Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 121 to 173 of 173

Thread: Dangerous barrier erected by Dee Valley Fishing Syndicate

  1. #121
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Cheshire
    Posts
    1,663

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sk8r View Post
    Or sustaining life for one more day in the backcountry.....

    Looks delicious.

    As I say, no issues with fishing for food. I just suspect the much vaunted 'catch and release' here is more to do with ensuring anglers can sit on river banks hooking as many fish as they want... and paying to do it... rather than for any sound ecological reasons. If they were taking them for eating like you do in your sparsely populated and wild country, they'd probably find themselves quickly restricted to one or two fish a year.

  2. #122
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Cheshire
    Posts
    1,663

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davidh View Post
    I talked with a Wye ghillie last night who held much the same view - from the other side .
    Of course he would. Turkeys wouldn't vote for Christmas.

  3. #123
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Posts
    1,595

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sk8r View Post
    Or sustaining life for one more day in the backcountry.....
    To be fair most of the comments from this and other threads show that the general opinion is that fishing for food is acceptable as that is a natural part of life. It is the playing with fish that gives the most concern, C&R is not the same as fishing, one is for food the other for pleasure. If any other animal was treated in the same way as fish are in C&R angling the perpetrators would be in court, the difference being fish do not have a voice so can not scream to show their distress or pain.

    A point to consider is Riparian rights were formed to protect fishing as a valuable food source long before Angling became a sport, do they equally protect the right to play with the fish for enjoyment? (NOTE I use the term playing as it is the term used by anglers not as a derogatory remark)
    "Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men"
    Grp Cpt Sir Douglas Bader CBE,DSO,DFC,FRAeS.

  4. #124

    Default

    I wonder if we should start a new thread as this one seems to have moved a long way from the discussion about a dangerous barrier erected to stop people paddling the Dee.
    Ken

  5. #125

    Default

    I wonder if we should start a new thread as this one seems to have moved a long way from the discussion about a dangerous barrier erected to stop people paddling the Dee.
    Indeed - it's becoming a dangerous barrier to sensible discussion of access problems. Personally, I disagree with fishing for sport, but I wouldn't bring that into a discussion on lawful activities on river - fishing is lawfull, and the debate should be about people respecting the rights of others to continue with their lawful activities, and working out compromise where those rights conflict. It seems to be possible in Scotland, so should also be possible in England & Wales (and Norn Iron, although I've never paddled there so don't know).

  6. #126
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Cheshire
    Posts
    1,663

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris_B View Post
    Indeed - it's becoming a dangerous barrier to sensible discussion of access problems. Personally, I disagree with fishing for sport, but I wouldn't bring that into a discussion on lawful activities on river - fishing is lawfull, and the debate should be about people respecting the rights of others to continue with their lawful activities, and working out compromise where those rights conflict. It seems to be possible in Scotland, so should also be possible in England & Wales (and Norn Iron, although I've never paddled there so don't know).
    Making the access debate strictly about legality hasn't done us in any favours in my opinion. For every statute and legal judgement we can show to support the contention 'there's a public right of navigation on every river', those who seek to restrict our access can dredge up other precedent to support their position. We've ended up in the situation where our governing body states on their web page about access that "[t]he situation is more complex on other non-tidal rivers and many lakes in England. Here a public right of navigation can be disputed" and Police respond to someone physically blocking a river with "we are currently unclear of the legal situation."

    The debate should be about what the legal position should be, not what it is or isn't.

    The reason canoeists and fishermen can play nice in Scotland is because there's a modern piece of legislation that takes as its starting point the right to responsible access for all. A level playing field. That's what we should be agitating for.

    If that's off-topic, I don't know what is on-topic.

    Out of interest - and very back on topic - what would be the legal response in Scotland if some ghilly or landowner took it upon himself to erect a baricade across a popular river run?

  7. #127
    Crow's Avatar
    Crow is online now 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
    15,879
    Journal Entries
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Per View Post

    Out of interest - and very back on topic - what would be the legal response in Scotland if some ghilly or landowner took it upon himself to erect a baricade across a popular river run?
    I think if it was deliberately placed to block access, rather than a fence to keep animals in, they could be reported and prosecuted under the Land Reform Act (2003).

    If it was less visible, or barbed wire say, and someone came to grief on it, they'd probably be charged with assault.

    "I stepped up on the platform. The man gave me the news. He said - you must be joking, son, where did you get those shoes?"

    Crow Trip Log

  8. #128
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Per View Post
    The debate should be about what the legal position should be, not what it is or isn't.

    The reason canoeists and fishermen can play nice in Scotland is because there's a modern piece of legislation that takes as its starting point the right to responsible access for all. A level playing field. That's what we should be agitating for.
    Actually, most of the reason that canoeists and fishermen can play nicely in Scotland is that there are fewer of them.

    I can't think of any city in England that I could have wild-fished within 10 minutes drive, as I used to do from Glasgow in 1970/71. That has probably changed, but it is fact that there is a smaller population, both resident and mobile, in Scotland.

    Compare the Lake District with, say, Loch Lomond.

  9. #129
    Crow's Avatar
    Crow is online now 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
    15,879
    Journal Entries
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davidh View Post
    Actually, most of the reason that canoeists and fishermen can play nicely in Scotland is that there are fewer of them.

    I can't think of any city in England that I could have wild-fished within 10 minutes drive, as I used to do from Glasgow in 1970/71. That has probably changed, but it is fact that there is a smaller population, both resident and mobile, in Scotland.

    Compare the Lake District with, say, Loch Lomond.

    That's a bit of a myth, often used to justify England's access restrictions. "Scotland (and by extension the rest of the world) is totally different to England and what works there couldn't possibly work here", is a common attitude.

    Population density in Central Scotland is comparable to urban England.

    In the Highlands of course it's much less (since the Clearances!). But the Lowlands are not that dissimilar to much of England.

    You meet plenty of fisherman up here, on popular canoeing rivers.

    As for Loch Lomond, there are plenty of problems with crowding and mess, linked to its proximity to major urban centres.
    Last edited by Crow; 5th-December-2016 at 06:23 PM.

    "I stepped up on the platform. The man gave me the news. He said - you must be joking, son, where did you get those shoes?"

    Crow Trip Log

  10. #130

    Default

    Making the access debate strictly about legality hasn't done us in any favours in my opinion.
    I wasn't suggesting the access debate should only be about legality - I was just saying that it doesn't help to bring in personal views about the appropriateness of sport fishing.
    The reason canoeists and fishermen can play nice in Scotland is because there's a modern piece of legislation that takes as its starting point the right to responsible access for all. A level playing field. That's what we should be agitating for.
    Absolutely agree, and I signed the WoW petition.
    Compare the Lake District with, say, Loch Lomond.
    I've paddled in both areas this year - Windermere is less crowded and less affected by its proximity to cities than Loch Lomond is.

  11. #131
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Crow View Post
    That's a bit of a myth, often used to justify England's access restrictions. "Scotland (and by extension the rest of the world) is totally different to England and what works there couldn't possibly work here", is a common attitude.

    Population density in Central Scotland is comparable to urban England.
    Glasgow and Edinburgh combined have a population of around 1,410,000.
    Birmingham and Manchester have a combined population of over three million. I didn't bother looking up Liverpool or Newcastle, or Hull. Sunderland and district used to be 200,000. I grew up there, hence my interest. Figures available on Google.

    Population density of Glasgow and Edinburgh is slightly over a third of Manchester and Birmingham, never mind urban England.
    London alone has a population of over eight and a half million.
    The population of Builth Wells is 2000 . That's why I live here.

    No myth. Not even a bit of one.
    Last edited by davidh; 5th-December-2016 at 06:30 PM.

  12. #132
    Crow's Avatar
    Crow is online now 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
    15,879
    Journal Entries
    10

    Default

    You're confusing density with total population. And missing out the surrounding conurbations.

    You live in any of these cities, you'll not notice much difference.

    Whatever, the point is that Scotland is not totally different to England and the enlightened laws there (and in plenty of other countries too) there could work in England too, if people wanted them to. England does not have unique problems, different from everywhere else in the world, that would justify its restrictive access approach.

    "I stepped up on the platform. The man gave me the news. He said - you must be joking, son, where did you get those shoes?"

    Crow Trip Log

  13. #133
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Southport, really in Lancashire, UK
    Posts
    1,888

    Default

    Hi Crow, the fishy folk of England and Wales have managed to gain an upper hand through intimidation. The selfish attitude of "I own this river", "It's private" etc etc is something that will take too long to sort out for some of us.

    I paddle peacefully yet I must have bubble floating over me, saying, "attack this idiot".

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


  14. #134
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Crow View Post
    You're confusing density with total population. And missing out the surrounding conurbations.

    You live in any of these cities, you'll not notice much difference.

    Whatever, the point is that Scotland is not totally different to England and the enlightened laws there (and in plenty of other countries too) there could work in England too, if people wanted them to. England does not have unique problems, different from everywhere else in the world, that would justify its restrictive access approach.
    This is the point.
    Scotland has a total population of 5,373,000.
    England has a total population of 53,000,000.

    I found this quote on Google. I didn't write the reference down, but you can easily find it by searching uk population densities.
    "In mid-2013 the population density of England was 413 people per sq km compared with 149 people per sq km in Wales and 135 people per sq km in Northern Ireland. Scotland has the lowest population density at 68 people per sq km. The population of the UK is projected to increase to 73.3 million by mid-20371."

    To put it all into perspective, the average population density for the EU is 116 people per sq km.

    Scotland is totally different to England.
    Last edited by davidh; 5th-December-2016 at 08:40 PM.

  15. #135

    Default

    The point is, what's the population density near the areas containing the rivers that are of interest? The population of Glasgow is smaller than Manchester, indeed, but I expect the number of people living within 50km of L Lomond is greater than the number living with 50m of Windermere. The rivers in the most populated areas actually have less conflict (eg, near Manchester, the Goyt & the Irwell).

  16. #136
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris_B View Post
    The point is, what's the population density near the areas containing the rivers that are of interest? The population of Glasgow is smaller than Manchester, indeed, but I expect the number of people living within 50km of L Lomond is greater than the number living with 50m of Windermere. The rivers in the most populated areas actually have less conflict (eg, near Manchester, the Goyt & the Irwell).
    I don't believe you are suggesting that paddlers don't drive more than 50 km to visit a river.
    It's not the proximity of a river or lake to a conurbation. It's the proximity + the mobility. We all have cars nowadays.

    Windermere can sometimes be quiet. Holiday-time it's very busy. It's also very restrictive. Have you tried wild-camping on one of the islands recently?

  17. #137

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ken_t View Post
    I wonder if we should start a new thread as this one seems to have moved a long way from the discussion about a dangerous barrier erected to stop people paddling the Dee.
    Ken
    I apologise for my part in all that. It did seem to naturally arise, and I can't help but respond to posts that seem (at first, at least) to take a pot-shot at folks (like me) who fish (and hunt) because they need food in the backcountry.

    Again, my apologies for my part in any derailment.

  18. #138
    Crow's Avatar
    Crow is online now 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
    15,879
    Journal Entries
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davidh View Post
    This is the point.
    Scotland has a total population of 5,373,000.
    England has a total population of 53,000,000.

    I found this quote on Google. I didn't write the reference down, but you can easily find it by searching uk population densities.
    "In mid-2013 the population density of England was 413 people per sq km compared with 149 people per sq km in Wales and 135 people per sq km in Northern Ireland. Scotland has the lowest population density at 68 people per sq km. The population of the UK is projected to increase to 73.3 million by mid-20371."

    To put it all into perspective, the average population density for the EU is 116 people per sq km.

    Scotland is totally different to England.
    You're missing the point.

    What is the population density of the Central Belt?

    Of course the Highlands are different, as I pointed out earlier.

    And as Chris B notes above, the areas with the biggest access problems are not those with large population densities, they are the relatively quiet rural areas. E.g. the Dee Valley, which is where this thread started.

    To claim England is exceptional when it comes to potential access solutions is absurd.

    PS I too have lived in both, and am well aware of the differences and similarities.
    Last edited by Crow; 5th-December-2016 at 09:01 PM.

    "I stepped up on the platform. The man gave me the news. He said - you must be joking, son, where did you get those shoes?"

    Crow Trip Log

  19. #139
    Crow's Avatar
    Crow is online now 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
    15,879
    Journal Entries
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dougoutcanoe View Post
    Hi Crow, the fishy folk of England and Wales have managed to gain an upper hand through intimidation. The selfish attitude of "I own this river", "It's private" etc etc is something that will take too long to sort out for some of us.

    I paddle peacefully yet I must have bubble floating over me, saying, "attack this idiot".

    Doug

    So it seems, Doug, so it seems.

    "I stepped up on the platform. The man gave me the news. He said - you must be joking, son, where did you get those shoes?"

    Crow Trip Log

  20. #140
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Southport, really in Lancashire, UK
    Posts
    1,888

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sk8r View Post

    Again, my apologies for my part in any derailment.
    Hi Sk8r,

    I didn't think your comments were anything other than helpful. Especially when the debate got to the "scared fish syndrome" but of course English fish are much more sensitive than anywhere else on Earth

    Always great to read your comments of real canoeing. I'm giving it a try next year in Algonquin.

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


  21. #141

    Default

    I have a lovely photo of 5 salmon swimming very happily, or at least they didnt appear to want to swim away, under my kayak. Unfortunately I haven't worked out how to post photos to message boards.

    But coming back top the topic, wouldnt it be lovely if we could all get along peacefully whilst doing what we love.



    I could paddle my canoe / kayak / SOT down river


    and


    The fisherman could sit on the bank getting away from his wife (which we ALL know is the REAL reason people go fishing)
    Last edited by Mike A; 5th-December-2016 at 09:42 PM.

  22. #142

    Default

    I don't believe you are suggesting that paddlers don't drive more than 50 km to visit a river.
    That's good, because it wasn't what I was suggesting. I'm saying population density in cities that are nowhere near the rivers in question doesn't prove that the Scottish approach wouldn't work. I do apologise, I didn't mean to get into an argument - it's the problem with communicating by text. I don't think we disagree that respect on all sides would make life a lot easier for all.
    Have you tried wild-camping on one of the islands recently?
    Only a week ago, without a problem.

  23. #143
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Crow View Post
    You're missing the point.

    What is the population density of the Central Belt?

    Of course the Highlands are different, as I pointed out earlier.

    And as Chris B notes above, the areas with the biggest access problems are not those with large population densities, they are the relatively quiet rural areas. E.g. the Dee Valley, which is where this thread started.

    To claim England is exceptional when it comes to potential access solutions is absurd.

    PS I too have lived in both, and am well aware of the differences and similarities.
    I think we'll have to agree to disagree, since I honestly can't see your point.

    I would point out that Finland has a low population and no conflict, that Germany has a few more heads, but little if any conflict, but it has something like 200 lakes which kind of soaks up those who wish to participate in watersports, and poor old Wales has very few lakes and charges for launching on each one. Mind, no conflict on the lakes.

  24. #144
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Bucks
    Posts
    6,654

    Default

    From Wikipedia

    The Central Belt of Scotland is the area of highest population density within Scotland. It has a population of about 3.5 million covering an area of approximately 10,000 km2, including Greater Glasgow, Ayrshire, Falkirk, Edinburgh, Lothian and Fife
    Just to help, that is 350 people per sq km, that's quite dense by the other standards mentioned above

  25. #145
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Posts
    1,595

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davidh View Post
    that Germany has a few more heads, but little if any conflict, but it has something like 200 lakes which kind of soaks up those who wish to participate in watersports, and poor old Wales has very few lakes and charges for launching on each one. Mind, no conflict on the lakes.
    Having spoken to a German friend about this subject on many occasions, the fishing intensity in Germany is much lower due to their laws that prohibit C&R, they treat fishing in the same way as hunting for land animals. It is therefore logical that this limits the amount of fish available to be caught and the fish will be less timid due to not having been caught and returned with a fear of man.

    This link gives an insight to the German view on fishing. http://www.anglersnet.co.uk/forums/i...se-in-germany/

    I disagree that this subject is not relevant, the barrier was erected to give the anglers more uninterrupted access to the water. It is only reasonable to question what activities they consider so important as to justify their action.
    "Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men"
    Grp Cpt Sir Douglas Bader CBE,DSO,DFC,FRAeS.

  26. #146
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adrian Cooper View Post
    From Wikipedia



    Just to help, that is 350 people per sq km, that's quite dense by the other standards mentioned above
    Yes, thats nearly up to England density. The difference being that if a chunk of those people decide to take off, to a lake or a river, they will find far fewer people there (unless they all decide to take off together).

  27. #147
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cloudman View Post
    Having spoken to a German friend about this subject on many occasions, the fishing intensity in Germany is much lower due to their laws that prohibit C&R, they treat fishing in the same way as hunting for land animals. It is therefore logical that this limits the amount of fish available to be caught and the fish will be less timid due to not having been caught and returned with a fear of man.

    This link gives an insight to the German view on fishing. http://www.anglersnet.co.uk/forums/i...se-in-germany/

    I disagree that this subject is not relevant, the barrier was erected to give the anglers more uninterrupted access to the water. It is only reasonable to question what activities they consider so important as to justify their action.
    Thanks for that Cloudman. And I agree that this is all relevant.

  28. #148
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    North Devon
    Posts
    2,058

    Default

    Why can't we take France as an example of how it's done. The French are very keen anglers, both course game fishing, they really love their match fishing, and looking at the amount of gear they have they clearly invest heavily in there hobby. The rivers get very busy with paddlers especially in summer, many in hire boats haven't got a clue, and bang and clatter their way down river. The volume of boats far outnumber the boats on The Wye (for example) even on its busiest August Bank Holiday, yet the anglers carry on fishing, often choosing to set up in a busy bankside picnic spot along with the swimmers dogs kids et all, and everyone seems happy, there just doesn't seem to be any 'us and them' issues at all. Some of the real 'honey pot' rivers have a loose arrangement where paddlers use the river between 10am and 6pm and the anglers can either fish then, or wait till everyone has gone home. The system works just fine. We have so much to learn, but our stubbornness will keep us in this merry go round for years.
    Paul.
    Just goin with the flow

  29. #149
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Bucks
    Posts
    6,654

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davidh View Post
    Yes, thats nearly up to England density. The difference being that if a chunk of those people decide to take off, to a lake or a river, they will find far fewer people there (unless they all decide to take off together).
    Just to explain how that translates across the country

    p/km2
    Northumberland 63
    Cumbria 74
    Herefordshire 84
    Rutland 99
    North Yorkshire 125
    Shropshire 136
    Cornwall 150
    Lincolnshire 150
    Norfolk 160
    Devon 169
    Suffolk 192
    Wiltshire 196
    Somerset 218
    Cambridgeshire 238
    East Riding of Yorkshire 238
    Oxfordshire 251
    Gloucestershire 274
    Warwickshire 277
    Dorset 281
    Northamptonshire 294
    Worcestershire 325
    Durham 332
    Isle of Wight 364
    Derbyshire 388
    Buckinghamshire 404
    Staffordshire 405
    West Sussex 406
    Cheshire 439
    East Sussex 447
    Leicestershire 455
    Kent 463
    Hampshire 468
    Essex 471
    Lancashire 475
    Bedfordshire 499
    Nottinghamshire 505
    Hertfordshire 682
    Surrey 683
    Berkshire 684
    South Yorkshire 866
    West Yorkshire 1,098
    Tyne and Wear 2,044
    Greater Manchester 2,105
    Merseyside 2,141
    City of London 2,548
    West Midlands 3,039
    Bristol 3,906
    Greater London 5,223

  30. #150
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Bucks
    Posts
    6,654

    Default

    And Wales

    Powys 26
    Ceredigion 43
    Gwynedd 48
    Carmarthenshire 77
    Pembrokeshire 77
    Anglesey 98
    Conwy 102
    Monmouthshire 107
    Denbighshire 111
    Wrexham 270
    Neath Port Talbot 316
    Flintshire 348
    Vale of Glamorgan 377
    Merthyr Tydfil 530
    Rhondda Cynon Taf 553
    Bridgend 566
    Swansea 632
    Blaenau Gwent 640
    Caerphilly 643
    Torfaen 723
    Newport 767
    Cardiff 2467

  31. #151
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adrian Cooper View Post
    And Wales

    Powys 26
    Ceredigion 43
    Gwynedd 48
    Carmarthenshire 77
    Pembrokeshire 77
    Anglesey 98
    Conwy 102
    Monmouthshire 107
    Denbighshire 111
    Wrexham 270
    Neath Port Talbot 316
    Flintshire 348
    Vale of Glamorgan 377
    Merthyr Tydfil 530
    Rhondda Cynon Taf 553
    Bridgend 566
    Swansea 632
    Blaenau Gwent 640
    Caerphilly 643
    Torfaen 723
    Newport 767
    Cardiff 2467
    That's why I live in Powys by choice .
    Really though, isn't mobility of a population, or populations, taken into account? It takes two hours to drive from Birmingham to deepest Powys. Five hours from Manchester. Most paddlers in the UK have cars.

    By my, and I recognise it may be faulty, reasoning, if the population density is 8, 9, or 10 times higher than Scotland then the leisure needs are also 8, 9, or 10 times higher. Of course we also need to factor in numbers of paddlers.

  32. #152
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Bucks
    Posts
    6,654

    Default

    Sure, mobility is an issue but to put this into perspective, half of the counties in England and half of those in Wales have population densities lower than the Scottish central belt. The distance from Gretna Green to John o' Groats is the same as it is to Exeter. These are not statistics which distort the point which Crow was making that England is so exceptional that different principles should apply to access to rivers, just because there are a few highly populated corners of the country.

  33. #153
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Well yes, but one of the highly populated areas is two hours from what used to be THE premier salmon river in England and Wales - the Wye.
    The premier salmon rivers of Scotland are either in the North (very low population) or South (low population). And I'm still not sure that paddling is welcomed with open arms on the Helmsdale and/or Brora.
    Not arguing btw, just filiing in the spaces.

  34. #154
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Bucks
    Posts
    6,654

    Default

    And there was me thinking the premier salmon river was the North Tyne.

  35. #155
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adrian Cooper View Post
    And there was me thinking the premier salmon river was the North Tyne.
    No. At the time of the Wye being the premier salmon river the Tyne had a very poor run due to pollution in the estuary. It improved with Keilder and the hatchery, and an EA cleanup, and has since gone from strength to strength, but the Wye was historically an internationally famous water. This goes some way to explaining the entrenched views of some riparian owners who have inherited a failing (in salmon terms) river.
    Catches are up this year - nowhere near what they could be - but juvenile fish counts are way down.

    Some of us think that catches may be up partly because fish are being caught two and three times……
    I don't fish for salmon on the Wye from choice, although I lost a big salmon in June. It snapped my 2lb leader - I was fishing for trout.

  36. #156
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    NE England
    Posts
    1,326

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adrian Cooper View Post
    And there was me thinking the premier salmon river was the North Tyne.
    It is and we get on with our anglers pretty well.

    But we accepted that our fish stocks were depleted to a near unrecoverable level so we artificially stocked the river. Anglers up here aren't silly enough to think that stopping all paddling would have much effect on the stock level or catch count. As a result, anglers catch fish, paddlers paddle their boats, and we all get along.

    The situation in Wales is good though, I'd like a right to roam on water, as long as they are throwing up barriers and threatening court cases, the angling groups are drawing attention to the silly arguments and the day of a right to roam draws nearer!
    The only thing you have to fear is Mergatroid the vengeful, man eating bear.

  37. #157
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by saarlak View Post
    It is and we get on with our anglers pretty well.

    But we accepted that our fish stocks were depleted to a near unrecoverable level so we artificially stocked the river. Anglers up here aren't silly enough to think that stopping all paddling would have much effect on the stock level or catch count. As a result, anglers catch fish, paddlers paddle their boats, and we all get along.

    The situation in Wales is good though, I'd like a right to roam on water, as long as they are throwing up barriers and threatening court cases, the angling groups are drawing attention to the silly arguments and the day of a right to roam draws nearer!
    I think the boat traffic on the Wye is heavier than on the Tyne, but you're certainly right about the hatchery.

    I just Googled canoe hire companies on the Wye, then on the Tyne. Loads on the Wye - none on the Tyne.

    It's a different situation if we want to be honest about it.
    Last edited by davidh; 6th-December-2016 at 08:23 PM.

  38. #158
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Bucks
    Posts
    6,654

  39. #159

    Default

    To aid fish stock the hatchery would appear to be the way to go.

    I was really surprised when I visited one that they fired the fertilised eggs at metal plate, the one that didn't survive were bad eggs. Really interesting stuff, esp given the 600 million smolt and fry they produce. That should help stock the wye / dee etc.

    http://www.pwsac.com/

  40. #160
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adrian Cooper View Post
    I don't disagree.

    In post 155 I said "At the time of the Wye being the premier salmon river the Tyne had a very poor run due to a three-mile plug of pollution in the estuary."

    The Wye had a historic run of 5000+ fish every year until the crash, which was brought about partly by every fish being clunked, but mostly by overfishing in the 70's, of UK salmon at sea. As far as I'm aware, the Tyne never had a run that size until recently, except prior to the Industrial Revolution. The Tyne has a long history of both heavy industry and sewage discharge from North and South Shields, Jarrow, Gateshead and Newcastle, all of which line it's banks. The Wye never had that pressure.

    What you have to factor in to your figures is that, unlike the current Tyne catch, on the Wye every fish was killed - it couldn't be caught twice.
    That's why the rod-caught figures on the Wye are now viewed with suspicion in certain quarters, because some of these fish will have been caught at least twice.
    Last edited by davidh; 7th-December-2016 at 09:12 AM.

  41. #161
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Mid Wales
    Posts
    62

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davidh View Post
    Actually, most of the reason that canoeists and fishermen can play nicely in Scotland is that there are fewer of them.

    I can't think of any city in England that I could have wild-fished within 10 minutes drive, as I used to do from Glasgow in 1970/71. That has probably changed, but it is fact that there is a smaller population, both resident and mobile, in Scotland.

    Compare the Lake District with, say, Loch Lomond.

    Spent 5 days paddling the spey last year, we were a group of 15 or so and I know that there was several other groups on the river at roughly the same time. We saw more fishermen in those few days than we would see all season in wales so there was certainly not fewer fishermen or paddlers and everyone was pleasant and jovial. We also saw plenty of Salmon and saw fishermen catching salmon.
    Having fished for them I do agree with Davidh that Wild brownies and Seatrout will be put off feeding for several hours if a boat disturbs them (both are very sensitive to disturbance and easily spooked in my opinion) but in saying that the better Seatrout fishing time is after dusk and before dawn.
    Phil

  42. #162
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phil S View Post
    Spent 5 days paddling the spey last year, we were a group of 15 or so and I know that there was several other groups on the river at roughly the same time. We saw more fishermen in those few days than we would see all season in wales so there was certainly not fewer fishermen or paddlers and everyone was pleasant and jovial. We also saw plenty of Salmon and saw fishermen catching salmon.
    Having fished for them I do agree with Davidh that Wild brownies and Seatrout will be put off feeding for several hours if a boat disturbs them (both are very sensitive to disturbance and easily spooked in my opinion) but in saying that the better Seatrout fishing time is after dusk and before dawn.
    Phil
    True Phil. No-one has mentioned sea-trout, but of course they, like big, wild browns, are the spookiest of the lot. They can be caught in the daytime of course, but the water needs to be coloured, and the angler very careful.

    On the Wye above Hereford it is quite usual from late Spring onwards to see boats every five minutes or so, in addition to parties of boats. The reason for that has only been explained to me this week. The various hire companies have arrangements with a taxi firm(s) and run a shuttle service where they take you and your hire boat up to Glasbury, where you launch. You then paddle downriver to your hire company - who are based somewhere below Hereford. Or you can hire your canoe at Glasbury and catch the taxi shuttle back up to Glasbury after your paddle. This arrangement makes for a nice gentle paddle, and a proliferation of boats on the river.
    Last edited by davidh; 7th-December-2016 at 08:45 PM.

  43. #163
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Mid Wales
    Posts
    62

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davidh View Post
    True Phil. No-one has mentioned sea-trout, but of course they, like big, wild browns, are the spookiest of the lot. They can be caught in the daytime of course, but the water needs to be coloured, and the angler very careful.
    Quite so David you will catch seatrout in coloured water but in my experience you do not need to be too careful, i'm of the opinion that the disturbance is visual so in murky water they don't see a boat.
    I have seen seatrout disturbed and be frightened off by a lump of wood passing through a pool in clear water and you won't have a chance of catching them for a few hours, but, I have caught them in coloured water when all sorts of flotsam is coming down.

  44. #164
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phil S View Post
    Quite so David you will catch seatrout in coloured water but in my experience you do not need to be too careful, i'm of the opinion that the disturbance is visual so in murky water they don't see a boat.
    I have seen seatrout disturbed and be frightened off by a lump of wood passing through a pool in clear water and you won't have a chance of catching them for a few hours, but, I have caught them in coloured water when all sorts of flotsam is coming down.
    And there you have it - fish can be frightened by boats.

  45. #165
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Mid Wales
    Posts
    62

    Default

    Ah, but the fish don't give a damn when it's coloured water

  46. #166
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phil S View Post
    Ah, but the fish don't give a damn when it's coloured water
    Happy to agree Phil!

  47. #167
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Deepest darkest Wales
    Posts
    3,806

    Default

    I've seen half a dozen sea trout taken from the same pool in two hours, in gin clear water, by a man in a rowing boat.

    Upstream of the bridge in Kelso.

    Hereabouts, the fashionable way of fishing for sewin is at night with honkin great streamers.
    This post may vanish at any moment.

  48. #168
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DougR View Post
    I've seen half a dozen sea trout taken from the same pool in two hours, in gin clear water, by a man in a rowing boat.

    Upstream of the bridge in Kelso.

    Hereabouts, the fashionable way of fishing for sewin is at night with honkin great streamers.
    DougR,
    I doubt it. Maybe Wesh and Northen English seatrout are different to Borders seatrout (I know they not).

  49. #169
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    St. Helens
    Posts
    431

    Default

    Maybe all this fish talk might be better in a new thread in the off topic section, as personally I am interested in a barrier on the Dee. But have no interest in the habits of fish.

  50. #170
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Deepest darkest Wales
    Posts
    3,806

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davidh View Post
    DougR,
    I doubt it. Maybe Wesh and Northen English seatrout are different to Borders seatrout (I know they not).
    Doubt away.
    This post may vanish at any moment.

  51. #171
    Crow's Avatar
    Crow is online now 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
    15,879
    Journal Entries
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sutchy View Post
    Maybe all this fish talk might be better in a new thread in the off topic section, as personally I am interested in a barrier on the Dee. But have no interest in the habits of fish.
    Agreed. I was just thinking the same.

    How about setting up a new thread in the Off Topic section, called 'Let's Chat About Fishing'?

    "I stepped up on the platform. The man gave me the news. He said - you must be joking, son, where did you get those shoes?"

    Crow Trip Log

  52. #172
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Crow View Post
    Agreed. I was just thinking the same.

    How about setting up a new thread in the Off Topic section, called 'Let's Chat About Fishing'?
    I'll start another in the Access thread instead, since it's key to the access argument. Mods - feel free to move if you wish.

  53. #173
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Southport, really in Lancashire, UK
    Posts
    1,888

    Default

    This thread has drifted a long way from the murderous attempts to stop the navigation of the Dee.

    So, it needs to stop wittering on about scared fish.

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


Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

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