The Scottish Government

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS SHEET - FORUM 2 PAGE 2

MISCELLANEOUS LEGISLATION PROPOSALS

Alan Ayre: The Grayling Society

It was good to see such a large majority of delegates supporting the Steering Group's recommendations. This will provide the group with increased confidence that they are thinking along the right lines, and should reassure anglers generally that their interests and those of their quarry are being properly addressed. It was particularly pleasing to find that a substantial number supported the case for grayling being given some protection at spawning time.

M C Smith: Tay Proprietor

Not necessary to ban gaffs/gags. A sliding leger (Bouncing Betty) used with fly or floating devon can be used to regularly foul hook fish - re Nith and Tay. This rig is unnecessary.

Drew Jamieson: Consultative Committee

1. What about American Brook Charr as a stocking species.

2. Is the current annual close season (7 Oct - 14 Mar) for Brown Trout adequate for conservation purposes? Gravid in September, Kelts in March.

Shona Marshall : West Sutherland Fisheries Trust

Not only pike anglers use live bait. The presence of other species is an issue in non pike areas therefore a ban important to protect all areas and fish species.

Jim Henderson: Nith DSFB

Whilst I welcome the control provided by restricting the movement of fish I am concerned that policing these restrictions will fall on DSFBs. At a time when the Scottish Executive are stating that no funding will be available to fisheries management structures, this is worrying.

Robert Dalrymple: Stinchar DSFB

If Sunday be a rest day for Salmon and Sea Trout which it should be. Then it stands to reason that Sunday be a rest day for Brown Trout in the River.

N Sinclair: River Clyde Fisheries Management Trust

No problem with presentations. Though I didn't agree with some of Peter Maitland's content I think he put his point of view very well.

I was uncomfortable about voting away the pike fisher's right to live bait, as I don't do this sort of fishing. Rather like politicians and hunting!

The questions on the feedback sheets were not appropriately worded. In several cases, there was no available option which represented my view.

John Ellis: British Waterways & Lowland Canals Angling Partnership Scotland

Regarding fish stocking it is vital the legislation makes it very clear who is responsible for obtaining consents ie the owner or supplier and who would be in breach of the law in the event of error in stocking (the supplier or the fishery owner?)

Cameron Durie's points are accurate and need to be given serious thought - there is a case for specific livebaiting bans on waters of high conservation status.

The use of up to four rods and associated rod rests are vital for certain aspects of coarse fishing eg specialised carp fishing.

Do not make consenting for stocking and use of nets and electrofishing equipment as cumbersome and bureaucratic as it is in England and Wales. The annual licence approval has great merit.

Strongly support the principle of local management empowerment where appropriate.

John Hamilton: River Girvan DSFB

Live Bait - Care will need to be taken that any legislation introduced to ban live bait may extend from live fish used as bait to cover all live bait. There would be significant problems for all anglers if bait such as worms, maggots etc were caught up in any legislation.

Weekly Close Times - It is impossible to enforce weekly close times as are species when other unrestricted species are also present. Therefore all trout should be treated similarly and in line with salmon; all coarse fish likewise.

Peter Reith: Federation of Border Angling Associations

Weekly Closed Times - Weekly closed times are either of benefit to wild brown trout or grayling or they are not. Scientific input/advice is required and if there is benefit to the fish there should be a closed day.

Angling Methods - Legislation should exclude the sale of antique tackle for collection rather than use.

Steve Tapley: Pike Anglers Alliance For Scotland

Rod Licences - A very good idea as long as every Department gets its fair share of the funds raised.

Protection Orders at the moment do not do the above. No improvement to fishings from Protection Order levies. Pocketed by the riparian owners and clubs.

If rod licences are chosen there needs to be a sound way of collecting it and policing it.

Jane Wright: RAFTS

Difficult to comment on whether there should be restrictions on fishing for charr and coarse species. It would have been helpful to have a short presentation on lifecycle of coarse species and charr - the local differences when spawning occurs etc (pointing to the possible need for local restrictions).

Pike for instance become heavier prior to spawning which may lead to increased pressure and decreased ability to recover from being caught - Debate would have been helpful on this and other relevant issues.

Edward Mountain : Spey and Beauly DSFB

How can you create restrictions for fish protection without detrimentally affecting somebodies fishings. Will there be compensation would it not be better to limit catches.

Simon McKelvey: Conon DSFB

Regulation of movement of fish is desirable but there must be resources made available to enforce the legislation. Legislation without resources to enforce it is likely to become discredited and ignored.

If the District Salmon Fishery Boards are to be asked to enforce legislation relating to fish species not currently within their remit, how will this be resourced.

Consider ban on use of freshwater fish as bait live or dead to make enforcement possible.

Ian Calcott: SANA

The council of the Scottish Anglers National Association recently agreed that there should be a closed season for grayling in Scotland from mid-March to mid-June. (Reminder: SANA represents 30,000+ anglers in Scotland).

Bert Johnston: Tweed Liaison Committee

Considering the decline in wild brown trout stocks have the Steering Committee considered making the statutory close season for brown trout 1st October to 31st March. At the beginning trout are not in condition and at the end are in spawning condition.

Roger Brook: RAFTS

"Fixed Lines" - we should not unintentionally introduce fixed line fishing on river banks for salmonids - suggest that unless fishing from a boat, a single rod to be held in the hand when fishing for salmonids on running water.

Alastair McPhee: Pike Anglers Alliance For Scotland

Do we really feel the Forum should discuss ethics of putting hooks in fish? If this is unacceptable - fishing is unacceptable.

All transfers - be they commercial or for ornamental reasons should be legislated equally - do we close aquaria supplies to prevent fish movements or the extreme, have a serious of threat to those stocking ornamentals in garden ponds.

Ruffe - proven case studies on transfer are not proven in Scotland - however the US Great Lakes have proven transfer of Ruffe via tanker ballast - ruffe from Europe to the US. None of Prof. Maitland's talk allowed for this prevention.

The method is widely accepted as normal - the bait fish industry in the US is worth $55 million annual - could Scotland increase its angling turnover to follow US.

The enforcement of these laws will require substantial bodies and costs - do we have a plan?

The use of fish from the water course is the only fair way forward.

Certain Dutch studies have proven the most effective tool in capturing pike repeatedly is the use of live fish. Given most pike are returned and learn from the experience with the exception of those taken on live fish. Why limit anglers to poor methods such as dead baits and lures.

Gary Clarkson: Scottish Federation For Coarse Angling

Re Mr Maitland's presentation and the proposals he spoke on.

If alien species are such a large problem why are fish transfers by members of public not included in the proposals.

You asked whether we wanted dace in the Spey. What evidence do you have that they are not already there?

Can he clarify his statement that without regulation coarse fish will reach catchments which do not already have them.

Does he include rainbow trout as part of the "most important fish in Scotland" (ie salmonids). Rainbow trout have polluted more waters than any other species.

Does Mr Maitland really believe that Ruffe are used and pike baits.

Does Mr Maitland believe that angling should be banned?

Rab Lee: Pike Anglers Alliance For Scotland

With regard to the use of livebaits, Peter's "ethical concerns" seem to be extremely unfounded. His opinion that fish can feel pain seems contrary to recent scientific studies and once we go down the route of it being cruel to put hooks in fish, surely this would mean that by definition actually trying to catch them on hooks could be deemed as cruel. In addition to his thoughts on transferring fish it was interesting to see that rainbow trout , one of the most widely introduced predatory fish species seem to go unchallenged. Though escapees and introductions these fish have found their way into waterways all over Scotland with hardly any cause for concern. The main point is that translocation of fish and livebaiting are separate issues and there is no danger of introductions of alien fish if baits are used from the waters being fished as per PAAS & SFCA code of conduct.

Peter Kennedy: River Doon Salmon Fishery Board

1. Well presented - clear and precise

2. One should avoid discussing ethics of use of live bait. No permission to use locally caught live bait as this could be open to abuse.

Jon Gibb : River Lochy Association/LDSFB/LFT

Definition of "rod and line"

I am still not convinced that this new definition is robust enough. My doubts are with the phrase 'providing proper control exercised'. The bailiffs have a very severe problem in this region with people using set lines for trout (and particularly rainbow trout on Loch Lochy). The amount of juvenile billed inadvertently is considerable. Often these people will set their rod out with bait overnight and sleep next to it. I am sure they would argue that they have the rod under 'proper control' due to their proximity to the rod. Would it not be better to replace the second bullet point of the definition to: -

• Restrict fishing for salmonids to a maximum of one rod per angler, held in the hand , except when harling or trolling from a moving boat

Furthermore, I am still not at all clear how this new definition would preclude the practise of (the old definitions) 'strictly, pointing & dragging' (ie foul hooking). In conclusion, I feel the definition needs more work.

W M Shearer: Salmon Net Fishing Association of Scotland

A method favoured by government in the past to reduce level of exploitation and conserve salmon stocks has been the ability to increase the Weekly Close Time of the net fishery but leaving rod fishery unchanged. Such a method if it was to apply to all fisheries particularly following the demise of the greater part of the net fishery has much in its favour from both a biological and management perspective.

Varying the Weekly Close Time could have a positive conservation impact on stock components when - and whenever they are harvested and it could be made to act with a precision not presently achievable under the present legislation which requires the Weekly Close Time to be the same for the whole of Scotland.

Although the present legislation allows for variations at district level in the Annual Close Time this instrument lacks the level of precision required and which could be achieved by making powers to vary the Weekly Close Time at district level.

Duncan Clark: Auchterarder AC

In the absence of clarity of implementation I have said no to the definition of rod and line issue. I have responded on this via the web forum and am gravely concerned about the universal legislation of set lines. If we are to have coarse methods for coarse fisheries only this may operate perhaps quite well but might need a lot of policing.

In our club water which can be quite busy and is only ¾ mile single bank we operate a step and cast rule which applies as soon as another angler appears to fish a pool. The use of a set line across the pool let alone 4 would cause considerable upset to our members and could make a lot of members give up in disgust if such practices were allowed.

I do not believe the use of 3 rods in 1 boat trolling is analogous to 1 bank angler fishing 4 set lines. I regularly take 3 rods fishing bit I only ever use one at a time. A single rod and line (however defined) should be enough for any angler whether he is game or coarse fishing.

If we are to have coarse methods for coarse fisheries only who is going to ensure its non-use in game fisheries and how? If its made universally legal even on this basis how will clubs like ours combat anglers who claim to be fishing for eels or perch/pike/roach/flounders. This could be done by local club rules perhaps if the club or proprietor owns the rights on both banks but if as in our case you have a club which exercises a significant level of control over its members methods and the opposite bank does not how will this be dealt with.

In regard to weekly close times for Salmon & Sea Trout I am not convinced that the conservation argument is being fairly presented in regard to other species. If it is considered necessary (purely on conservation grounds) to keep Sunday as a no fishing day then the same arguments must apply to all other species as the increased fishing effort available on Sunday must be the same for all species. We must be consistent here.

Back to contributor list | Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4