Salmon bye laws

Bio Mech

Just a few thoughts.

I used to have a pretty good opinion of the fisheries boards, now IFI, and the other fishing powers that be. Thought they did pretty good work all considered. They took a lot of flack in a lot of areas but the individuals always worked hard and did their best.

I was supportive of them for the most part.

Was.

Of course a lot happens over 20 years and the issues with pike control, gillnetting etc have been well highlighted here. But my particular gripe, which has left me feeling so disillusioned with IFI and fisheries law that I want to never deal with them again.....

The Liffey Salmon bye laws (So who is my gripe with? IFI, the minister, the stakeholders, the clubs?)...

Now I have been fishing the liffey for 30 years and my father 40 years. Its my home water of sorts. Friends and clubmates have fished it just as long. Never once in all that time have I caught or even hooked a salmon when I wasn't specifically targeting them. I have never had a salmon while pike deadbaiting, feeder fishing, pole fishing or stick float fishing. The liffey is a mixed fishery and Salmon are only one species among many...pike, perch, trout, roach, hybrids, gudgeon, eels, bream.

But now I am banned from using barbed hooks, worms, trebles. Single barbless hooks only. Its primarily frustrating for two reasons. Firstly as I said I have never had a salmon on deadbait. Secondly its a method I like to use a lot on the liffey and now I have to use barbless singles or else I am criminalised. Its been tricky to nail that method down and I have been connecting with much fewer fish. Now I can live with all that but...

If the Salmon are in such need of protection how can it be ok to allow guys to specifically fish for them, in summer, low water conditions, with prawns, spinners and fly. Single barbless might allow the hook to easily pop out but surely its of more risk to the fish to be fighting them, netting them, unhooking them, handling them and returning them in hot low water conditions?

In my experience its of minimal risk to use a standard deadbait rig as the chances or contact are minimal. But there is a bigger risk to salmon to target them in low water conditions even as catch and release. I have seen many liffey fish go belly up after being caught on singles. I have never seen one go belly up from picking up a deadbait.

So as a law abiding angler I have found my own fishing to be impinged upon to protect the salmon so the salmon guys can get out the prawns and have some sport. I also don't buy the enforcement argument that might be made because the fishery officers still have to check peoples gear to ensure they are fishing with barbless singles anyway.

Why not with a bit more thought and detail on the law allow the use of trebles for deadbaiting, or the use of barbed hooks below a certain size for pole and float fishing?

Why, well it seems if you don't fish for salmon you don't matter. I didn't used to believe that line.

I think I do now.

uch

I've been using Barbless hooks on the Liffey for about 25 years now and haven't had a noticeable difference in losing fish between Barbed and Barbless, but I never fish for Pike, Salmon or Trout on it. But I fully agree with you in that I've never seen a Salmon hooked on a Pike Rig, so I fail to see why Barbless Pike rigs are also a must.

Bio Mech

uch wrote: »

I've been using Barbless hooks on the Liffey for about 25 years now and haven't had a noticeable difference in losing fish between Barbed and Barbless, but I never fish for Pike, Salmon or Trout on it. But I fully agree with you in that I've never seen a Salmon hooked on a Pike Rig, so I fail to see why Barbless Pike rigs are also a must.

I have seen a mixed bag on coarse fish on barbless. In general. Long distance trotting I find barbless don't help as it can be difficult to maintain tight contact at long range. On the pole I find its not so much an issue as the elastic keeps constant contact. Either way I cant see why barbed couldn't be allowed on hooks below a size 12 say or 14.

But overall my comment is more related to the notion of restricting other methods while allowing salmon fishing in the first instance.

I guess it boils down to this. What do you think is safer for Salmon?

The very, very occasional unintentional capture and release on barbed hooks and methods not intended for salmon.

The intended catch and release of salmon specifically targeted on prawn, lures and fly.

con___manx1

Bio Mech wrote: »

Just a few thoughts.

I used to have a pretty good opinion of the fisheries boards, now IFI, and the other fishing powers that be. Thought they did pretty good work all considered. They took a lot of flack in a lot of areas but the individuals always worked hard and did their best.

I was supportive of them for the most part.

Was.

Of course a lot happens over 20 years and the issues with pike control, gillnetting etc have been well highlighted here. But my particular gripe, which has left me feeling so disillusioned with IFI and fisheries law that I want to never deal with them again.....

The Liffey Salmon bye laws (So who is my gripe with? IFI, the minister, the stakeholders, the clubs?)...

Now I have been fishing the liffey for 30 years and my father 40 years. Its my home water of sorts. Friends and clubmates have fished it just as long. Never once in all that time have I caught or even hooked a salmon when I wasn't specifically targeting them. I have never had a salmon while pike deadbaiting, feeder fishing, pole fishing or stick float fishing. The liffey is a mixed fishery and Salmon are only one species among many...pike, perch, trout, roach, hybrids, gudgeon, eels, bream.

But now I am banned from using barbed hooks, worms, trebles. Single barbless hooks only. Its primarily frustrating for two reasons. Firstly as I said I have never had a salmon on deadbait. Secondly its a method I like to use a lot on the liffey and now I have to use barbless singles or else I am criminalised. Its been tricky to nail that method down and I have been connecting with much fewer fish. Now I can live with all that but...

If the Salmon are in such need of protection how can it be ok to allow guys to specifically fish for them, in summer, low water conditions, with prawns, spinners and fly. Single barbless might allow the hook to easily pop out but surely its of more risk to the fish to be fighting them, netting them, unhooking them, handling them and returning them in hot low water conditions?

In my experience its of minimal risk to use a standard deadbait rig as the chances or contact are minimal. But there is a bigger risk to salmon to target them in low water conditions even as catch and release. I have seen many liffey fish go belly up after being caught on singles. I have never seen one go belly up from picking up a deadbait.

So as a law abiding angler I have found my own fishing to be impinged upon to protect the salmon so the salmon guys can get out the prawns and have some sport. I also don't buy the enforcement argument that might be made because the fishery officers still have to check peoples gear to ensure they are fishing with barbless singles anyway.

Why not with a bit more thought and detail on the law allow the use of trebles for deadbaiting, or the use of barbed hooks below a certain size for pole and float fishing?

Why, well it seems if you don't fish for salmon you don't matter. I didn't used to believe that line.

I think I do now.

i once seen a fishery officer using a treble hook fly on a single barbless hook water. the liffey is fly only for salmon.
i cant see any problem using barbed hooks unless you were using worms for bait.i very much doubt a salmon would take a dead bait.

Zzippy

Bio Mech wrote: »

I have seen a mixed bag on coarse fish on barbless. In general. Long distance trotting I find barbless don't help as it can be difficult to maintain tight contact at long range. On the pole I find its not so much an issue as the elastic keeps constant contact. Either way I cant see why barbed couldn't be allowed on hooks below a size 12 say or 14.

But overall my comment is more related to the notion of restricting other methods while allowing salmon fishing in the first instance.

I guess it boils down to this. What do you think is safer for Salmon?

The very, very occasional unintentional capture and release on barbed hooks and methods not intended for salmon.

The intended catch and release of salmon specifically targeted on prawn, lures and fly.

Did you register your objections to the byelaw when it was opened for public consultation? The salmon regulations are enacted annually, and open for public consultation before the minister signs off on the final version. Everyone has an opportunity to make their views known at that time and possibly have the byelaw amended if enough others make similar representations. If they don't take your views into account at that stage, there are other avenues open to you, such as making representations to your political representatives, forming a pike club to get more likeminded people on board, getting onto the media. Slating IFI on an internet forum is probably the least effective of the methods available to you, however...

Bio Mech

Zzippy wrote: »

Did you register your objections to the byelaw when it was opened for public consultation? The salmon regulations are enacted annually, and open for public consultation before the minister signs off on the final version. Everyone has an opportunity to make their views known at that time and possibly have the byelaw amended if enough others make similar representations. If they don't take your views into account at that stage, there are other avenues open to you, such as making representations to your political representatives, forming a pike club to get more likeminded people on board, getting onto the media. Slating IFI on an internet forum is probably the least effective of the methods available to you, however...

I raised my concerns at the time yes. I am not slating IFI by the way. I am posting a reasonable topic for discussion on a discussion forum. I would appreciate if you didnt attepmt to lower the validity of my points by suggesting that its mere IFI bashing. its not.

When the bye laws were first proposed I raised the issue directly with IFI and I made a submission under the public consultation also. I was told at the time that the restrictions would refer to salmon fishing only and would not be specified for other methods were salmon were clearly not being targetted. Such as float fishing, dead baiting etc. However when the legislation was published that provision was omitted. I am also a member of 3 clubs, one coarse, one pike, one game. The pike club made a submission of their own also.

Bio Mech

con___manx1 wrote: »

i once seen a fishery officer using a treble hook fly on a single barbless hook water. the liffey is fly only for salmon.
i cant see any problem using barbed hooks unless you were using worms for bait.i very much doubt a salmon would take a dead bait.

I agree on the dead bait bit. But the liffey is not fly only for salmon as far as I am aware. Its barbless singles but lure, prawn etc are allowed too I thought. I cant see any suggestion on the IFI site that suggestes its fly only?

con___manx1

Bio Mech wrote: »

I agree on the dead bait bit. But the liffey is not fly only for salmon as far as I am aware. Its barbless singles but lure, prawn etc are allowed too I thought. I cant see any suggestion on the IFI site that suggestes its fly only?

liffey is a catch and release catchment for salmon. you cant use worms prawns or spinners. if you see anyone using these methods they are fishing illegally.its fly only single barblesss flys. all catch and release rivers have the same laws im pretty sure.

Zzippy

Bio Mech wrote: »

I used to have a pretty good opinion of the fisheries boards, now IFI, and the other fishing powers that be. Thought they did pretty good work all considered. They took a lot of flack in a lot of areas but the individuals always worked hard and did their best.

I was supportive of them for the most part.

Was.

Of course a lot happens over 20 years and the issues with pike control, gillnetting etc have been well highlighted here. But my particular gripe, which has left me feeling so disillusioned with IFI and fisheries law that I want to never deal with them again.....

Bio Mech wrote: »

I raised my concerns at the time yes. I am not slating IFI by the way. I am posting a reasonable topic for discussion on a discussion forum. I would appreciate if you didnt attepmt to lower the validity of my points by suggesting that its mere IFI bashing. its not.

When the bye laws were first proposed I raised the issue directly with IFI and I made a submission under the public consultation also. I was told at the time that the restrictions would refer to salmon fishing only and would not be specified for other methods were salmon were clearly not being targetted. Such as float fishing, dead baiting etc. However when the legislation was published that provision was omitted. I am also a member of 3 clubs, one coarse, one pike, one game. The pike club made a submission of their own also.

Apologies if I misinterpreted the first post (quoted) as slating IFI, but that is definitely how it reads. Regardless, I think you have a valid point re the legislation, although as con_manx1 pointed out, salmon anglers can only use single barbless fly, and not other methods. Have you followed up with the department/IFI why those provisions were included after being reassured that they wouldn't be?

Bio Mech

Zzippy wrote: »

Apologies if I misinterpreted the first post (quoted) as slating IFI, but that is definitely how it reads. Regardless, I think you have a valid point re the legislation, although as con_manx1 pointed out, salmon anglers can only use single barbless fly, and not other methods. Have you followed up with the department/IFI why those provisions were included after being reassured that they wouldn't be?

Thanks. I certainly didn't mean to suggest a slating of them. Its more a general sense of being disillusioned with the position and its blanket implementation.

Let me explain. I used to love spending the summer evenings fishing on some stretches. Stick float fishing and lure fishing for pike and perch.

Now I am in a position of either changing all my lures over to barbless singles (so snipping off all the trebles on spinners and adding split rings and singles or adding singles to all plugs etc which can make hooking up very difficult due to the shape of the lure and the way the singles sit close to the body) or not doing so and not being able to relax/enjoy as I would be breaking the law.

Same for the stick float fishing and winter deadbaiting.

I didn't realise that about the fly only. Are you sure? I will respond to Cons comment below actually.

I did enquire and got a generic response officially.

I was told, off the record, by an officer for IFI that inclusion of provisions for small hooks, coarse fishing, pike rigs etc would make the legislation too complicated and they needed some degree of simplicity to make enforcement viable. He suggested there would be a degree of discretion applied by the officers on a local scale. Having said that an angler I know was approached on the river recently (spinning for perch at the time - he had caught two) and was told that if he cast out with his treble barbless size two mepps again he would be fined. So no discretion there.

Bio Mech

con___manx1 wrote: »

liffey is a catch and release catchment for salmon. you cant use worms prawns or spinners. if you see anyone using these methods they are fishing illegally.its fly only single barblesss flys. all catch and release rivers have the same laws im pretty sure.

Are you sure of that? The IFI page says the following (liffey does not have specifics on fly only from what I can see)

On rivers where catch and release is permitted (Table 2):

• anglers may not use worms,
• anglers must use single, barbless hooks,
• the fish must be handled carefully and should not be removed from the water prior to release.

• The Regulations on the River Avoca prohibit the taking of any sea trout (under 40cm) as well as prohibiting the use of worms as bait and any fish hooks other than single barbless hooks in angling for sea trout (under 40cm) (bye-law no. 890, 2011).
• The River Blackwater season is extended from 1st - 12th October on a catch and release basis using artificial fly only (bye-law no. 314, 2013).
• The River Tor and its tributaries are closed for angling for all species of fish (bye-law no. 311, 2011).
• The River Deel is closed for angling for all species of fish until 31st May 2014 (bye-law no. 308, 2011).
• The Regulations on the River Slaney provide for catch and release from 17th March to 16th Sept. Anglers may only use single barbless hooks with artificial fly only upstream of the old bridge, Enniscorthy and prohibits the use of worms, downstream of the old bridge, Enniscorthy, Co. Wexford (pending bye-law).
• The Regulations on the River Suir prohibit the use of worms, prawn, shrimp or any other crustacean or artificial forms thereof as bait and any fish hooks other than single barbless hooks (pending bye-law).
• The Regulations on the River Nore provide for catch and release up to 31st May and will be open for angling from 1st June with a bag limit of 1 fish per angler per day and no more than 5 fish for the season (pending bye-law).
• The River Feale is subject to further restrictions, check with IFI Limerick or IFI website.