EA/NRW Catch Returns - Catch effort

[Teifi-Terrorist]

Dear all,

I am after some insight please and also please feel free to post some comments to follow up with too after posting your poll submission. Please note I need this to be Teifi specific please - even if you just fished it for a day.

When filling in your annual catch return to submit to the EA/NRW, how many of you fill and submit this section please? How many of you accurately record over a given season how many days you fish? Then, because it is counted as days rather than hours, would you then put e.g. a one hour session down as a day?

Many thanks,

TT.

[Highwater]

Days/hours

Im not sure but i dont recall ever seeing a section for how many days/hours ive fished, and ive never counted these on a season basis as ive never felt a need to, is this a new thing?

[dB]

I keep a log of all my days fishing during the season. And as requested on the licence I count one day even if I only fished for an hour.

I have always found this to be very crude method and over estimates fishing effort in my opinion.

Interested to know what other do?

dB

[ronward]

I'm similar to dB, but I record to the half day, even if it's only an hour or two actually fishing.

[phl]

I do the same as dB. I've always assumed that was what was asked for.

[silverstoat]

I record the numbers of days fished, but don't break it down into hours or half days. If I've fished overnight I would still only record that as one day, i.e. as a single fishing session.

[Thom]

Effort or effortless?

I record it all as requested on the form and i agree, it was a very poorly thought out questionnaire but that's nrw for you-true to form.::

cheers

Tomtom.

[Teifi-Terrorist]

Ok, I was not going to elaborate on this until a few answers were received. Let me spill the beans on the purpose of asking this question and forming this questionnaire.

As it stands the NRW do not have system in place to categorise the 'at risk' status for sea trout on our rivers. As such, in their wisdom, they have decided to base it on how long someone was fishing for to achieve a sea trout catch. Now, of all the figures they could have used - with the actual total catch return for starters - they decided to use this one. Is this the one that makes things look 'better' or 'best' of all the stats they could have chosen? Surely due to the irregularity of the information received i.e. one hour still marked as one day that this is the least reliable one that could have been used? Anglers note their catches, some religiously so, but seldom would an angler accurately note 'fished for 7.5 hours' etc. as most go fishing to lose themselves from such clock-watching and routines.

Anyway, just wanted to raise awareness of this but also get some feedback.

TT.

[silverstoat]

Ok, I was not going to elaborate on this until a few answers were received. Let me spill the beans on the purpose of asking this question and forming this questionnaire.

As it stands the NRW do not have system in place to categorise the 'at risk' status for sea trout on our rivers.

TT.

Oh dear, that can't give anything like a reliable statistic on which to base an at risk status. More widespread installation of fish counters would presumably give better data against which to compare catch returns(?). I'm guessing counters are usually installed upstream of the nets though, so this still wouldn't factor in the larger culls of migratory fish.

[mintylad]

If as a result of the survey they determine that the river is at risk and choose to make it catch and release only would that then put a stop to the nets? Or would they be able to continue with "catch and kill". Although I try to be as accurate and honest with my returns I am sure that some of the figures they receive are either exaggerated or kept quiet. I know of some anglers who catch far more than they declare and on the flip side others beef up their returns. I am sure they will make a decision without any proper scientific evidence as they have done in the past. Maybe a questionnaire should be used to gauge the amount of presence of bailiff on the river and whether as a collective us anglers are getting value for money. I for one would love to see the feedback from that one!

Mintylad

[davo]

Same as dB for me - recorded as a day fished whether it was for 10 minutes or 10 hours.
D

[phl]

My understanding is that originally the EA based its "At risk" judgement on the raw catch returns. They were then persuaded that this was misleading as it took no account of angling effort (which could be affected by factors such as the weather: for example, in a very dry year, salmon angling effort might be much less). So they now make an attempt to measure angling effort, in the form of "days fished". Obviously, this is a very crude measure, for the reasons others have pointed out. However, I suspect it would be difficult to get anglers to reliably report their fishing effort in more detail. Another weakness in the approach is that it does not differentiate between salmon angling and sea trout angling effort, although, as we know, there can be big differences in the fishing methods used. This probably makes a river like the Teifi seem worse for salmon fishing than is really the case (because a lot of the angling effort is spent on night fishing for seatrout, with little chance of catching a salmon).

Of course, actual fish-count numbers would be a much better way to measure the runs of fish, but few rivers have this technology installed.

Paul

[fiskeking]

totally agree

Well said ml. If we do go catch and release,surely the nets have to stop fishing also? If we need to rest the river then it has to be everyone? Or why bother with restrictions on anglers? Seems we don't have bailiffs on the river any more,so who checks the nets. NRW, come on!! Most of us are trying!