintained access points and portages where needed.
    Why would we need a licence to use a Public Right of Navigation? No licence is needed to walk along a footpath or ride a bridleway.

    I would be happy to pay towards access across private land to reach the water, and for portaging around natural obstacles, except that I fear the principle would become blurred and we'd end up paying for navigation itself. Portage around artificial obstructions such as weirs is a bit more dubious; arguably, those who own the obstructions should make provision for passage around them.

  17. #77
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Hebrides
    Posts
    3,180

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by N1mr0d View Post
    I suggest that if paddlers had a licence this would deem them to have a right of access on the same level as anglers as well as a reasonable expectation of maintained access points and portages where needed.
    Having a rod licence only grants the right to fish and does not give any rights of access to water which requires permission of the riparian owner and may involve additional cost.

    Is that the level of access you want?

  18. #78

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cloudman View Post
    It is quite clear from the Government advice on Riparian ownership that the river should be kept clear, to intentionally block a river with a tree would at the least land the culprit with a big bill for the EA to remove it. So in practice it would be the EA who would enforce it by giving notice for the obstruction to be cleared or pay them to clear it.

    https://www.gov.uk/guidance/river-ma...and-landowners
    Thank you. The EA would only remove timber from main rivers if it caused property to be threatened during periods of flood. If not, its all large woody debris to them. Interesting subject.

  19. #79
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    North Devon
    Posts
    2,042

    Default

    A while back there was a huge strainer by a bridge on our local river, which had built up over a period of time, until the point where it was very difficult/impossible to pass. I reported this to our local EA and they gave me a reference number. After a few days they contacted me and said they'd had a look, and as it wasn't a flooding threat to property or roads it wouldn't be moved by themselves and it would have to be the landowner who would have to move it. They were also unable to find who owned the land and there was a question as to whose responsibility it was, ie the owner of the bridge (an old railway bridge, now with a footpath) or the adjacent fields. I've always found the EA are very helpful, and are happy to spend time explaining the situation from their point of view, they are however restrained by manpower and budget cuts, and said that in the past these 'non' threatening blockages would have been removed as a matter of course, and they would put this one on the to do list, but not as a priority. Several weeks went by and the blockage remained in place. The river isn't paddled a lot, but in the summer months local kids on sunny days have been known to float down it in inner tubes, toy dinghies old beat up kayaks etc. I contacted the EA again, and suggested that as I had a reference number for the case, and therefore had proof that it had been previously reported and nothing had been done, if there was a fatality the responsibility could be seen to fall on the EA, as they were the authority ultimately responsible for clearing the rivers. They should have either cleared it themselves, or they should have found the owner and ordered them to do it. A couple of weeks later it was gone. I never found out who actually did the clearing, but it would appear that in addition to it causing flood risk 'large woody debris' and presumably any other object which could threaten a persons safety will be removed if the responsibility for not moving it can be pinned onto a specific person or authority.
    Paul
    Just goin with the flow

  20. #80
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Posts
    1,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robbo11 View Post
    Thank you. The EA would only remove timber from main rivers if it caused property to be threatened during periods of flood. If not, its all large woody debris to them. Interesting subject.
    Normally the EA are sympathetic to most land owners as they realise that it can be a huge financial burden to remove trees from a river that many farmers can not afford. I was referring to a situation where the land owner had deliberately blocked the river, in those circumstances I doubt if they would have any sympathy and given enough pressure from ourselves I think they would take action.
    "Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men"
    Grp Cpt Sir Douglas Bader CBE,DSO,DFC,FRAeS.

  21. #81
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Posts
    1,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by paulsmith View Post
    I've always found the EA are very helpful, and are happy to spend time explaining the situation from their point of view, they are however restrained by manpower and budget cuts, and said that in the past these 'non' threatening blockages would have been removed as a matter of course, and they would put this one on the to do list, but not as a priority.
    Paul
    The task they have is huge and as with all things these days budgets are being cut to the bone. The C&RT put some interesting info on their site to give an idea of the task they face. In the year 2013/14 they had to remove 2000 trees and they cut 10,500 miles of grass, the decision to create the C&RT to look after the canals has proved a great success as the canals look better now than they have done for decades. The way they are encouraging people to get involved with looking after them and use them more is the way forward, maybe we need a similar system for the rivers.

    https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/enjoy...at/enforcement
    "Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men"
    Grp Cpt Sir Douglas Bader CBE,DSO,DFC,FRAeS.

  22. #82

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adrian Cooper View Post
    The money gathered in from angling licences is less than the money the EA spends on fisheries so the tax payer is subsidising their sport.
    The tax payer is not subsidising their sport at all. The EA have primary responsibilities to improve, protect and develop all inland waterways. The EA obtain all the income from the sale of rod licences. A benefit of their work is that fish exist in our rivers. Some of these are caught be anglers.

  23. #83

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cloudman View Post
    The C&RT put some interesting info on their site to give an idea of the task they face. In the year 2013/14 they had to remove 2000 trees and they cut 10,500 miles of grass, the decision to create the C&RT to look after the canals has proved a great success as the canals look better now than they have done for decades. The way they are encouraging people to get involved with looking after them and use them more is the way forward, maybe we need a similar system for the rivers.
    The country is awash with rivers trusts.

  24. #84
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Posts
    1,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robbo11 View Post
    The country is awash with rivers trusts.
    The difference between the C&RT and most of the others is that the C&RT is inclusive, they encourage all users to get involved with their waterways. The others are primarily set up and run by anglers for their benefit only and as we all know they do not support paddle sports. I was suggesting genuine River Trusts open to all river users.
    "Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men"
    Grp Cpt Sir Douglas Bader CBE,DSO,DFC,FRAeS.

  25. #85
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Berrow, Worcestershire
    Posts
    576

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dougoutcanoe View Post
    The Dee Valley Fishing Syndicate namely Gary and Dave have erected a barrier across the River Dee below Serpent's Tail. The barrier was intended to cause harm or death.

    If you are wondering who Gary and Dave are?


    Gary Fletcher Owner of Dee Valley Fishing Syndicates : 07845496795

    Dave is the director of White Waters Country Hotel, Llangollen.

    It's worth repeating the names of these two spiteful individuals and the name of the White Waters Country Hotel Llangollen. While not exactly Tripadvisor, Laterooms or Trivago, search engines might find some key words, here, allowing visitors to the area to make an informed decision on the sort of 'hospitality' that awaits them.
    Last edited by Duck Feet; 24th-August-2016 at 04:18 PM.
    I'm at that difficult age... somewhere between birth and death.

  26. #86
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Posts
    1,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Duck Feet View Post
    It's worth repeating the names of these two spiteful individuals and the name of the White Waters Country Hotel Llangollen. While not exactly Tripadvisor, Laterooms or Trivago, search engines might find some key words, here, allowing visitors to the area to make an informed decision on the sort of 'hospitality' that awaits them.
    I agree, I made the point at #20 & #28 that if they were to erect the barrier again we should target the White Waters Hotel via social media, this is their soft underbelly.

    What is the latest news on the problem ?
    "Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men"
    Grp Cpt Sir Douglas Bader CBE,DSO,DFC,FRAeS.

  27. #87

    Default

    So when are we all going to book into the hotel for a weekends paddling then?

  28. #88
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    We've all been here before…...

    At least part of the problem is the VAA's which were agreed on behalf of anglers and paddlers, even though the majority of anglers and paddlers didn't/don't want them.

    Of course putting wire/rope across a river is stupid, but it shows how high feelings are still running. Even if PRN's are agreed in Wales there are a large body of anglers who will be unhappy. What we need for harmony on the banks is understanding and agreement from both groups. Not "we have the law on our side" or "no - we have the law on our side".


    I'd like to clear a couple of points up.
    Salmon fishers take precedence over trout fishers on our waters too. It's an etiquette thing as much as anything, although I freely admit that salmon fishers pay more (34.00 a year - fish as often as you like) than trout fishers (18.00 a year - fish as often as you like). Our fishing is cheap because our club is for the people of Builth. To join you must live within 5 miles of St Marys Church in the centre of Builth. Many of the angling clubs in Wales are the same, so in a lot of cases the fishing isn't as elitist as you may imagine.

    Having done both I know that fishing for coarse fish in 4 foot of muddy water is very different to stalking a rising wild trout in clear water. A narrowboat chugging along a 4-foot deep canal will often encourage fish to feed by stirring up the bottom (in fact I caught my best zander by casting directly into the wake of a passing narrowboat on the Ashby canal). Not so with trout. A canoe or kayak will put down a wild trout without a doubt. Salmon too, in many cases. I know there is some stupid EA quote somewhere which says that canoes don't frighten fish - in some cases it just isn't true.
    My kayak certainly puts down basking pike in Llangorse lake in the Spring. Of course it makes the paddlers argument stronger by clinging to the mistaken belief that paddling doesn't affect the fishing. Whether some actually believe it or not is a different matter.

    Antagonising groups of anglers (is two a group?), or a hotel owner is just stupid - imo. Calling anglers "fishy-folk" is stupid - imo.
    Granted, the Dee is not my fight, but the situation between paddlers and anglers in Wales is.
    Last edited by davidh; 29th-November-2016 at 08:14 PM.

  29. #89
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Southport, really in Lancashire, UK
    Posts
    1,846

    Default

    For me "fishy folk" is the group name covering riparian owners, fisheries, ghillies, bailiffs and anglers and is not stupid.

    Of course I have had a lot worse from the "fishy folk" who believe they have exclusive rights to the rivers.

    Too often, I have been told, "I own this river", "It is illegal to canoe this river", "I have called the police to meet you at the next bridge", "The Angling Association will take you to court for trespass". These and other threats are not conducive to good relations. When you add the threats of violence from some anglers it only lowers opinions of their status.

    I consider the Dangerous Barrier to be in the same category as threats of violence.

    I am sure that canoeists do not enter into threats although some fighter may do.

    Of course legal protests are permitted in the UK, at least for now.

    Share and share alike. I do not want to go back to the total exclusions tried on so many rivers. Or the one Sunday every other week, or having to write for "permission" or any other far too restrictive impositions.

    Doug
    When there's trouble on shore, there's peace on the wave,
    Afloat in the White Canoe.
    Alan Sullivan


  30. #90
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    I was careful to add imo (in my opinion) when I said that the name-calling was stupid. You see it differently.
    It's an insult though, as you are fully aware.
    I don't think it is helpful at all.

    I'm not saying there is anything wrong with peaceful protest, just that coming from both sides, as I do, I don't see how it can do anything other than give a few participants a jolly, and inflame an already-inflamed situation.

  31. #91

    Default

    Can I just invite both sides to come over 'ere - the paddlers can paddle to their heart's content, with no-one yelling at them etc (coz there won't be anybody else there), and the fishers can fish as much as they want (and eat what they catch... ).... and, just to add to the general merriment, my canoe must be a magic one coz it has never frightened a fish! (or if it did, it certainly didn't frighten many of 'em... )









  32. #92
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Different place - different (and hardly any) people. Did you never paddle right over a basking pike or pickerel without scaring it?

  33. #93
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Deepest darkest Wales
    Posts
    3,800

    Default

    I've paddled and poled over wild brownies without scaring them, they csrrier on feeding.

    Got my first fly rod in 1960.
    This post may vanish at any moment.

  34. #94
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Keynsham near Bristol
    Posts
    3,747

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davidh View Post
    Did you never paddle right over a basking pike or pickerel without scaring it?
    How can you tell it's scared, David?
    Keith

  35. #95
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DougR View Post
    I've paddled and poled over wild brownies without scaring them, they csrrier on feeding.

    Got my first fly rod in 1960.
    No, you paddled and poled over what you thought were wild browns. They were stockies, or grayling. Wild browns have a highly developed sense of flight. They don't hang around! Neither do Wye chub. Neither do any chub as far as I can see. Plenty of stuff on u-tube which shows how shy they are. Grayling do though, and will come back on the feed very quickly. Put a wild brown down and it will stay down, maybe for hours.

    Next you'll be saying you paddled on Llangorse and the basking pike just stayed on the surface while you paddled over them.
    Here's an idea. If you're near why not come on Llangorse next Spring and prove your point. I'll bring a video camera. We can pubish the results on here for all to see.

    In fact, there's a challenge for anyone who has a GoPro. Come to Llangorse in late April/May and see how many pike you can get close to. They bask on the surface in warm Spring sunshine.
    Last edited by davidh; 1st-December-2016 at 10:04 AM.

  36. #96
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Keith, in the spirit of cooperation I'm going to take your question seriously.

    If you're very careful once you spot them you can sidle up to them. I can get to about 5ft before there is a huge swirl as they take off into the depths.

    Pike "double". It doesn't count unless it's on your lap and flapping.

    Carp are different. It is possible to paddle directly over big carp, especially if they are used to passing boats. The Ashby canal is good for that, and there are some whoppers in there.
    Last edited by davidh; 1st-December-2016 at 10:03 AM.

  37. #97
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Southport, really in Lancashire, UK
    Posts
    1,846

    Default

    Wild salmon in the UK are definitely unperturbed by canoes and at times almost jump in our boats.

    But this post is about irresponsible people doing things that cause serious risk of harm to those travelling along PRN rivers. Their actions could cause death and murder is illegal.

    Scared fish are not part of this post.

    Doug
    When there's trouble on shore, there's peace on the wave,
    Afloat in the White Canoe.
    Alan Sullivan


  38. #98
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dougoutcanoe View Post
    Wild salmon in the UK are definitely unperturbed by canoes and at times almost jump in our boats.

    But this post is about irresponsible people doing things that cause serious risk of harm to those travelling along PRN rivers. Their actions could cause death and murder is illegal.

    Scared fish are not part of this post.

    Doug
    The wider picture is one of denial on both sides.
    The paddlers deny that fish are scared by boats. Paddlers shout abuse at anglers on occassion. It happened to me once from a passing car as I was climbing up a riverbank. Totally unprovoked. Mind, he didn't have much of an abusive vocabulary .

    The anglers deny that paddlers have any right to be on the water. Some anglers are taking the law into their own hands because they believe the rhetoric spouted by AT.
    What they don't believe is the VAA's.

    Salmon are stupid. They are also wild creatures and are unpredictable. If you paddle around hoping for a free meal courtesy of a salmon leaping into your boat you are going to starve. Boats do scare them. Anything vaguely seal or porpoise-shaped is going to scare them - think about it for a minute.

  39. #99

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davidh View Post
    Different place - different (and hardly any) people. Did you never paddle right over a basking pike or pickerel without scaring it?
    Can't be sure - I usually paddle deeper water - but I have been just floating along near a weed bed, having a drink of water - not fishing at all - and a big northern pike (presumably "basking"..) tried to take a chunk outta my boat........ ambitious bugger...... (I actually think he had just never seen a canoe before - I was a long way from anywhere... ).

    Seriously, though, I do sympathise with both sides of this whole thing over there, but I have no solutions to offer.

  40. #100
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sk8r View Post
    Can't be sure - I usually paddle deeper water - but I have been just floating along near a weed bed, having a drink of water - not fishing at all - and a big northern pike (presumably "basking"..) tried to take a chunk outta my boat........ ambitious bugger...... (I actually think he had just never seen a canoe before - I was a long way from anywhere... ).

    Seriously, though, I do sympathise with both sides of this whole thing over there, but I have no solutions to offer.
    That sounds right. We get the odd newspaper report of pike attacking fishermen/dogs.

    Thanks for your obviously genuine concern. It's not a hopeless situation though. I believe it only needs a bit of give-and-take on both sides .

    Did you ever hook into a pike and have it tow the boat around? Exciting stuff!

  41. #101

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davidh View Post
    Did you ever hook into a pike and have it tow the boat around? Exciting stuff!
    No -I use extremely light take-down tackle (coz I have to pack and carry everything, obviously) - and even though I have hooked fish that could probably do that, they just take my hook & go away...

  42. #102
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Deepest darkest Wales
    Posts
    3,800

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davidh View Post
    No, you paddled and poled over what you thought were wild browns. They were stockies, or grayling. .
    No chance whatsoever - not there, not then.
    This post may vanish at any moment.

  43. #103
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DougR View Post
    No chance whatsoever - not there, not then.
    Doug,
    Wild browns are by nature timid fish which flee at the first sign of danger, be it avian, human, or other fish. Unless they were "tame" wild browns (ie - fish used to humans feeding them) you are mistaken.

    Coming over to Llangorse next year then?

  44. #104
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sk8r View Post
    No -I use extremely light take-down tackle (coz I have to pack and carry everything, obviously) - and even though I have hooked fish that could probably do that, they just take my hook & go away...
    Ah - we fish in different ways .

    A big Northern Pike will tow your boat without any bother, as long as you use a heavy line and trace. They are VERY good eating!

  45. #105

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davidh View Post
    .

    They are VERY good eating!
    Yeah, the Dog & I lived on 'em for a week this past summer, up across the Arctic Watershed.



    http://www.songofthepaddle.co.uk/for...at-Time-Forgot

  46. #106
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sk8r View Post
    Yeah, the Dog & I lived on 'em for a week this past summer, up across the Arctic Watershed.



    http://www.songofthepaddle.co.uk/for...at-Time-Forgot
    My bad .

    Had I read your blog I would have known that!

    Great blog btw - thanks for sharing.

  47. #107
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Keynsham near Bristol
    Posts
    3,747

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davidh View Post
    Keith, in the spirit of cooperation I'm going to take your question seriously.

    If you're very careful once you spot them you can sidle up to them. I can get to about 5ft before there is a huge swirl as they take off into the depths.
    It was a serious question, David. I've floated 18 inches directly over a pike in very clear water. There was certainly no huge swirl and dash for safety but it is possible the pike was "paralysed" with fear.
    Keith

  48. #108
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KeithD View Post
    It was a serious question, David. I've floated 18 inches directly over a pike in very clear water. There was certainly no huge swirl and dash for safety but it is possible the pike was "paralysed" with fear.
    Keith - my apologies,
    I thought you were being flippant.

    In the Spring pike will often bask just beneath the surface. These fish are alert to danger, hence the swirl when you get up to them.
    It is not unusual for pike to attack anglers keep nets, and and we have several big pike on the Builth town water which follow hooked fish in to the angler.
    Very unlikely that a pike would be paralysed by fear. A big pike is top of the river, lake and canal food chain. Having said that, she (big pike are always females, the males provide much-needed protein after mating) is a wild fish and has an inbuilt flight mechanism which allowed her to grow to 30lb+ in the first place.
    A small pike - up to say 7lbs - had better develop a flight mechanism, because he or she will otherwise be eaten by an otter or another pike, or if smaller, a cormorant or sawbill.

    Isaac Walton (he of "Compleat Angler" fame) said that pike were fearless - not my experience, either on canals - where you can creep up on them but once they spot you - they're gone, or Llangorse. I think it perfectly possible to take your boat over one, but of course it may have been injured, or comatose for some reason.
    Last edited by davidh; 4th-December-2016 at 04:56 PM.

  49. #109

    Default

    So Pike are never caught from boats on lakes such as Llangorse. A friend of mine ran the canoe hire, and worked in the bar/campsite there 30ish years ago. Hey I caught several of the pike that I had scared off with a canoe. I don't know about now but most of the fishing was from rowing boats being rowed by groups of fishermen obviously not rowers clanking about they caught pike.

  50. #110
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Cheshire
    Posts
    1,658

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davidh View Post
    I think it perfectly possible to take your boat over one, but of course it may have been injured, or comatose for some reason.
    Probably recovering from being stabbed in the mouth, dragged into the suffocating air and gawped at.

  51. #111
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Markthespark View Post
    So Pike are never caught from boats on lakes such as Llangorse. A friend of mine ran the canoe hire, and worked in the bar/campsite there 30ish years ago. Hey I caught several of the pike that I had scared off with a canoe. I don't know about now but most of the fishing was from rowing boats being rowed by groups of fishermen obviously not rowers clanking about they caught pike.
    No - pike are only caught from boats, there being no bank fishing at Llangorse. I catch them on my kayak .

    I suggest you read the whole thread (and look at the pictures).
    Last edited by davidh; 5th-December-2016 at 11:37 AM.

  52. #112
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Per View Post
    Probably recovering from being stabbed in the mouth, dragged into the suffocating air and gawped at.
    "sigh".
    You're on the wrong forum Per. You want the "anti-blood sports, tree huggers, vegetarians and yogurt knitters" forum.


    Just to be clear - I am a pretty tolerant bloke. I recognise, however, when someone is trying to blacken my name, however clumsily.
    If you seriously want to debate this, start another thread.
    Last edited by davidh; 5th-December-2016 at 11:38 AM.

  53. #113
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Cheshire
    Posts
    1,658

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davidh View Post
    "sigh".
    Bit on an "anti" agenda going on, Per?
    Not as such. Fishing for anything other than dinner isn't my cup of tea, but whatever floats your boat.

    I just find the whole 'do canoes and kayaks floating past disturb fish' debate to be rather absurd when one party to the debate (anglers in general), is there to hook and pull fish out of their natural environments.

    My willingness to understand/work with anglers is rather eroded when the argument as a whole seems to always be framed from 'our side' as 'What can we do to get on better with fishermen?' and from 'their side' as 'What can we do to restrict other river users as much as possible?'

  54. #114
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Per View Post
    Not as such. Fishing for anything other than dinner isn't my cup of tea, but whatever floats your boat.

    I just find the whole 'do canoes and kayaks floating past disturb fish' debate to be rather absurd when one party to the debate (anglers in general), is there to hook and pull fish out of their natural environments.

    My willingness to understand/work with anglers is rather eroded when the argument as a whole seems to always be framed from 'our side' as 'What can we do to get on better with fishermen?' and from 'their side' as 'What can we do to restrict other river users as much as possible?'
    It will take both sides to find common ground while we wait for the legal decisions initiated by either side (which may never happen).
    Calling me names is less than helpful.
    Personally-speaking, if other paddlers don't want to get on with me, fine. I can live with that without a second thought.

  55. #115
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    St. Helens
    Posts
    425

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davidh View Post
    Calling me names is less than helpful.
    Has something been deleted here? I cant see any name calling going on.

    Per has responded to you in a tongue in check way, rather then in the condescending way that you are coming across in most of the posts here.

  56. #116
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sutchy View Post
    Has something been deleted here? I cant see any name calling going on.
    Ok guys. Enough.

  57. #117
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Cheshire
    Posts
    1,658

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davidh View Post
    It will take both sides to find common ground while we wait for the legal decisions initiated by either side (which may never happen).
    Calling me names is less than helpful.
    Personally-speaking, if other paddlers don't want to get on with me, fine. I can live with that without a second thought.
    Who's calling you names?

    Common ground can be found for sure. But usually before negotiations can proceed, there needs to be a ceasefire. And I may be biased, but it isn't the paddlers that are throwing barriers across rivers, hurling abuse, dropping trees, keying cars etc. I don't believe I've ever seen anything published by any of the angling organisations calling for their members to work with paddlers - while the BCU et al are constantly reminding us to be civil and avoid disturbing anglers as much as possible.

    And - it may be a controversial opinion to hold. Legality be blow'd. We could get a high-court ruling tomorrow that landowners own the rivers flowing through their land and they have every right to restrict navigation. It wouldn't change my opinion that it's immoral to try and restrict responsible access to our rivers for the benefit of a minority. Morality trumps legality.

    The drift of history is with those of us that want to enjoy our natural spaces in a low impact way. And public opinion - every non-paddler (and non-angler) I've spoken to is frankly amazed that our right to canoe down a river is even up for debate!

    I would think anglers would do well to avoid creating too much fuss, lest they draw too much attention to the status-quo.

  58. #118

    Default

    So davidh your saying that your particular kayak just isn't scary to pike. Or don't you catch many from it. As a canoe/kayak fisherman myself just can,t understand this scaring fish argument. Since a knee injury (can't walk far anymore) I even catch brown trout on the fly from a canoe on mid wales rivers.

  59. #119

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Per View Post
    Probably recovering from being stabbed in the mouth, dragged into the suffocating air and gawped at.

    Or sustaining life for one more day in the backcountry.....


  60. #120
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Per View Post
    Who's calling you names?

    Common ground can be found for sure. But usually before negotiations can proceed, there needs to be a ceasefire. And I may be biased, but it isn't the paddlers that are throwing barriers across rivers, hurling abuse, dropping trees, keying cars etc. I don't believe I've ever seen anything published by any of the angling organisations calling for their members to work with paddlers - while the BCU et al are constantly reminding us to be civil and avoid disturbing anglers as much as possible.

    And - it may be a controversial opinion to hold. Legality be blow'd. We could get a high-court ruling tomorrow that landowners own the rivers flowing through their land and they have every right to restrict navigation. It wouldn't change my opinion that it's immoral to try and restrict responsible access to our rivers for the benefit of a minority. Morality trumps legality.

    The drift of history is with those of us that want to enjoy our natural spaces in a low impact way. And public opinion - every non-paddler (and non-angler) I've spoken to is frankly amazed that our right to canoe down a river is even up for debate!

    I would think anglers would do well to avoid creating too much fuss, lest they draw too much attention to the status-quo.
    I talked with a Wye ghillie last night who held much the same view - from the other side .

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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