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.

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.

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.  

           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

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?

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

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