SFFF SG 6-2c: Access to salmon and freshwater fisheries
in Scotland
This focusing paper summarises the main discussions of
the Steering Group on access.
Salmon
In Scotland, even in the sea around the coast, salmon
fishing rights are private, heritable titles. It is an
offence for any person without the legal right or written
permission from a person having such right to fish for or
take salmon.
In general, the lawful methods for salmon fishing in
Scotland are:
a - Inside estuary limits - net and coble; rod and
line.
b - Outside estuary limits - net and coble; bag net, fly
net or other stake net; rod and line
Exceptions to these rules include some ancient, but
still active rights to use cruives (cruive is a kind of
trap fishery) in some rivers, and the use of gears such as
haaf nets and poke nets in the Solway Firth.
Salmon net fisheries are operated by the owners of
fishing rights or tenant netsmen. Tenants operate the
fisheries under leasing arrangements. The fishermen have
exclusive rights to fish at the locations specified in the
titles to the fisheries.
Rod fisheries for salmon may be operated by the
proprietors, their guests, lease holders, time-share
owners, or persons who buy permits to fish. The prices
charged for permits are largely market driven and may vary
from around £10 per day to several hundreds of pounds for
those fisheries considered to be the best. Many angling
clubs own or lease fisheries, and make fishing available to
their members and visitors, often at very reasonable
prices.
Fishing for salmon is regulated by both weekly and
annual close times.
Increasing access
Netting. It is unlikely that there will be any increase
in the availability of netting opportunities in the
foreseeable future. The trend in recent years has been to
close net fisheries, either as a result of buy-out schemes,
or as a result of netsmen reducing their effort by
combining fishing stations and reducing the numbers of gear
units deployed. Given the differing economic values of the
fish taken by nets and rods, the emphasis has swung towards
rod fisheries.
Angling. In many areas, access may already be as
complete as possible commensurate with ensuring
sustainability and economic viability. The issue of more
permits may lead to an increase in levels of exploitation,
and may ultimately be to the disbenefit of the fishery.
One of the major selling points for salmon angling in
Scotland is the fact that generally speaking, river banks
are not too crowded with anglers. Any increase in the
numbers of anglers may put down the prices that may be
charged, and could actually reduce income from the
fisheries, especially from anglers visiting from
overseas.
Any shortening of weekly or annual close times may
increase the level of exploitation, which, it may be
argued, could already be too high on some stock components,
especially the early-running, multi-sea-winter salmon.
Increasing adoption of catch and release may afford some
scope for decreasing weekly and annual close times, and
there may be arguments in some rivers for altering the
dates of the annual close times to match changes in
run-timing that appear to have occurred. These should be
examined on a case-by-case basis, reflecting the differing
situations in different salmon fishery districts.
Some correspondents have advocated the removal of the
weekly close time for salmon angling (Sunday) on the basis
that this is the only or one of the only days on which they
are able to fish. A straight addition of Sunday to the
fishing week would inevitably lead to some increase in
exploitation levels. It may be suggested that this could
be offset by changing the "day off" to another day during
the week. This would, of course, have implications for the
anglers who visit Scotland, or another part of Scotland,
for a week's fishing (generally Monday to Saturday), and
for the owners of the fisheries/accommodation etc
involved.
Most of the arguments put forward to increase access
have focused on the desire of some anglers to either obtain
fishing more cheaply or to have Sunday fishing without
giving up any other days, and make little or no reference
to the long-term implications of these proposals.
Freshwater Fish
The Steering Group has identified a number of concerns
over the issue of access to fishing for freshwater fish.
There are, however, a few common threads.
There is agreement that the status quo cannot be
maintained. However, there is a clear acceptance that a
free-for-all is not an option. None of the Group advocates
unlimited access to fishing, and all agree that good and
sustainable fisheries cannot be maintained without the
input of money from anglers. All agree that there may be
times and/or places where fishing for any freshwater fish
should not be permitted either permanently or temporarily
in order to address specific fishery management
issues.
Much of the criticism about access appears to stem from
dissatisfaction with the provisions in and the operation of
the Freshwater and Salmon Fisheries (Scotland) Act 1976 and
the Protection Orders that have been or could be made under
that Act. Some of the criticism is made by anglers who
seem to think that the fact that it is generally a civil
offence to fish for freshwater without permission means
that there is an unfettered right to fish for freshwater
fish in Scotland. This is not the case. The fish are wild
animals and belong to no person until caught. However, the
fishing rights are owned.
There is also the widely-held misconception that POs
refer only to brown trout, and despite repeated attempts to
clarify the situation, this seems to have gained almost
given truth status in some quarters. The situation is
actually quite clear. All protection orders refer to
fishing for freshwater fish in inland waters in the
prescribed areas. Thus, fishing for fish such as charr,
pike, perch, roach is covered. Any cases where this is not
being done is not because the 1976 Act is at fault, but is
as a result of the owners/occupiers and anglers failing to
understand the provisions in the Act.
There are, however, shortcomings in the 1976 Act.
Ensuring sustainable fisheries for wild fish requires
that there be rational management of the fisheries. The
1976 Act does not provide for that explicitly, merely
stating that the Scottish Ministers shall not make a PO
unless they have taken into consideration the need for
conservation of any species of fish. There is no
requirement for any on-going monitoring by anybody to
determine whether situations have changed after any PO has
been made.
Attention has been drawn to the difficulties that exist
in dealing with withdrawal of access after a PO has been
made. Each PO made has been drafted to describe a coherent
area. No real scope exists to remove the protection
afforded to individual riparian owners within a PO area.
Where there have been problems in the past, the approach
taken to remedy the situation has been to propose
revocation of the whole PO, even though it may be working
reasonably well over the vast majority of the area
covered.
Criticism has been made of conditions applied to
permits, such as fishing by fly only, no Sunday fishing, no
night-time fishing, restrictions on wading depths. Many
fisheries apply conditions to permits, but criticism is
often restricted to those fisheries within a PO area. In
some parts of the country, there is a strongly held
antipathy to fishing, and indeed many other activities,
being undertaken on a Sunday. Whether there is a need to
require those who would wish to keep Sundays free from
fishing to change their minds is as much a social issue as
a fishing issue. There may be less of an argument with
regard to prohibiting night-time fishing and restricting
wading depth. In a number of cases, riparian owners may
cite health and safety arguments to support their bans,
while still allowing those fishing for salmon and/or sea
trout to fish at night or without wading depth
restrictions.
Some owners of salmon fisheries have clearly attempted
to prohibit anglers seeking trout, grayling or coarse
fishing, and some may have implemented de facto
prohibitions on the basis that they are disturbing salmon,
or disturbing salmon spawn. However, there must be scope
for resource sharing.
There is great scope for promoting angling in Scotland,
and improved access to fishing must be part of this
process. However, with respect to fishing for wild fish,
it is essential that sustainability remains at the heart of
any further development. This will require rational
management. Information required to ensure this might
include:
- establishment of baseline data on
the species of fish present, and their age and growth
characteristics;
- determination of the current
levels of exploitation and the potential for any
increase;
- development of detailed plans for
the management of individual fisheries and how these
plans might interact within any given area.
It would seem to present a clearer picture to everyone
if it was necessary to have written permission to fish for
any freshwater fish in inland waters in Scotland. This is
quite separate for any call for a rod licence, which does
not have universal support. The issues then would be what
charge would be made for a permit, to whom the permit fee
would be payable, and how the permit fee was used to
support the fishery in question. There is much to commend
the proposals that such monies should be spent locally.
However, it is not immediately clear who would be
responsible for the issue of permits or for using the money
collected.
Local Authorities have been proposed by some. These
bodies have the advantage that they are accountable
locally, but there remain problems. Firstly, they are
unlikely to have the resources available to take on what
could be a fairly large amount of extra work. Secondly,
natural fishery management geographical areas do not fit
with the LA geographical areas. One river system may cross
more than one LA area. It is essential that catchment wide
management is developed, and this may become more difficult
if several LA areas are involved, each with their own
priorities.
An Anglers' Trust has also been proposed. This may be a
vehicle for introducing a nationwide requirement for having
permission to fish. It may also be possible to introduce a
mechanism whereby permit fees are utilised in the
management of the fisheries for which they were paid.
However, it is not clear how such a Trust would be formed,
who would be members, how they would be accountable, where
it would be located, and how the Trust would be financed.
A number of other questions remain to be answered. For
example, do the proposers envisage a Non-Departmental
Public Body? In order to ensure that local issues are
addressed, should there be locally-based subsidiary groups
that are accountable to a centrally-based Trust? Will the
Trust employ qualified fisheries biologists to provide the
science necessary to underpin management policies?
The scheme that seems to have most support is for the
establishment of Unitary Authorities that will undertake
management of both salmon and freshwater fisheries. The
arguments for this proposal have been presented in the
papers associated with management structures. However,
access and management are inextricably linked. The
adoption of a series of Unitary Authorities should allow
for the establishment of bodies that are large enough to be
economically viable, but locally-based enough to be able to
address the differing problems that exist in different
fisheries and river catchments. They will have to be
financed to a large extent by those who wish to use the
resource, but should perhaps also expect to receive funding
from other groups who benefit downstream and who are
included in the evaluation of the economic benefits of
fishing to Scotland, such as the hotel and guest house
sector, fishing tackle shops, etc., as well as any central
funding that may be necessary to ensure that government
policy may be implemented.
Back to Steering Group menu