SFFF SG 6-2c: Access to salmon and freshwater fisheries in Scotland
This focusing paper summarises the main discussions of the Steering Group on access.
Salmon
In Scotland, even in the sea around the coast, salmon fishing rights are private, heritable titles. It is an offence for any person without the legal right or written permission from a person having such right to fish for or take salmon.
In general, the lawful methods for salmon fishing in Scotland are:
a - Inside estuary limits - net and coble; rod and line.
b - Outside estuary limits - net and coble; bag net, fly net or other stake net; rod and line
Exceptions to these rules include some ancient, but still active rights to use cruives (cruive is a kind of trap fishery) in some rivers, and the use of gears such as haaf nets and poke nets in the Solway Firth.
Salmon net fisheries are operated by the owners of fishing rights or tenant netsmen. Tenants operate the fisheries under leasing arrangements. The fishermen have exclusive rights to fish at the locations specified in the titles to the fisheries.
Rod fisheries for salmon may be operated by the proprietors, their guests, lease holders, time-share owners, or persons who buy permits to fish. The prices charged for permits are largely market driven and may vary from around £10 per day to several hundreds of pounds for those fisheries considered to be the best. Many angling clubs own or lease fisheries, and make fishing available to their members and visitors, often at very reasonable prices.
Fishing for salmon is regulated by both weekly and annual close times.
Increasing access
Netting. It is unlikely that there will be any increase in the availability of netting opportunities in the foreseeable future. The trend in recent years has been to close net fisheries, either as a result of buy-out schemes, or as a result of netsmen reducing their effort by combining fishing stations and reducing the numbers of gear units deployed. Given the differing economic values of the fish taken by nets and rods, the emphasis has swung towards rod fisheries.
Angling. In many areas, access may already be as complete as possible commensurate with ensuring sustainability and economic viability. The issue of more permits may lead to an increase in levels of exploitation, and may ultimately be to the disbenefit of the fishery. One of the major selling points for salmon angling in Scotland is the fact that generally speaking, river banks are not too crowded with anglers. Any increase in the numbers of anglers may put down the prices that may be charged, and could actually reduce income from the fisheries, especially from anglers visiting from overseas.
Any shortening of weekly or annual close times may increase the level of exploitation, which, it may be argued, could already be too high on some stock components, especially the early-running, multi-sea-winter salmon. Increasing adoption of catch and release may afford some scope for decreasing weekly and annual close times, and there may be arguments in some rivers for altering the dates of the annual close times to match changes in run-timing that appear to have occurred. These should be examined on a case-by-case basis, reflecting the differing situations in different salmon fishery districts.
Some correspondents have advocated the removal of the weekly close time for salmon angling (Sunday) on the basis that this is the only or one of the only days on which they are able to fish. A straight addition of Sunday to the fishing week would inevitably lead to some increase in exploitation levels. It may be suggested that this could be offset by changing the "day off" to another day during the week. This would, of course, have implications for the anglers who visit Scotland, or another part of Scotland, for a week's fishing (generally Monday to Saturday), and for the owners of the fisheries/accommodation etc involved.
Most of the arguments put forward to increase access have focused on the desire of some anglers to either obtain fishing more cheaply or to have Sunday fishing without giving up any other days, and make little or no reference to the long-term implications of these proposals.
Freshwater Fish
The Steering Group has identified a number of concerns over the issue of access to fishing for freshwater fish. There are, however, a few common threads.
There is agreement that the status quo cannot be maintained. However, there is a clear acceptance that a free-for-all is not an option. None of the Group advocates unlimited access to fishing, and all agree that good and sustainable fisheries cannot be maintained without the input of money from anglers. All agree that there may be times and/or places where fishing for any freshwater fish should not be permitted either permanently or temporarily in order to address specific fishery management issues.
Much of the criticism about access appears to stem from dissatisfaction with the provisions in and the operation of the Freshwater and Salmon Fisheries (Scotland) Act 1976 and the Protection Orders that have been or could be made under that Act. Some of the criticism is made by anglers who seem to think that the fact that it is generally a civil offence to fish for freshwater without permission means that there is an unfettered right to fish for freshwater fish in Scotland. This is not the case. The fish are wild animals and belong to no person until caught. However, the fishing rights are owned.
There is also the widely-held misconception that POs refer only to brown trout, and despite repeated attempts to clarify the situation, this seems to have gained almost given truth status in some quarters. The situation is actually quite clear. All protection orders refer to fishing for freshwater fish in inland waters in the prescribed areas. Thus, fishing for fish such as charr, pike, perch, roach is covered. Any cases where this is not being done is not because the 1976 Act is at fault, but is as a result of the owners/occupiers and anglers failing to understand the provisions in the Act.
There are, however, shortcomings in the 1976 Act.
Ensuring sustainable fisheries for wild fish requires that there be rational management of the fisheries. The 1976 Act does not provide for that explicitly, merely stating that the Scottish Ministers shall not make a PO unless they have taken into consideration the need for conservation of any species of fish. There is no requirement for any on-going monitoring by anybody to determine whether situations have changed after any PO has been made.
Attention has been drawn to the difficulties that exist in dealing with withdrawal of access after a PO has been made. Each PO made has been drafted to describe a coherent area. No real scope exists to remove the protection afforded to individual riparian owners within a PO area. Where there have been problems in the past, the approach taken to remedy the situation has been to propose revocation of the whole PO, even though it may be working reasonably well over the vast majority of the area covered.
Criticism has been made of conditions applied to permits, such as fishing by fly only, no Sunday fishing, no night-time fishing, restrictions on wading depths. Many fisheries apply conditions to permits, but criticism is often restricted to those fisheries within a PO area. In some parts of the country, there is a strongly held antipathy to fishing, and indeed many other activities, being undertaken on a Sunday. Whether there is a need to require those who would wish to keep Sundays free from fishing to change their minds is as much a social issue as a fishing issue. There may be less of an argument with regard to prohibiting night-time fishing and restricting wading depth. In a number of cases, riparian owners may cite health and safety arguments to support their bans, while still allowing those fishing for salmon and/or sea trout to fish at night or without wading depth restrictions.
Some owners of salmon fisheries have clearly attempted to prohibit anglers seeking trout, grayling or coarse fishing, and some may have implemented de facto prohibitions on the basis that they are disturbing salmon, or disturbing salmon spawn. However, there must be scope for resource sharing.
There is great scope for promoting angling in Scotland, and improved access to fishing must be part of this process. However, with respect to fishing for wild fish, it is essential that sustainability remains at the heart of any further development. This will require rational management. Information required to ensure this might include:
- establishment of baseline data on the species of fish present, and their age and growth characteristics;
- determination of the current levels of exploitation and the potential for any increase;
- development of detailed plans for the management of individual fisheries and how these plans might interact within any given area.
It would seem to present a clearer picture to everyone if it was necessary to have written permission to fish for any freshwater fish in inland waters in Scotland. This is quite separate for any call for a rod licence, which does not have universal support. The issues then would be what charge would be made for a permit, to whom the permit fee would be payable, and how the permit fee was used to support the fishery in question. There is much to commend the proposals that such monies should be spent locally. However, it is not immediately clear who would be responsible for the issue of permits or for using the money collected.
Local Authorities have been proposed by some. These bodies have the advantage that they are accountable locally, but there remain problems. Firstly, they are unlikely to have the resources available to take on what could be a fairly large amount of extra work. Secondly, natural fishery management geographical areas do not fit with the LA geographical areas. One river system may cross more than one LA area. It is essential that catchment wide management is developed, and this may become more difficult if several LA areas are involved, each with their own priorities.
An Anglers' Trust has also been proposed. This may be a vehicle for introducing a nationwide requirement for having permission to fish. It may also be possible to introduce a mechanism whereby permit fees are utilised in the management of the fisheries for which they were paid. However, it is not clear how such a Trust would be formed, who would be members, how they would be accountable, where it would be located, and how the Trust would be financed. A number of other questions remain to be answered. For example, do the proposers envisage a Non-Departmental Public Body? In order to ensure that local issues are addressed, should there be locally-based subsidiary groups that are accountable to a centrally-based Trust? Will the Trust employ qualified fisheries biologists to provide the science necessary to underpin management policies?
The scheme that seems to have most support is for the establishment of Unitary Authorities that will undertake management of both salmon and freshwater fisheries. The arguments for this proposal have been presented in the papers associated with management structures. However, access and management are inextricably linked. The adoption of a series of Unitary Authorities should allow for the establishment of bodies that are large enough to be economically viable, but locally-based enough to be able to address the differing problems that exist in different fisheries and river catchments. They will have to be financed to a large extent by those who wish to use the resource, but should perhaps also expect to receive funding from other groups who benefit downstream and who are included in the evaluation of the economic benefits of fishing to Scotland, such as the hotel and guest house sector, fishing tackle shops, etc., as well as any central funding that may be necessary to ensure that government policy may be implemented.
Back to Steering Group menu