RETURNING SPRING SALMON

[tayspringer]

:)THIS COULD BE INTERESTING POLL.

EVERY ANGLER HAS DIFFERENT IDEAS.

SHOULD WE FOLLOW THE TAY BOARDS RECOMMENDATION OF RETURNING THE FIRST FISH? WHAT ARE YOUR VIEWS REGARDLESS OF THE RIVER OR BEAT YOU FISH?

THE TAY HAS ALREADY HAD SOME SPORT FROM SPRINGERS AND THE TWEED WILL BE STARTING THIS COMING WEEK ALONG WITH A NUMBER OF OTHER SALMON RIVERS.

CHEERS

TAYSPRINGER

[williegunn]

It is usual for the district fishery boards, taking advice from their scientists to decide what is best for the river. They then advise the beat owners what is expected from their rods, the closest fit on your survey is The beat rules dictate what happens.
I personally return all spring fish which can be returned.

In 2005 65% of all Scottish spring fish were returned which is a figure Scotland should feel proud of, it would be good to see it reach the same levels as the Spey which managed an excellent 71% of sring fish.

[Fruin]

It depends on how healthy the stocks are on any particular system. I should be based on proper statistics on the health of stocks for each system, and that goes for all fish - not just springers.
That is why I voted for the beat rules dictating the policy.

[lomond]

On the Loch Lomond system,where the spring salmon stock are quite low, nobody,repeat nobody puts springers back. Which is a crying shame as it could potentially be a great spring salmon fishery (as it once was !)

[Fruin]

About 3% return of springers I believe

[lomond]

Fruin, Must be 3% returned from the Loch as every springer is chapped on the Leven !

[leo]

I think as a rule most springers should be returned to preserve fragile stocks. However, if numbers genuinely allow it, I do not think C and R should be compulsory so that people are not allowed to keep the very occasional fish.

[wilbert]

Having only ever caught springers on the Dee all 3 of them have gone back according to the beat rules / Dee fishery board. I have never fished for springers anywhere else as my local rivers don't get spring runs of any size, however I may have a crack at catching and releasing one of these rare Lancashire springers this year. If a river system can support some of the spring fish being kept then this is OK for me but numbers should be limited as with all salmon that are kept.

[elwyman]

lomond said:

Fruin, Must be 3% returned from the Loch as every springer is chapped on the Leven !

And those same people probably moan about the lack of fish in the system.

[lomond]

elwyman,Steve, That's exactly what happens. I've even seen people chapping gravid fish on the Leven ,then moaning about how bad the river now is and that how good it used to be. Unbelievable !!!

[macsalmo]

I voted beat rules dictate, again, I think it is ok to take the odd fish depending on the fish stocks in it.

[Fruin]

Lomond,

I heard of one spring fish being returned on the Leven this year. Knowing that one angler was very lucky and caught five fish, mostly caught during the working week, that means that he chapped at least four of them and possibly all five. I find that disgusting given the lack of fish in general (not just springers).

I honestly have nothing against somebody taking a spring fish if the system can afford it, and is the type of system that only a small percentage of the run is actually caught by rod and line.
The problem on poorer systems is that it may be the last fish that particular angler catches that season, and to some people, this is the only fishing available to them.
Springers may be more vulnerable, but given the poor backend run this year, we may be putting all the focus, wrongly, on one small area. I think we are in danger of creating the mindset of - don't chap any springers, but after that fill your freezers.
Any decent angler that wants a fish for the table should use there own conscience to justify the reasoning. If they have returned many spring fish over the years and are likely to continue doing so for the following few years, is it wrong of them to break the pattern and take just one spring fish?
Is it OK to return all your springers and chap everything else?
If you have been fishing all day and seen signs of healthy stocks throughout the beat, then you get a fish, are you justified in keeping it?
What I am driving at is, we are not talking about a black and white issue here, unless you are 100% C&R and abhor anybody taking a fish for the table.
If there are fishmongers on assosciation waters, or owners that encourage there guests to kill fish, then this has to be controlled, but I think that compulsory C&R would only punish the decent anglers who like to take the occasional fish, and would send the fishmongers to the next available river to carry on regardless.
As far as the Leven (and the Endrick) is concerned, we do need to get better control of the situation in conjunction with trying to encourage the stocks to grow. However, two hours on the phone last night never got me very far. However, I will keep plugging away.
There are overiding issues that will dictate the future. If we lose to many members we will not have any money to bailiff the system and the situation will get worse. We also need to find money from somewhere to help finance research and habitat improvements (if required) as, in my opinion, the trust is not moving forward in an efficient manner (slow progress and a lack of funding). I know nothing about fundraising for fisheries management and improvement, particularly on a system like ours, but if anybody is willing to point me in the right direction I am more than happy to listen.

[hornet]

To date all of my Spring Salmon have been returned and i see no reason to change ;D.

For me the Spring Salmon is to precious to chap on the head. I get more pleasure in trying to catch / land them, then most of all release them to continue on their amazing journey.

As many others have said on various posts i have no issue with anybody taking fish for the table. It is up to the individual whether we agree or disagree. All we can hope is for forums like this to try and change the mind set of people who take fish for other reasons other than the table.

Hornet

[wemyssflee]

I stopped fishing the North Esk in the spring when catch-and-release became compulsory until the end of May in 2005.
Not because having to return all fish, but because the nets were allowed to start from the beginning of May making a complete mockery of conservation by anglers.
Despite writing to the Scottish Executive and the Chairman of the Esk Fishery Board, this legislation went ahead.
The netsmen must think we anglers are all absolutely crazy to pay rents, keep the river financially stable and put all our fish back, or else, while they scoop them up 4 weeks before we can take one!!

To catch a spring fish these days requires an enormous ammount of time, effort and large sums of money in rents, almost always without success.
There are exceptions like the Dee where their run of spring fish is very prolific (Invery with 8 on Opening Day) In contrast to the huge Tay system, where they are struggling to get that many in a week.

Myself, personally, have never caught a spring fish for years which has not been due to lack of effort either. I think I would rather give up salmon fishing completely than be forced to return a hard won fish which should be my choice.

[levenrod]

Fruin : On how to finance your fishery - what you need is an expensive fishing DVD filmed by a qualified diesel mechanic illustrating where your members are failing in their ability to access the vast potential within your system. This will encourage hundreds of new members to pay for your exciting new projects.

[Fruin]

Levenrod,

Do I know you?
I think, by your comments, that you know me and obviously know my views on priorities for the system

[lomond]

Fruin, I've PM'd you

[Fruin]

Could Levenrod be JC?

[williegunn]

wemyssflee said:

I stopped fishing the North Esk in the spring when catch-and-release became compulsory until the end of May in 2005.
Not because having to return all fish, but because the nets were allowed to start from the beginning of May making a complete mockery of conservation by anglers.
Despite writing to the Scottish Executive and the Chairman of the Esk Fishery Board, this legislation went ahead.
The netsmen must think we anglers are all absolutely crazy to pay rents, keep the river financially stable and put all our fish back, or else, while they scoop them up 4 weeks before we can take one!!

To catch a spring fish these days requires an enormous ammount of time, effort and large sums of money in rents, almost always without success.
There are exceptions like the Dee where their run of spring fish is very prolific (Invery with 8 on Opening Day) In contrast to the huge Tay system, where they are struggling to get that many in a week.

Myself, personally, have never caught a spring fish for years which has not been due to lack of effort either. I think I would rather give up salmon fishing completely than be forced to return a hard won fish which should be my choice.

Perhaps with a little bit of lateral thinking you could see that the Dee has a good spring run and 100% (almost) catch and release perhaps these factors could be related?

I understand that part of the deal to restrict the netting on the Esks was the compulsory catch and release, why take the nets off if anglers continued to kill the fish?

Did you know anglers are the biggest killers of salmon in Scotland? Killing more fish than netsmen, food for thought.

[levenrod]

Fruin
All this retoric about should spingers be taken or released is completely bogus. Its as if anglers are intent on blaming themselves for the sorry state of our game fisheries. Excessive commercial fishing, industrial activity, hydro schemes and a succession of crazy Government Fisheries Policies are responsible, not anglers.

Fair angling methods, particularly with fly and spinner, have little over all effect on salmon numbers. In fact, anglers are the engine by which improvements take place and the very reason we still have wild salmon in our rivers. If anglers are not careful, we will fall into the biologists trap the same way Irish anglers have. They lobbied Government agencies, paid rod licences, biologists wages and expenses, suffered EU drainage schemes, fish farming, industrial pollution and excessive commercial netting - and how were they rewarded for all their money, hard work and dedication? They received a ban on some rivers and dreconian restrictions on others. While the netsmen got a 30 million Euro compensation package, fish farmers received ongoing subsidies and industrial polluters were given grants and tax relief for rectifying the very pollution they profited from.

Its a total nonsense and anglers shouldn't be acting as if their catches are in any way part of the problem, or the solution.