|
Post by gusgreaves on Feb 13, 2007 23:18:19 GMT
The idea of turning Sandwath into a commercial type fishery is basically sound but there is a great deal more by way of investment than just putting in an initial stocking of carp. For a start I think it would be necessary to drain the lake and electro fish it to remove all the existing stock to a temporary holding pond including the pike. You would not want to stock young carp into a water that has a head of pike in it you would just be throwing money down the drain. You need to be able to net a commercial fishery so you would have to get a tipping license and fill the bottom of the lake to a consistent depth of around six feet and creating shallow ledges around the margins. This would cover the tree stumps and other obstacles in the bottom of the lake that make it impossible to net. No doubt some of the cost could be offset by money from the tipping of none toxic material and finished off with a layer of clay that would ensure the lake had good color. I think the lake is about 1.5-care so the initial stocking of carp should only cost around £10,000 with supplementary re-stocking every other year to replace losses, which every commercial fishery has to accept. If the level of carp stocked is too low the carp will soon grow too large for match fishing especially with poles and these large fish would have to be removed and replaced with smaller fish. The lake is pretty well surrounded by trees which restricts oxygenation by the wind so unless you have a constant supply of water running through the lake you would probably have to install aerators and therefore you would need an electric supply to the site. I have no idea how far it is to the nearest supply but it will not be cheap. However providing you have reasonable security on the site I think an investment of say £40,000 would be well worth while and if it was open to day ticket anglers the society should recoup the investment within a few years and increase the membership. My only advice would be if you are going to do it you have to go all the way and not try to do it bit by bit. If a visiting angler has a bad day he is unlikely to come back and word soon spreads through the tackle shops. Also one dead fish seen in the lake on Monday and by Friday the gossips will have turned it into 'all the fish are dead', so day to day maintenance of the site is paramount.
Regards Gus Greaves
|
|
|
Post by gusgreaves on Feb 14, 2007 0:06:00 GMT
I had missed the fact that there were two pages of comments when I posted my last one and having now read them all I find some of the comments just do not stack up. At Catterick we have made Hall lake a silver fish only lake and although there are still a few carp in it there is a good head of bream, tench, chub, roach and perch. However, only about two in every hundred visiting anglers and members fish this lake even though there are regular nets of 30 to 70lb caught and it is comfortable easy access park and fish.
The other thing I noticed was that some seem to think that carp dominate a water and so the roach etc, decline. Howe Specimen Lake at Catterick has a big head of large carp with none less than 10lb. However, the roach are so prevalent in the lake I spend all winter moving as many of them as I can into Hall Lake. Last year one angler had 11-roach over 1lb and four over 2lb in Howe Lake and nets of 20 to 30lb of quality roach were often recorded.
During to summer months the roach in Kendall Match Lake are an absolute nuisance and will attack every kind of carp bait you care to put on the hook so I do not think the idea that stocking carp means a decline in other species. I do think that where you have carp in a fishery everything else has to feed at every opportunity they get.
Regards, Gus Greaves
|
|
|
Post by kevrich on Feb 14, 2007 8:04:31 GMT
The idea of turning Sandwath into a commercial type fishery is basically sound but there is a great deal more by way of investment than just putting in an initial stocking of carp. For a start I think it would be necessary to drain the lake and electro fish it to remove all the existing stock to a temporary holding pond including the pike. You would not want to stock young carp into a water that has a head of pike in it you would just be throwing money down the drain. You need to be able to net a commercial fishery so you would have to get a tipping license and fill the bottom of the lake to a consistent depth of around six feet and creating shallow ledges around the margins. This would cover the tree stumps and other obstacles in the bottom of the lake that make it impossible to net. No doubt some of the cost could be offset by money from the tipping of none toxic material and finished off with a layer of clay that would ensure the lake had good color. I think the lake is about 1.5-care so the initial stocking of carp should only cost around £10,000 with supplementary re-stocking every other year to replace losses, which every commercial fishery has to accept. If the level of carp stocked is too low the carp will soon grow too large for match fishing especially with poles and these large fish would have to be removed and replaced with smaller fish. The lake is pretty well surrounded by trees which restricts oxygenation by the wind so unless you have a constant supply of water running through the lake you would probably have to install aerators and therefore you would need an electric supply to the site. I have no idea how far it is to the nearest supply but it will not be cheap. However providing you have reasonable security on the site I think an investment of say £40,000 would be well worth while and if it was open to day ticket anglers the society should recoup the investment within a few years and increase the membership. My only advice would be if you are going to do it you have to go all the way and not try to do it bit by bit. If a visiting angler has a bad day he is unlikely to come back and word soon spreads through the tackle shops. Also one dead fish seen in the lake on Monday and by Friday the gossips will have turned it into 'all the fish are dead', so day to day maintenance of the site is paramount. Regards Gus Greaves Man at one with NATURE
|
|
|
Post by Dr barbus on Feb 14, 2007 8:45:54 GMT
Thanks Gus for spelling out how much thsi is going to cost. And how severe and risky the operation. £40,000 is a sizeable chunk to "molest" Sandwith. And a high risk venture given the number of commercials in the Tadcaster, York, north east of Leeds area. You have a lot of competition in that area.
What is the cost of getting hold of suitable land and digging a bespoke pool (or pools)?
Sandwith appears to be be targetted beacuse it only sees a dozen anglers a day? What is wrong with that - many people like that type of fishing. Some room to think on a natural(ised) fishery. A fishery does not have to wall-to-wall anglers to be worthwhile (from my perspective usually the reverse). The idea of money-making commercials has turned a few people's heads. The problem Leeds ASA should be addressing is how to increase membership and not "commrecials make money - lets have some of that". Wrecking Sandwith is going to upset quite a few; not only those who fish there.
In short the Sandwith proposal is a short-sighted, expensive, high risk, environment unfriendly one. Especially as the poll is only 53% to 41% in favour of a commercial - hardly overwhelming.
|
|
|
Post by Dr barbus on Feb 14, 2007 9:01:43 GMT
Taking Gus's ball park figure of £40,000 to turn Sandwith into a commercial. That amounts to approximately 1000 Year books, or 10,000 Day Tickets. Viewing the proposal on a pure business basis can you see such a pool attracting such revenue over 3 or 4 years?
You would get abetter return for the much less expensive option of extending fishing hours on rivers. An extra 200 plus yearbooks/annum say over the same period for considerably less outlay.
|
|
|
Post by keepitreal on Feb 14, 2007 21:31:51 GMT
If that sort of money is in the offing, and I don't know whether it is or isn't. Why doesn't the society approach an existing comercial in the area, where they could work in a partnership with the current owners and have ponds for leeds anglers only or leeds day tickets? more hours on rivers? Yes please
|
|
|
Post by nightline on Feb 14, 2007 23:45:56 GMT
Are you all sheep ? What is this obsession with having night access to river venues bestowed in an official way. I have fished all the clubs North Yorkshire rivers and many others at night and all through the night as much as any one has, in fact more than most.
Car security was always important to me so I have always made my own arrangements with local landowners , It takes effort and ingenuity, but it can be done. Asking for this to be organised in an official way detracts from the spirit of pioneering that is single species fishing to me.
I know I lay myself open to criticism on the grounds that I am encouraging people to break rules but we all know that the rules are only there for the idiots in the first place and that good members require few rules.
Where ever I have fished I have rarely given away my presence, left nothing but footprints and never taken anything but photographs.
The concept of always wanting someone to officially bestow this or that privilege directly reflects on the individuality of those that seek it.
As for the other matter of transforming sandwath into a Commercial type venue (Frim). The idea appalls me, the place is now a paradise to how it was in the past but I only fish it half a dozen times a year in spring any way, so should my vote be relevant?
This is a democracy and I feel that the fairest way to decide on the matter would not be to poll the whole membership but to poll just those members known to be Sandwath regulars for the past ten years, these could be easily ascertained. Just ask Mick Hughes and Dave Thomas to formulate such a list, they are both regulars.
Finally I would just like to comment on the one thing that has always broken us as a sport whenever we have been called upon to fight our corner, that is divisiveness, which is evident in some of the posts above. Where is the tolerance for that- that others enjoy. Do we just want our own little part of the sport catered for? Surely not.
|
|
|
Post by George on Feb 15, 2007 0:09:00 GMT
PERSONALLY I FEEL ITS TIME PEOPLE STOPPED LIVING IN THE PAST, AND STARTED LOOKING TO THE FUTURE, BUT LOOK AT IT REALISTICALLY. NIGHT FISHING FOR ME IS A BIG NO, WE NEED TO CONSIDER MORE THAN THE ANGLERS, THE RIPARIAN OWNERS AND LOCALS BOTH NEED CONSIDERATION, PEOPLE SEEM TO FORGET ABOUT LOCAL PEOPLE. AS FOR BREAKING THE RULES, I WOULDN'T ADVISE IT, I KNOW A FEW PEOPLE WHO WERE CAUGHT NIGHT FISHING ON LEEDS WATERS WITHIN THE LAST YEAR, THEY CERTAINLY GOT MORE THAN THEY BARGAINED FOR WHEN THE COMMITTEE DEALT WITH IT! I FEEL SURE THEY ARE HOPING TO CLAMP DOWN ON A LOT MORE! AS REGARDS SANDWATH, I FEEL PUTTING A FEW CARP IN CERTAINLY WOULDN'T HURT. LETS WAIT AND SEE WHAT THE POWERS THAT BE, WHO ARE DOING A FANTASTIC JOB DECIDE IS THE BEST COURSE OF ACTION. THEY SEEM VERY FOCUSED ON MOVING THINGS FORWARD, ISN'T IT TIME WE STARTED SUPPORTING THEM MORE?
|
|
|
Post by frim on Feb 15, 2007 3:42:33 GMT
nightline, Your name and comments suggest which way you lean, and its nice to know that at least one of you sees the bigger picture, most of the anti commercial/carp posts have been very ME-ME-US-US and unbelievably selfish, think of all the poor sods who cant walk six fields to catch a barble, but want to get a few bites doing what they do best. Its amazing how locality, car safety, access,etc become unimportant, a majority poll becomes unconvincing, yet Gus finds a figure of 40 grand from thin air and a bandwagon gets a head of steam. My own club which for 50 years was the biggest in the society, now only provide half of its members with yearbooks due to the lack of "commercials" THATS FACT. times that by the number of clubs we have - and thats lost revenue worth moaning about! smell the coffee frim
|
|
|
Post by nightline on Feb 15, 2007 10:33:22 GMT
Thanks for that Frim, it does seem to be that there are people who cannot see there way to be supportive of the kind of fishing that others enjoy if they don't enjoy that kind of fishing themselves. Which at best to be polite, is bizarre. Anyone reading my previous post will find it obvious that I did not set out to fly the flag for night fishing at all but regarding the comment "night fishing for ME is a big no" This illustrates the ME mentality perfectly.
Bums on seats is what rules, always has always will. I might have been one of those that was not that keen on catterick (the lakes) in the past but the fact was the club owned it so it was **** or get off the pot and now as a result of a lot of hard work and commitment it has to be taken seriously as one of the clubs more viable and popular assets. The same applies to commercial type fisheries they are what the majority of people want and if you want their money you have to provide it. It is that simple.
|
|
robp
New Member
Posts: 31
|
Post by robp on Feb 15, 2007 11:35:59 GMT
Let's get one thing straight shall we, the majority that have posted an objection to Sandwath being "developed" as a commercial water do so as it is an established lake that offers good fishing for those that are prepared to put a little effort into their angling. I'm sure most would accept that there is sufficient demand for a suitable "commercial" type water, regardless of whether they would fish one or not. But why compromise what should be an assett on a speculative venture that could potentially cost rather a lot of money with no guaranteed return, especially on a venue that one could argue is not entirely suitable for the purpose. Seems those in favour base their argument on the fact that Sandwath is owned outright and is the best available option from the portfolio of waters the society holds. This doesn't mean that it is ideal. If the club are serious about developing a true commercial fishery then perhaps they would be better looking closer to home, potentially at a purpose built venue. Look at the long term picture, anglers are an ageing bunch and far less juniors are coming into fishing than when I grew up. I'll concede that much of this is down to the way society is now, but a forward thinking club should be looking to develop a fishery that appeals not only to the existing angler, but also to the potential angler. I'm sure that if this was done in the correct way, then funding could be secured from various groups in order to provide such a venue. Introductory sessions, longer term tuition, tackle loans for newcomers and other such schemes all offer the potential to lead to a much better future for any club. Look at some of the pro-active stances taken by some clubs and the good press angling has had as a result. To be honest some of the recent posts really do illustrate the problems within the society. Simple fact is the constitution of the club is totally geared towards the match angling fraternity. The system of affiliation and delegates serves to protect the interests of the match clubs, who by their nature can operate easily within such a structure. The pleasure and specimen angler tend to be much more solitary by nature and it is extremely difficult to fit in with the current constitution. We therefore hear that the majority want this and so it should be, when, infact, the majority of members are probably not affiliated at all. Before anyone starts yelling about division again, I'm not against match anglers, but I don't see why the society should be dominated by them due to the constitution. Seems somewhat ironic that those who cry division are often the ones who are inadvertantly perpetuating it! So come on Leeds, accept that the society should represent all members in the 21st century. The future of clubs is about encouraging membership from all aspects of the sport, not one particular "style". Failure to do this will lead to a very turbulent future and the day will come where syndicates will be offering riparian owners significantly increased rents in order to secure fishing that suits their needs. Selfish? Perhaps, but when clubs fail to represent the full membership, then it's almost inevitable this will happen. So onto Mr Nightline's post. Nice to know that those who wish to have the opportunity to fish legally after dark are all sheep according to your good self! In an ideal world I fully accept that rules are there to legislate for the minority and the rest of us are more than capable of regulating ourselves. Doubt the committee see it like that though. I think that your assertion that breaking rules makes you a pioneer is fundamentaly flawed, it does, however, potentially give you an advantage over those who abide by the rules, whether those rules are right or wrong. Perhaps revolutionary would have been a more apt description . Finally Frim, the assertion that a commercial fishery is a neccessity due to an individuals mobility just doesn't stack up. I have every sympathy with those who miss out on fishing certain waters due to health issues, but can't see what difference the type of stillwater makes on accessibility. Indeed, is there not provision for disabled anglers on Sandwath at the moment? Rob
|
|
|
Post by George on Feb 15, 2007 12:54:50 GMT
IN MY PREVIOUS POST I WAS GIVING MY PERSONAL VIEW, SEEMS ONLY SOME OF US ARE ENTITLED TO THEM, EVEN WHEN WE ADMIT TO BREAKING SOCIETY RULES!
|
|
|
Post by Dr Barbus on Feb 15, 2007 19:06:18 GMT
George no one has had a dig at you.
But to return to your first post on night fishing. What is wrong with fishing after dark? If the Riparian owner agrees, there is no problem there. As for locals we were asking (on the other thread) for an extension to 10 or 10:30 at the latest. How can that upset locals when cars are moving around til late Its hardly as if noisy rabble were leaving a pub at 11pm or later is it? And given some renegotiation of fishing leases or access rights where the society already owns the water I think the society will gain extra members. Hence extra money. And yes it suits me too. As for pros and cons of a Commercial type Water, most have stated that they can see why the club wants one, but that Sandwith is a poor choice for variety of reasons. And what is being suggested is not simply the addition of a few carp to the existing stocks. For the cost involved, if Gus is correct with his ball-park figures, I think that there are better options - as RobP as stated. As for access rights for disabled anglers, a water need not be a commercial type water to do that.
|
|
|
Post by Dr Barbus on Feb 15, 2007 22:25:24 GMT
Stan I read with interest the other thread you started on commercials, the financial situation and the improved access for siabled. The latter is to be lauded. The statement about the losses has taken the wind out of what I was going to post to a certain extent, but here it is anyway. If Gus is right ( I do not know) about how much it would cost to establish a commercial fishery by changing an existing naturalised lake that looks even more of a particularly high risk venture given Leeds losses over the last year. Staying with the commercial fishery idea, and the probable fact that like many societies and clubs you are not seeing youngsters coming into the sport and so establishing reliable yearbook source for the future, would it not make sense to hang fire on a pure commercial and consider some of the options given already, such as establishing links with existing fisheries. And save the big expenditure for somethig analogous to what Hull are acheiving with parts of their Brough Fishery. The idea is thus: find a suitable site for developing not only a match oriented "commercial" fishery but one that also allows youth coaching. So a new complex of two or more small lakes or pools is what is required to do this. It would satisfy the needs of the society in establishing a new commercial fishery and hopefully attract youngsters to give the society a better lifeblood for the future. Finding a suitable site may take some time, and it might be better if it were not in close (geographic) competition with existing commercials. Something closer to Leeds would also help with the youth aspect too; and closer to the society's HQ. It might even be possible to get grants from the EU, national or local schemes to match society money. This is a longer term prospect which is why I suggest sounding out links with suitable existing commercials looks like sound move for the short and immediate future. It relieves that pressure for a commercial nearer to Leeds and gives the society more time to formulate a sounder long term plan and see if grant money is available. Information on the Brough complex is at: www.hdaa.freeserve.co.uk/the_brough_fishery_complex.htm Note I am not suggesting a specimen lake like Hull, but just the coaching and match pools.
|
|
|
Post by stanfish on Feb 16, 2007 16:42:28 GMT
hi Dr barbus,in the longterm you are of couse right, we will seek to make our own pools should the finance for such a project be made available, a new clubhouse and a complex of lakes for all ,disabled , juniors , beginners, all could be catered for, but at this moment that is not possible. we can only use the tools we have and the limited recources that are available to us , our membership has fallen from over 9,000 to its present number of just over 2,000, thats because we have not supplied the right product for our customers for the past 10 years, its plain to see where all these other anglers are going and it costs them much more than buying a leeds book ever did, if we stick together we can supply the kind of fishing that every one wants be it specimin, pleasure or match and at a reasonable price. the night fishing is not so easy to resolve, some of them may not have been asked for many years about night fishing, some may allow it for a increase in rent that means the night anglers would have to pay for the privalage, we may be able to use the waters we own for night fishing, this all falls into my mandate of uttiliseing our assets and i am pushing this, but it takes time so bear with me on this.stan..
|
|