Supposing I hook a fish on one bank, where I'm entitled to fish, but land it on the other bank, where I'm not entitled to fish, is this okay? Or not, as I've always believed. Someone used the analogy of shooting, that if I shoot a bird on my land and it falls on my neighbour's, then I'm allowed to retrieve it therefrom. Which I personally don't feel is very apt.

I wouldn't have a problem with that one mate.Why do you ask?

If you hook a fish from a bank where you're entitled to fish you are not allowed to cross the river and land the fish on the opposite bank.

You would, in effect, be poaching and subject to the sanctions of that offence.

A shot bird similarly becomes the property of the owner of the land it falls on - again you have no right of access to retrieve it.

__________________
[I]"I still don't know why I fish or why other men fish, except that we like it and it makes us think and feel."[/I] Roderick L Haig-Brown

[url]www.wildfly.net[/url]

[url]http://www.gameanglinginstructors.co.uk/[/url]

That is my understanding of the law,Including if your fish runs Upstream/Downstream from your beat into another beat.

Jim

__________________
The Fishermans Friend is the Flirty Fly,Fickle Food for Fleeting Fish.

I agree with Lighthouse and 3lb Grayling and it is worth noting that you are technically not allowed to wade or even fish past the mid-point of the river where the opposite bank is in different ownership. The PAAS make this quite clear in their rules.

In many situations there is a mutual understanding that you can certainly cast past the mid point provided that no angler is fishing opposite. On some salmon or sea trout beats the nature of the pools is that they will usually fish better from one bank and there is often an agreement that one bank will take priority over the other in some pools, i.e. if there is an angler on both banks it is predetermined that one will have first go at the pool but in the absence of an angler on the far bank the whole pool can be waded and fished from either bank (but not actually from the far bank).

If you are fortunate enough to hook a fish large enough to take you up or downstream out of your beat or over to the far bank where there is no prior agreement you will depend on being invited to deal with it by an angler (or landowner) on that bank.

Incidentally, going to retrieve a shot bird (or deer) from a neighbour's ground might constitute armed trespass if you take your gun or rifle with you.

__________________
“There is no more lovely country than Monmouthshire in early spring. Nowhere do the larks sing quite so passionately, as if somehow inspired by the Welsh themselves. There is a blackbird on every thorn and a cock chaffinch, a twink as they call him there, on every bush...... It moved me profoundly. I had been spared to see another spring, and I thank God for it.”

Oliver Kite
“A Spring Day on the Usk”
A Fisherman’s Diary

Not sure this is correct. The House of Lords ruled that the owner of a single bank fishery was entitled to wade or moor a boat anywhere on his side of the middle line of the river and cast a line (or net) as far as he could into the other half of the river. See the bottom of this page.

This is, strictly speaking, a decision under Scottish law, but opinion seems to be that, if challenged, the same would apply in England & Wales since the HoL is the ultimate court of both countries. I do know that when a certain fishery changed hands a few years ago the new owner started making noises about preventing the opposite bank from casting into 'his' water, but backed down when this precedent was drawn to his attention.

Again,this is my understanding of the law.

Jim

__________________
The Fishermans Friend is the Flirty Fly,Fickle Food for Fleeting Fish.

Hi, Aiden,
From time immemorial there has been a sort of tacit, undiscussed gentlemen's agreement to stand on your side of the median line down the river and to cast to your opposite neighbour's side of the river. Without access to a boat, that is often the only way some lies can be fished. Where parties dispute this
'Barrack room law', in the final analysis, you haven't a leg to stand on if you are caught with a foot in the wrong half of the river. Pardon the pun!
As an aside, although lakeside property owners own the lake bed straight out from their property, if you fish from a boat, they can't move you. BUT, don't drop your anchor or moor in the said owner's bay. This applies on Ullswater, for sure, because permitted access to fishing from boats in so-called 'private water' was the outcome of a dispute, settled in court, which secured the 'free fishing' which its visitors all enjoy.
Cheers,TC
PS The above anchoring thing would surely be waived in an emergency.

I for one would not give a ****.. if i hooked a fish on one bank and had to cross the river to land the fish i would do so without so much as giving it a thought.

Give me New Zealand any day of the week.. me thinks that the only good thing that ever came from the royals is 'the queens chain'

the concept of private waters, whether i can land a fish on the other bank, etc..... it honestly makes me feel ill.. I hate the concept of people owning rivers... so many of our best waters are privately owned, to be fished only by those who can afford to fish there.. surely thats just wrong??


Me thinks i need to move back to NZ. In fact i am trawling the net for work over there right now, anyone know any big sheep farmers in NZ with land near some good trout water?

Thank you all for the responses. Very much aprpeciated.