Fishing The Fly Scotland Forum

Derek Roxborough

78 pages of future red tape
« on: 17/02/2016 at 12:07 »
 The draft reform bill for Scotlands wild fisheries is on line,this will affect us all and effectively criminalise all anglers who do not have written permission to fish, this will kill off the wild trout fishing in the highlands,also there will be appointments of Jobsworths as either bailiffs or the new designation of fishery warden, write to Your MP/MSP, with your concerns, the Anglers are being held responsible for the demise  of the west coast salmon not the Salmon farming industry   :z8 easgach 1


Rob Brownfield

Re: 78 pages of future red tape
« Reply #2 on: 17/02/2016 at 13:06 »
Read it, cant reply without politicizing the issue. Sorry.

It is basically the fishery version of "Right to Roam" and "Land Reform Bill".

I believe we will see rivers and lochs forced into an open access, anyone can fish here status.  Open access is listed as one of the foundation stones of the Wild Fisheries Reform Bill.

Equally, those waters that are currently free, will become "administered" in some form. That will introduce a cost.

I  must question why put and take fisheries and stocked waters seem to be covered by this Bill as well?  "The system (national and local functions) will manage fish in our rivers and lochs as well as put-and-take fisheries in still waters."


Mike Barrio

Re: 78 pages of future red tape
« Reply #3 on: 17/02/2016 at 14:14 »
Interesting points Rob ................... :z3

Mike Thornton

Re: 78 pages of future red tape
« Reply #4 on: 17/02/2016 at 16:32 »
 As far as I am aware there was no such thing as free fishing for trout in Scotland.  ,  The bottom line was that unless covered by a Protection Order, which made it a criminal offence,  unauthorized fishing for trout remains an offence which is subject to civil prosecution.   The problem is that unless you know the person fishing illegally, the owner of the fishing does not even have the power to demand, and seek verification of, their name and address.   Before the Don was granted Protection Order status bus loads of indiscriminate anglers from the Scottish central belt ravaged the river.  If they had only brown trout in their possession , even although an offence had been committed, there was little we could do about it.   And they knew this !
     As for opening up fishing access to one and all, remember there is an election coming up, and such a move will be worth lots of votes for President Nicola.

Derek Roxborough

Re: 78 pages of future red tape
« Reply #5 on: 17/02/2016 at 19:11 »
I don't know where you thought that the fisheries would be open, more Bailiffs /Wardens, criminal charges  Local fisheries management organisations, how is that opening up fisheries? according to Lord Joycey after the 1976 Fisheries act Scotland  ,  wild brown trout belong  to whoever catches them but access could be trespass, My interpretation of the bill will be more restrictions not less, and I don't feel it has any comparison with the land reform bill ,up to now access to hill lochs has been allowed provided that you respect the privilege, now you will have to carry written permission, and still no mention of salmon farming, I have filled in the online questionnaire and have a letter to my local MP , easgach 1

Mike Barrio

Re: 78 pages of future red tape
« Reply #6 on: 17/02/2016 at 22:52 »
What I liked about Rob's post is that he had obviously tried to find something positive in the paper.  I'm guessing that most folk ( myself included ) would simply look for the negatives.

I usually need to read through these things a few times before I can begin to understand them and form an opinion ....... and I'm not there yet :oops

Cheers
Mike

Hamish Young

Re: 78 pages of future red tape
« Reply #7 on: 18/02/2016 at 05:15 »
Equally, those waters that are currently free, will become "administered" in some form. That will introduce a cost.

A Scottish rod licence maybe :? :!

What I liked about Rob's post is that he had obviously tried to find something positive in the paper.  I'm guessing that most folk ( myself included ) would simply look for the negatives.

Fair point well made. By and large though it strikes me that the one thing anglers really believe is that they know better than the politicians and civil servants tasked with creating the reform bill; whilst that is probably true (in most cases :!) it is likely that the proposed bill will yield the usual divided response from anglers in (and out) of Scotland and the owners of fishing - when what they should be doing is speaking under a unified voice.
I'm not necessarily in favour of needless red tape but I'd observe that from an outsiders perspective we may be perceived as not being the best custodians of our resources (let's not get into that right now.....) and if the bill contains a 'real world' way to move forward in the restoration of our wild fisheries then I'll almost certainly support it.

H :cool:

Rob Brownfield

Re: 78 pages of future red tape
« Reply #8 on: 18/02/2016 at 08:01 »
What I liked about Rob's post is that he had obviously tried to find something positive in the paper.  I'm guessing that most folk ( myself included ) would simply look for the negatives.Mike

Did I??? lol.


Rob Brownfield

Re: 78 pages of future red tape
« Reply #9 on: 18/02/2016 at 08:21 »
"The Scottish Ministers may by regulations make provision for the imposition of a levy
on persons specified in subsection (2), to be known as a wild fisheries levy.
(2) The persons are—
(a) in relation to an Atlantic salmon fishery, an owner or occupier of the right to fish
for Atlantic salmon in the fishery,
(b) in relation to any other wild fishery, an owner or occupier of the land to which the
right to fish for freshwater fish (other than Atlantic salmon) in the fishery pertains."


This is worrying.  As the SG have placed stocked and put and take fisheries under "Wild fisheries", there is now nothing to stop them imposing a charge on a private owner who manages his own fishery.

The purpose of a wild fisheries levy is to meet or contribute towards expenditure
incurred, or to be incurred, by the Scottish Ministers or Fisheries Management
Organisations—
(a) in promoting—
(i) the conservation of freshwater fish in wild fisheries and their habitats, and
(ii) best practice in the management of wild fisheries,
(b) otherwise in performing functions under this Act or any other enactment relating
to wild fisheries.


So a private fishery may have to pay a levy for a Minister to tell them how to run their fishery or to support other fisheries that may have asked for help.

Maybe I am reading in to thing to much??

Regulations under subsection (1) may, in particular—
(a) specify rates of levies, or provide for them to be determined, by reference to such
factors or circumstances as may be specified in or determined under the
regulations,
(b) make provision for the valuation of wild fisheries and for the entering of the
values in the valuation roll,

(c) provide for levies to be imposed on an annual or other recurring basis,
(d) provide for exemptions, discounts, remissions or repayments,
(e) provide for the collection and enforcement of levies,
(f) provide for the charging of interest on overdue levies,
(g) provide for appeals in respect of any matter determined under the regulations,
(h) provide for income from levies to be retained by the Scottish Ministers or
Fisheries Management Organisations,
(i) in relation to income from levies retained by Fisheries Management
Organisations, make provision about—
(i) the particular purposes for which the income may be applied,
(ii) the accounting for the income and the expenditure of the income,
(j) provide for the delegation of functions to a Fisheries Management Organisation in
relation to—
(i) the determination of the rates of levies and their administration, collection
and enforcement, or
(ii) any other matter provided for in the regulations.

I have to ask why a wild fishery would need a "valuation"? Only one reason...tax.

Derek Roxborough

Re: 78 pages of future red tape
« Reply #10 on: 18/02/2016 at 15:48 »
 And to pay for the New Bailiffs/wardens, very little of the rod licence in England goes back in to the Fisheries, it goes on administration, and I don't see the Scottish version being much different,one of the Questions was should Scottish ministers be able to designate the moneys as they think fit or should the money be solely for the purpose of the fisheries, now what do you think?I can find nothing positive in this interference with the system, at least from my point of view, at the consultation we were told not to refer to historic events,(salmon farming) because they wanted to move forward, this was by a man with no interest in fishing, I can see this being a bone of contention for years to come,   :z8   easgach 1

Rob Brownfield

Re: 78 pages of future red tape
« Reply #11 on: 19/02/2016 at 09:29 »
And to pay for the New Bailiffs/wardens, very little of the rod licence in England goes back in to the Fisheries, it goes on administration, and

This is a useful reference https://environmentagency.blog.gov.uk/2014/07/17/where-does-your-rod-licence-money-go/

The EA probably has more anglers to cater for so yes, admin charges will be high, but the work they have recently been doing on re-stocking and fish rearing has been fantastic. I think that this is going to be the falling down bit of a Scottish system, re-stocking.

If all anglers have to pay a rod licence, and  if its based on the English system, coarse anglers will have to buy two licenses (as they often use 2 rods) so would expect their money to be used on coarse fish restocking and habitat improvement. But I cannot see this happening.

I think it will actually end up a right mess...although in practice, I support rod licenses and a single organization...but I just don't think it will work in Scotland.

Mike Thornton

Re: 78 pages of future red tape
« Reply #12 on: 19/02/2016 at 13:46 »
I don't know where you thought that the fisheries would be open, more Bailiffs /Wardens, criminal charges  Local fisheries management organisations, how is that opening up fisheries? according to Lord Joycey after the 1976 Fisheries act Scotland  ,  wild brown trout belong  to whoever catches them but access could be trespass, My interpretation of the bill will be more restrictions not less, and I don't feel it has any comparison with the land reform bill ,up to now access to hill lochs has been allowed provided that you respect the privilege, now you will have to carry written permission, and still no mention of salmon farming, I have filled in the online questionnaire and have a letter to my local MP , easgach 1

    And so the free trout fishing debate rumbles on.
    In the nineteen eighties and early nineties I did a fair bit of trout fishing in the north of Scotland and encountered plenty of so called "anglers" who were adamant  that they had the god given right to fish for trout, in Scotland, for free.  Their fishing was mainly carried out with set lines, drowning worms.   It also appeared mandatory that you were required to be drinking a can of beer while watching your rod tip.  Their empty cans were often left behind at the end of the day.
     A few years ago a squad from  "The Free Trout Fishing" brigade proclaimed their intention to fish for free on a lower Spey beat.  The TV, media, and every other dog's body was there on the day to witness the tartan clad bold heroes march down to the river, rods in hand.  After a few casts they were quickly escorted from the water , and nothing was ever reported to the effect that they had been unfairly or unlawfully treated in any way.
     Bruce Sandison, the celebrated Scottish angling writer and author, has been doing his best to dispel the free trout fishing myth  for many years now.   In spite of his considerable influence things do not appear to be getting any better.
      As for "trespass", let me put on my old bobbies bonnet and respectfully advise that there is no crime of trespass under Scottish common or statutory law.   There was something called the Vagrancy Act which gave the police power to deal with vagrants, vagabonds and other tinks in general.  A landowner seeking to keep normal people off his land would need to take out a court injunction ( if granted) to achieve this.
        Let us hope that the eventual outcome of the proposed legislation will lead to the same degree of protection for brown trout, as that offered to migratory fish.  However I am afraid that this may simply be wishful thinking, since the central belt holds all the trump cards.

Mike Barrio

Re: 78 pages of future red tape
« Reply #13 on: 19/02/2016 at 14:35 »
You can't beat the system in place in New Zealand in my humble opinion :z8

You pay the government for an annual fishing licence, there are strict rules in place to protect the fish and the environment and the government employs people to police those rules.

No beats, no exclusive waters, you simply pay for your annual licence and go fishing.

Derek Roxborough

Re: 78 pages of future red tape
« Reply #14 on: 19/02/2016 at 15:29 »
That would be nice  Mike ,But there are too many riparian owners (i.e. Lairds)if the land belonged to the people then so would the fishing ,but, it's not and  we have to suffer for it, the examples for the bill are supposed to be from abroad,  but I think they have been cherry picking the bits that the government liked with out seeing the broader picture. In  BC in Canada there are 6 state hatcheries for restocking I wonder how many state hatcheries there are in Scotland? but I already know that answer,  I don't know if Howietoun still exists, that was the only one near enough to a State hatchery, this discussion will rumble on , easgach 1

 




Barrio Fly Lines - designed in Scotland - Cast with confidence all over the world

Barrio Fly Lines

Designed in Scotland

Manufactured in the UK

Cast with confidence all over the world

www.flylineshop.com