Clongee fishery on the moy

fishy8881

Im wanting to know if anyone can clear this up for me about this stretch. Ive been fishing here for almost 20 years and theres this one spot where it begins that theres a disput where a farmer says he owns the right sand the fishery board say different.

Ive know people to get their rods took of them on this paticular spot and a few have even went to court and they said the judge throws it out everytime apart from a few cases where they agreed not to fish it ever again without their daily permits.

Ive been told recently that the courtcase went ahead between the fishery board and the farmer saying he owns the rights and its been settled that the farmer is free to fish it and can let 10 people on it with his permission. This case has been suppose to been going on for 20 yrs and still isnt settled because none of them can produced the rights. Can anyone clear this up on how the rights get owned.I own my own farm and on my deeds it says i own my fishing rights yet theres no river or lake on my land, would this be the case for people who own land on the moy.

Im wanting to know has anyone heard similar and can clear this up because i wouldnt want to be going fishing this spot and getting myself into trouble. I do know the guy in question as i went to school with one of his kids but want to hear the views of others or if theres any fishery board guys on here that can clear this up.

Zzippy

fishy8881 wrote: »

Im wanting to know if anyone can clear this up for me about this stretch. Ive been fishing here for almost 20 years and theres this one spot where it begins that theres a disput where a farmer says he owns the right sand the fishery board say different.

Ive know people to get their rods took of them on this paticular spot and a few have even went to court and they said the judge throws it out everytime apart from a few cases where they agreed not to fish it ever again without their daily permits.

Ive been told recently that the courtcase went ahead between the fishery board and the farmer saying he owns the rights and its been settled that the farmer is free to fish it and can let 10 people on it with his permission. This case has been suppose to been going on for 20 yrs and still isnt settled because none of them can produced the rights. Can anyone clear this up on how the rights get owned.I own my own farm and on my deeds it says i own my fishing rights yet theres no river or lake on my land, would this be the case for people who own land on the moy.

Im wanting to know has anyone heard similar and can clear this up because i wouldnt want to be going fishing this spot and getting myself into trouble. I do know the guy in question as i went to school with one of his kids but want to hear the views of others or if theres any fishery board guys on here that can clear this up.

The case was indeed heard recently, and from what I was told it was proved that IFI owned the fishing rights and the landowner did not. It was agreed that the farmer could fish it himself, but I certainly didn't hear anything about him being allowed to let 10 people with his permission. If he doesn't own fishing rights there would be no legal basis for this.

AFAIK The previous cases of anglers being prosecuted for no permits were not thrown out, the judge just refused to rule on them while the High court case was pending. Those cases will now be proceeded with AFAIK. If I were you I would certainly not fish there without a permit.

fishy8881

Zzippy wrote: »

The case was indeed heard recently, and from what I was told it was proved that IFI owned the fishing rights and the landowner did not. It was agreed that the farmer could fish it himself, but I certainly didn't hear anything about him being allowed to let 10 people with his permission. If he doesn't own fishing rights there would be no legal basis for this.

AFAIK The previous cases of anglers being prosecuted for no permits were not thrown out, the judge just refused to rule on them while the High court case was pending. Those cases will now be proceeded with AFAIK. If I were you I would certainly not fish there without a permit.

Would this be hearsay or fact and was it in any newspapers?

As for the guys who were up in court before the ruling, i dont think anything could happen to them now because of the situation but anyone caught now would certainly get prosecuted.

do you know how the ifi proved they owned the rights because this case has been going on years and how did the outcome only happen now and not 15 years ago.

fishy8881

Not really to do with the OP but why doesnt clongee have yearly tickets or membership. Its one stretch id love to fish daily but cant because of the day tickets they only sell.

Zzippy

fishy8881 wrote: »

Would this be hearsay or fact and was it in any newspapers?

As for the guys who were up in court before the ruling, i dont think anything could happen to them now because of the situation but anyone caught now would certainly get prosecuted.

do you know how the ifi proved they owned the rights because this case has been going on years and how did the outcome only happen now and not 15 years ago.

Fair enough its hearsay as it is what I was told by someone who was at the court but didn't observe it myself.

AFAIK IFI purchased the fishing rights several years ago from the previous owner (of the fishing rights). Fishing rights are proved by the production of a deed, similar to the one you have for your own land. Not all landowners will own fishing rights - in many cases sporting rights were retained by a previous owner when land was sold. I presume it was shown in court that the landowner's deed did not assert ownership of fishing rights. IFI would have had a deed for fishing rights supported by conveyancing documents from the sale and a copy of the original deed. Again, I wasn't involved in the case so don't take my word as gospel.

As for the guys whose cases were set aside, I wouldn't like to guess the outcome, but given who the district court judge in Mayo is, I would be very surprised if she didn't find some reason to throw the cases out.

fishy8881

Zzippy wrote: »

Fair enough its hearsay as it is what I was told by someone who was at the court but didn't observe it myself.

AFAIK IFI purchased the fishing rights several years ago from the previous owner (of the fishing rights). Fishing rights are proved by the production of a deed, similar to the one you have for your own land. Not all landowners will own fishing rights - in many cases sporting rights were retained by a previous owner when land was sold. I presume it was shown in court that the landowner's deed did not assert ownership of fishing rights. IFI would have had a deed for fishing rights supported by conveyancing documents from the sale and a copy of the original deed. Again, I wasn't involved in the case so don't take my word as gospel.

As for the guys whose cases were set aside, I wouldn't like to guess the outcome, but given who the district court judge in Mayo is, I would be very surprised if she didn't find some reason to throw the cases out.

I remember a family member of landowner telling me that the guy did have it in his deeds his father left to him stating that he had the fishing rights on his land and seeing as the river runs through part of it, he owns the rights to that small part of clongee fishery. It isnt a long stretch compared to others on the moy but would still be worth a few hundred thousand euro if not 1mill. Do you know does the land owner have a case for an appeal to a higher court. Im not clued up on the law but i would guess he would seeing as its on his deeds.