LOFFCA Meeting Nov 2nd
Written by Mike Grief   
Friday, 22 January 2010 10:10

Notes and actions from the last Lower Ouse Fisheries Consultative Association meeting on the 2nd November 2009.

Download

The next LOFCA meeting is at the Littleport Leisure Centre on February 1st 2010.

For more Details and Information contact the Secretary Richard Hiom on 07731990783.

LOFFCA brings together fishing clubs and Associations from the Lower Ouse Catchment, working together for Angling and the Enviroment.

 

Last Updated ( Friday, 22 January 2010 10:36 )
 
What can it mean to the Fens
Written by Mike Grief   
Tuesday, 12 January 2010 10:23
WHAT CAN IT MEAN TO THE FENS 

An Anglers view from Mike Grief (RFERAC)

SOME ANGLERS  are concerned about the format of the proposed new byelaws particularly as to the removal of fish. We hope you agree with us and will support our actions by replying to the consultative document.  Our concern is that the legal removal of zander from the Fens will have a dramatic effect on fishing in the Fens as we know it. Remember when zander were introduced resulting in a predator imbalance, do we want to see our good fishing damaged again. 

I Believe that zander should be on Schedule 1 of the new byelaws and be protected as a "native" species. WHY?

 

They were legally introduced by the then EA and after 50 years are in our opinion now "native" and part of the ecology of the river.

 

To remove them could have dire consequences, perhaps not, but can we afford to take that risk. ie the zander was originally stocked by a public body and therefore have received "official" backing. 

 

Should zander not be on schedule 1 the fish stealers and poachers will have a fine time, “legally” removing zander, whilst our rivers suffer a decline. 

 

The Fens attract local and visiting anglers providing outstanding sport for both the predator and silver fish angler. 

 

The rivers are fishing as well as they have ever done but the possible changes to the byelaws allowing for more fish to be removed puts the river/drain fishing in jeopardy, which will drive more anglers from the rivers and tourists from the Fens.

 

We ask that the Marine Bill be used to protect the Fens and our fishing not assist in their decline.  The Byelaws have been debated in various committees that I am a member of and the response from this region has consistently been that the “new” byelaws will still allow easy fish removal and course fish should not be removed.  

 
Fishery Byelaw Changes
Written by Mike Grief   
Tuesday, 12 January 2010 10:02

WILL THE NEW FISHERY BYELAWS CHANGE FISHING IN THE FENS AS WE KNOW IT?

The Marine Bill is about improving legislation on Coastal waters, Coastal Access, Estuaries, Inland waterways, Fisheries and Fish movements and has been evolving for several years. The Bill was proposed in 2001,

A Consultation Document produced in 2006, White Paper in 2007, Draft Bill 2008 

New fishery byelaws were required that would allow standard "laws" across the country, to replace those that varied from region to region. In addition to give the Environment Agency powers to update, without the need for new legislation if and when any situation arose.

Earlier this year EA invited the public to contribute to a debate on proposed byelaws covering –

  • Coarse fish, eel and shad removal by rod and line
  • Close seasons for brown trout and salmon in stillwaters
  • Net fishing for eel and elver.

   Replies from over 1000 people and organisations. The replies have been collated and published a summary of the responses on the EA website at http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/homeandleisure/recreation/fishing/112102.aspx

Whilst this seems a large number of replies a recent report indicated rod licence sales were at an all time high of 1.5 million. Consequently if anglers are unhappy with the “new” byelaws which have been refined after only 1000 replies to the document they now have their last chance to have a say.  The comments and views the EA received during this informal consultation helped them developed the proposals further. The EA are now advertising the final byelaws, as they are obliged to do in law, giving anyone an opportunity to object or offer support to them. The Environment Agency published these proposed new byelaws on December 16 2009.

The closing date for objections is Wednesday 20 January 2010.  


What byelaws are included?

Since the earlier consultation, The EA decided to postpone the eel and elver net fishing proposals until 2011 (the urgent need to introduce net fishing close seasons for 2010 will be provided through another route). However, they are proceeding with proposals to –

  • Regulate coarse fish, eel and shad removal by rod and line.
  • Dispense with the brown trout close season on stillwater fisheries.

COARSE FISH REMOVAL BY ROD AND LINE

As a rule, fish in stillwaters belong to the fishery owner or occupier, while fish in rivers are not owned. Because of this difference we need to split the byelaws to cover rivers and stillwaters separately.

Rivers  The byelaw allows anglers to take:
  1. 15 small fish (up to 20cm) per day of those listed in Schedule 1 (see below).
  2. 1 pike per day of up to 65cm (approx 5lb)
  3. 2 grayling per day of 30-38cm.

The Schedule 1 list excludes "tiddler" and non-native species, allowing these to be taken without restrictions. It also excludes ornamental varieties of the listed species, allowing these to be taken. Note that these limits are subject to the permission of the fishery owner or occupier.  What is the rationale for these limits on rivers? There is no evidence to suggest that the current level of coarse fish removal by anglers is impacting on the conservation of coarse fish species generally. Within reasonable limits, taking coarse fish is unlikely to impact on overall numbers. But it can affect the make-up of the stock, and have serious impacts on the fisheries they support. In particular, specialist or specimen coarse fishing places particular value on large mature fish. The value of many of our river coarse fisheries centres on the quality of the fishing provided by large fish which may have taken many years to reach such a size. While we need to protect the mature fish that provide sport for anglers, this does not justify a complete ban on taking coarse fish.

In the absence of a strong conservation argument, this would be open to challenge as the removal of a basic right. We must also recognise that the taking of small fish for bait is an important part of predator fishing; there is no evidence that this is damaging stocks and therefore should be allowed to continue. The byelaw must achieve an acceptable balance. It must protect mature fish for the benefit of anglers and fishery owners, while allowing sufficient small fish for predator angling. We also need to allow for those species that are traditionally taken for eating – pike and grayling. Current levels of exploitation do not appear to have affected stocks of these species, and so removal should be allowed, though again we need to protect the most valuable fish. Allowing anglers to take one pike per day up to 65cm (approx 5lb), protects the larger pike while allowing an angler to take a fish sufficiently large to eat. Two grayling per day between 30 and 38cm will protect not only the specimen grayling, but also the juveniles that have yet to spawn.

Stillwaters The byelaw allows anglers to remove fish with the owner/occupier’s written permission only. What is the rationale for this approach to stillwaters? Fish in stillwaters usually belong to a fishery owner or occupier. We need to ensure that the byelaw does not conflict with their right to decide whether their fish may be taken. On the other hand a byelaw that prohibits the removal of fish from stillwaters also conflicts with owner’s rights. The removal of fish from stillwaters can only be be taken with the owner or occupier’s written permission. This would normally be given through fishery rules printed

On permits or day tickets. If an angler removes fish and does not have written permission, then he commits a byelaw offence. In those situations where there is no clear owner of a stillwater, anglers will not be able to remove fish, ensuring that these sites are protected.


Eels and shad What will the byelaw do? The byelaw prohibits the removal of these species by rod and line. They are migratory species and therefore this restrictions applies seaward to 6 nautical miles (the extent of our fisheries jurisdiction). Why prohibit removal of eels? Eel stocks have suffered a severe decline across the whole of Europe. Under new European regulations we are introducing tighter controls over eel and elver net fishing over the next two years. Mandatory catch and release for angling will complement these net restrictions. It also avoids the need to report anglers’ eel catches to Europe – which will require us to introduce a catch return system for rod caught eels.

Given that relatively few eels are taken by anglers, and the widespread support of the angling community, we think that a complete ban on removal of eels by angling is justified. Keepnets The purpose of this part of the byelaw is to clarify that the restrictions do not apply to fish kept in a keepnet or keepsack and subsequently released. Schedule 1 This lists the fish species to which the byelaw applies. Coarse fish species not on this list may be taken. Schedule 2 A small number of large natural lakes have multiple ownership, and therefore need to be treated in the same way as rivers.

This schedule lists these natural stillwaters. Schedule 3 Most canals can be regarded as stillwaters, as fish are contained (by locks) and therefore owned. This is the basis on which the close season was removed from canals. Those few canals that are actually rivers are listed in Schedule 3, and therefore subject to same rules as rivers. Schedule 4

Introduction of these national fish removal byelaws requires that some existing regional byelaws must be revoked or modified. This schedule sets out the changes that are needed to remove any conflict with existing byelaws.  


SCHEDULE 1 Fish species

           Species                                                                Common name

  • Abramis bjoerkna                                                  Silver bream
  • Abramis brama                                                      Common bream
  • Barbus barbus                                                      Barbel
  • Carassius carassius                                               Crucian carp
  • Cyprinus carpio                                                      Common carp
  • Leuciscus cephalus                                               Chub
  • Leuciscus leuciscus                                               Dace
  • Rutilus rutilus                                                        Roach
  • Scardinius erythrophthalmus                                   Rudd
  • Tinca tinca                                                            Tench
  • Esox lucius                                                           Pike
  • Osmerus eperlanus                                                Smelt
  • Thymallus thymallus                                               Grayling
  • Perca fluviatilis                                                      Perch

Including hybrids between any of the above species.

Excluding ornamental varieties or colour variants of the above specie

The above is a precis of the information available that affects anglers in this region. A full copy of the byelaws can be obtained from:-   www.environment-agency.gov.uk/fish/byelaws, by phoning 08708 506 506* or from any Environment Agency office, where they may be inspected during office hours. How can you respond? 

If you wish to object or offer support to the new byelaws, please write to Alexander Kinninmonth at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Marine and Freshwater Biodiversity Division, Area 2D, Nobel House, 17 Smith Square, London SW1P 3JR ( This e-mail address is being protected from spambots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

At the same time, please send a copy to Mat Crocker, Head of Fisheries, Environment Agency, Rio House, Waterside Drive , Aztec West, Almondsbury, Bristol , BS32 4UD or by e-mail to This e-mail address is being protected from spambots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it .

At the end of the consultation period, copies of the responses may be made public. The information contained may also be published in a summary of responses. If you do not consent to this, you must clearly request that your response be treated confidentially. You should also be aware that there may be circumstances in which the Environment Agency will be required to communicate information to third parties on request, in order to comply with its obligations under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the Environmental Information Regulations.

What happens next?

The EA will reply to anyone objecting to the byelaws, responding to the issues they raise and inviting them to withdraw their objection. After 20 January, they will formally apply to the Secretary of State and Welsh Ministers for confirmation of the byelaws, enclosing any outstanding objections and suggested modifications.  

Compiled from current information, the Marine Bill is 122 pages long  

Written by Mike Grief

Member of Lower Ouse & Fenland Consultative (LOFCA), Anglian Regional Fisheries Forum and member of The Anglian Regional Fisheries, Ecology and Recreation Advisory Committee. (RFERAC) 

Last Updated ( Tuesday, 12 January 2010 10:36 )
 
Resume of Regional Consultative
Written by Mike Grief   
Saturday, 14 November 2009 09:56

Resume of The Anglian Regional Fisheries, Ecology and Recreation Committee. (RFERAC)  Meeting held November 11th 2009

Kingfisher House Peterborough. 

ITEMS RELEVANT TO THE KLAA AREA. 

1 Outcome of the byelaw consultations  Much discussion on this issue as the committee is not happy with the new proposals.These are documented elsewhere on the KLAA site. . Correspondence continues with Adrian Taylor the EA Fisheries Policy Manager. 

2 Extra Rod Licence Incomes Reinvested To date 221,000 Rod Licences sold in the Anglian Region. (1.3m countrywide)The Region has received £665K + a further £250K from DEFRA to be spent on Fishery projects in the region. (Has your club submitted a project to enhance your fishery?) 

3 Water framework Actions Anglian secured £872K funding a proportion of this is being spent on Fisheries work. 

4 Coaching By the end of September the EA had coached 4056 new anglers across the region. In addition to arranging, and subsidising training for new Coaches. 

5 Tail Sluice Feasibility Study With the construction of the Relief Channel lock at Denver in 2001, navigation onto the RC was made possible. Waterways have secured £16K to carry out a feasibility study to explore opportunities for opening the RC to navigation at the Tail Sluice.This could lead to the building of a new marina offering visiting and economic benefits.Similar to a new marina being built on disused industrial land at Beckets Park in Northampton. 

6 Visit Anglian websites

7 Tidal River Strategy for the future and the Tidal River Siltation Issues. The improved use of the tidal river to discharge water into the Wash, will allow the Relief Channel to revert to its original status as a Relief channel. Improvements have been noticed with the opening and use earlier this year of the “little eyes”. However the boating fraternity consider that the silt dredging and activation of the salt water Ouse to reduce its base level is the best way forward. This would certainly be of benefit to fishing in the Relief Channel. This idea is being pursued by the Regional Navigation Group. Options are under consideration on how best to provide continued flood defence to the area.           

Other topics included

  • Responding to Climate Change
  • Enjoying Water. Strategies to maximise economic, environment and social benefits of water related recreation in the East of England.           
  • Eel Management plan needed to prevent the species becoming extinct.  
Last Updated ( Saturday, 14 November 2009 10:04 )
 
LOFCA Meeting Nov-09
Written by Mike Grief   
Wednesday, 11 November 2009 11:15

LOFCA Meeting November 2nd 2009

Littleport Sports Club

 

The meeting was well attended and quite active. Jonathan Wilson from the Angling Trust and Mick Robinson from EA Enforcement were invited but neither was able to attend on the day. 


Kye Jerrom from the Agency answered his actions from the previous meeting to the satisfaction of the members. However the blanket weed problem on the Old Bedford at Welney was not answered. Several information items previously given to the now redundant CAAP are still not on the LOFCA Agenda. 

Kye presented the latest survey details on local rivers, plus an update on Mitten Crab sightings. He produced the project proposal forms and an EA Family Tree of contacts.Projects were discussed. Cambridge Albion had received 1K towards their platform project at Stretham. Kings Lynn was in line for platforms on the Little Ouse and Middle Level. Clubs were invited to send in projects that would enhance their fisheries. Weed has been cut and cleared on the Gt Ouse at Littleport, to the appreciation of Littleport AC. Further work to be considered. 

Kye was informed of the concerns of the local club on the work done to the back channel on the River Sapiston, this using Rod Licence Grant monies. The club thought that the 18K was not well spent.

Crayfish traps being destroyed by Agency weed cutting boats on the Lark.  

Kye informed members of the overall costs of an EA part time bailiff, working 10 hours a week (15K pa) and what actions they were allowed to take depending on their “level” Members were updated on the future way Enforcement “Calls” will be dealt with. This would be intelligence led on information received, rather than in a response to individual calls. This was of concern to members as Anglers just do not seem able to pick up the phone in real time and contact the EA about illegal issues they see. 

The KLAA “Hot” phone line has only been used twice in nearly 2 seasons. 

The Recent Review tabled in the RFERAC minutes was discussed. Member clubs felt there had been a considerable breakdown in information pathways from the “New” look EA Teams. Examples given Clubs not informed or informed on the day of any EA actions on their waters.Results of surveys or any information gathering being received months after the events, preventing clubs from utilizing any hot tips.Weed and bank cutting programmes clubs were not being informed.

Kye was very concerned and agreed to look into these matters 


The Angling Trust was discussed. Whilst members felt it is a must for angling in the long term, they considered that the PR and Advertising used by the trust to be very poor.Members were worried that LOFCA as a member organisation had not received any information from the Trust, particularly no information about where LOFCA sits or the future of Consultatives. The Possible New Byelaws were discussed.

The members were in unanimous agreement that the taking of any fish should be illegal. If pike are allowed to be taken those removing them will. 

  1. Say they are after pike and remove all they catch as happens now.
  2. Ignore size limits as they will not have scales or a tape with them
  3. Current practise is often to drag them in and kill them
  4. Those stealing fish ignore all rules and notices, anglers have been seen to remove fish next to KLAA Notices banning this practise.
  5. Those anglers are becoming extremely fly in that they roam the banks for miles perhaps covering 2 or 3 venues in one day armed just with a rod and rucksack.

They deposit their catch in bags in the reeds or under bushes to be collected later, if they do not get back too bad or so what..Do they care. This weekend the KLAA Bailiff found bags of fish in the reeds still alive with the possible culprit’s miles down the bank disappearing in the distance. Even last weekend of foul weather 10 “Anglers” and I use the term loosely were patrolling the banks, some very drunk. However whatever the byelaws the EA Enforcement teams will need to expand and this has cost implications. 


RFERAC Meetings Members were pleased to hear that the Annual 4 meetings pa was being reintroduced. Kye has discussed with other EA teams some of the above concerns from the meeting and has already replied. These include improved communication from the Fisheries team to clubs, encouraging clubs to attend survey sessions where possible. Hot info on these would be sent to the clubs asap.

An action plan is being produced to prevent a repeat of the damage to the crayfish traps on the Lark. The Agency is funding 15 new traps for use on the river. The weed growth on the Old Bedford is to be discussed with the local club.

A summary of Enforcement in the Anglian Central Regionbetween April 1st 09 and September 30th 09. 

  • Number of waters visited 763
  • Number of Anglers checked who produced a valid licence 5091
  • Number of Offences detected 119 
  • Cases convicted between these dates 113 defendants convicted
  • Total Fines £10,383.40
  • Total Costs awarded £7,778.12 

Food for thought for those that moan! 

Should you or your club wish to join the LOFCA Consultative then contact secretary Richard Hiom on 07731 990783.

Find out what’s going on and get some help and funding for your club to enhance your fishery.

 
Last Updated ( Wednesday, 11 November 2009 11:30 )
 
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 Next > End >>

Page 1 of 3
Quality fishing in beautiful places