British Float Tube Association

Fishing South West Waters => 2014 Rules for South West Water => Topic started by: kevin1 on March 17, 2014, 05:10:47 PM

Title: South West Water
Post by: kevin1 on March 17, 2014, 05:10:47 PM
New rules for fishing the following waters :


Members can fish by themselves on these waters when South West Water have personnel on site ,  this will be the same as the times posted for boats.
You must pay the normal fishing ticket and a additional £5 launch fee.  You must use the boat signing in book to sign in and out, and state that you are float tubing.  
If fishing when no personnel are on site you must have a minium of two tubers as before.
Kennick have know stated only tubing with two persons . 

Title: Re: South West Water
Post by: bracken on March 17, 2014, 07:03:32 PM
The £5 launch fee is a bit of a pain. On what basis has this been levied?

I have never understood the basis for float tubing launch fees. Is this Chris's idea?

Title: Re: South West Water
Post by: kevin1 on March 18, 2014, 04:27:35 PM

There was a launch fee imposed before , we have been lucky that we have not been asked to pay this the last few years.

As a pensioner you will get a concessionary ticket .

Title: Re: South West Water
Post by: bracken on March 19, 2014, 09:09:43 AM
The last piece about pensionbers concessionary rates is good news.

However, I still want somebody to rationally persuade me why a launch fee is justified. No fishery we have fished on has made any special arrangements for easy tube launching, non-slip gradients etc. So what else do they do to justify this charge?

I would have thought that waters wishing to attract more customers would have been doing their best to accomodate them, rather than issuing punitive charges without good reason. I guess in the early days of float tubing the club accepted some imposition of fees to increase access to waters but this now seems to have stuck, and it is time it was changed!

Title: Re: South West Water
Post by: chessie on March 19, 2014, 07:34:05 PM
With regard to launch fees i guess we could all do without them but I suppose we have to recognise that other water users (eg kayakers)pay a launch fee for the priviledge of using the water and other facilities So I can see the logic of us having to pay as well.I accept we pay for the fishing but only the bank fishing rate.I also guess they would claim a degree of supervision, and potentially the need to provide assistance in the(albeit very unlikely) if problems arise

Title: Re: South West Water
Post by: kevin1 on March 20, 2014, 10:19:51 AM
If the waters put in non-slip gradients and other special  arrangements they would have to increase the launch fee to cover this.
Also they would probably also state that if we have members who are unable to launch with the existing arrangement they  would also be a safety risk and should not be tubing  , as the  waters have a boat for disabled people they would expect you to use them instead.

Many of the other waters we fish charge a launch fee and no one moans about paying them.

Title: Re: South West Water
Post by: andre on March 20, 2014, 04:24:15 PM
I'm really sorry but I don't know any business that has to justify what it charges for its products or services, the answer is very simple and obvious, if you don't agree with the charge you don't have to pay it, go somewhere else, the same response when you go to Tesco and tell them Sainsburys are cheaper ! To be quite honest its the same response I give my Customers when they tell me they can by the goods cheaper in China.


Title: Re: South West Water
Post by: Lupostie on May 18, 2014, 08:14:09 AM
Kevin your remarks are true in some respects but in my view the part about not being able to get in one's floattube is wrong as is what you say about the wheelyboat. On waters that have modern wheelyboats on you can not use it unless you are in a wheel chair as there are no fixed seating, this is what a person was told when they tried to use one on Grafham this year.
Since I fractured my spine in two places at the end on 2010 together with my Buergers disease I am now medically classed as disabled, so do you mean I should not be using my float tube to enjoy my hobby. No I don't think you would say that but that is what it comes across like.
Ravensthorp has put its launch fees up to £10 and I think such a rise in launch fees in unwarranted because it already had the launch ramp as well as steps down into the water plus the water warden does NOT help us into and out of the water like he does for boat anglers and we are not paying a different fishing rate we pay the same ticket price as everyone. The warden is there in case of emergency for all anglers not just for float tubers, the bank / boat anglers do not have to pay extra for this service. When we have had meetings there in the past I do not remember any incidents that would have caused concern, in fact as far as I remember we have always had a very good day there with some very good fishing and even a BBQ afterwards all without incident. If these waters feel they need to add a launch fee the surely they could give a discount to current BFTA members as the association has well thought out rules plus insurance and I think that although we are not a governing body we as an association act responsibly ever ever we go fishing.
I for one will miss not fishing Ravensthorp in a floattube as its my favourite in the area and I will surely miss it when we go there for competitions.
I know there are loads of other fisheries in this area that charge a minimal fee but I will still miss ravensthorp.

Title: Re: South West Water
Post by: bracken on May 18, 2014, 05:46:53 PM
With reference to the Ravensthorpe new and absolutely extortionate launch fee. As set out above, nobody has ever given me a satisfactory explanation for the need to levy a launch fee for float tubing! This new rate is totally ridiculous. I can only assume that the fishery is trying to maximise profits any way it can. However, in this case I feel Anglian Water has shot itself in the foot very badly, as I no longer feel that I would be happy to be robbed in order to fish this water - however much I like it. I think a two fish ticket, plus catch and release, would now be in excess of thirty pounds which is absolutely ridiculous.

In response to Andre's comment above, we are not comparing like with like here. Float tubing essentially costs the water nothing, we own our own gear and we have our own insurance. Maintenance of boats cost is undoubtedly a factor which needs taking into account on boat launch fees where reservoirs own their own fleet, and I have no quarrel with that. I have some reservations about kayaks on the water, but surely the same rules should apply to them where the fishermen own their own equipment and the Water Authority contributes nothing - NO CHARGE!  Maybe the rich can willingly pay up and not notice the cost to their disposable income. A fairly high number of BFTA reglars are now OAP's, and believe me they certainly will notice a charge of this nature. I accept your premis that we should look elsewhere - where the water is more welcoming and less avaricious about its charging. Unless Ravensthorpe, (and I assume Rutland and Pitsford), ameliorate this silly charge substantially, I will not sadly be fishing there again. The principle of the charge upsets me, and my only means of protest is to withdraw my money from their coffers. I have fished there for the last twenty years, which when added up is not an insignificant amount of money paid out to Anglian Water over this time. By doing this they have lost the chance of me contributing any more to them.

I was made aware of this charge from a hearsay comment about two of our members who fished the water and paid nothing early in the season, and then when they went back again a couple of weeks back, the £10 charge was added to each of their tickets. On questioning this, they were shown a memo by a Warden who they did not recognise, stating that this was now AW policy. Having travelled a hundred miles to fish there they paid up, but my guess is that they will not be very keen on going back.

This rather brings into question our annual Pairs Competition to be held at this venue. I would find it galling for our membership to contribute £150 or so extra to Anglian Water for no good reason, if our usual numbers were to turn up. It also poses a problem as I know some members who travel long distance have booked accomodation, so it may be too late to change for this year.

I do wonder whether it is time for us to reconsider going back to Eyebrook. I was one of many who were deeply upset by the way we were last treated there for the competition and casual days, and vowed not to go back. However, I understand that it is now under new management once again, and that they are quite keen to have us back. Perhaps Andre would like to make a few enquiries.

Andre, is there any chance you could use you tact and diplomatic negotiating skills to sort this ridiculous situation out with Anglian water befor the pairs comp?

Title: Re: South West Water
Post by: Lupostie on May 18, 2014, 09:13:54 PM
I could not have put it better, here here Bracken

Title: Re: South West Water
Post by: stevieN on May 19, 2014, 08:44:15 AM
The solution is easy, if you don't want to pay the fee, dont go.

At the end of the day, Anglian water, like any other business, are there to make the business profitable. By stating we have our own gear, therefore negating boat maintenance fees is irrelevant. As one fishery owner told me..."people using float tubes are people who have may paid to use one of my boats, therefore I have to introduce a launch fee"

We can debate this from both sides, however the fees are what they pay up or stay away... the choice is yours !!

Steve N

Title: Re: South West Water
Post by: davec on May 19, 2014, 03:23:47 PM
Brian and I don't go south of Rutland due to the expense of fuel, bed and breakfast and fishery costs. Putting up launching fees by £5 at Ravensthorpe and we don't have to do b&b doesn't seem too bad to me. Because floattubers have more chance of catching their limit than bank anglers I don't see the problem. If Emma's put up their breakfasts to £10 I would still eat there and it would still be cheaper than little chef. Don't let us be divided for the sake of £5. I give more than that to the wife for housekeeping.

Title: Re: South West Water
Post by: andre on May 19, 2014, 04:06:24 PM
I will talk to Ravensthorpe to see if they'll grant us a concession for holding a competiton and ensuring good numbers for turn out.

Similarly with the Eyebrook I have no problem with the fishery I have spoken to Andy Miller on many occasions and I am sure we will be welcome to go, the issue I have had in the past is the water is not stocked after the May bank holiday for the rest of the season, so attending in August could see you battling the weather and a fishery low on stock.

In terms of Anglian water, as Stevie says, if this is their policy and there is no concessions then we either vote with our feet or pay up and smile.

Leave it with me, I'll see what I can do.


Title: Re: South West Water
Post by: bracken on May 19, 2014, 04:32:34 PM
In response to Stevie. I did state that my intention would be to not pay the fee and reluctantly stay at home.

The second point about float tubers fishing from the boats if they had to. Personally I only fish from a float tube because regrettably my disabilities preclude me from standing on a bank for many minutes without experiencing some serious discomfort. Equally if I get into a boat - if it is not equipped with a seriously comfortable seat with back support, I am soon in trouble. I don't know for sure, but my guess is that Andy Ward will be in the same dilemma at present. A float tube is the only way that I can currently fish, albeit for a limited time in some conditions. I fully realise that this is my problem and nothing should be based around one persons situation - I try and do the best I can so that I can still enjoy fishing. I would not gladly go for a boat to fish from. As Andy has stated, the wheelie boats are mainly wheelchair biased, and actually I would not wish to deprive a more disabled person than myself of the opportunity to have an enjoyable day out.

There is a much larger factor here, which if not sorted out at this stage will spread, and become an inherent part of all float tubing. If Anglian Water are seen to get away with this without protest, then every other fishery owner will develop the opinion of 'if they can do this and get away with it - then we can as well'! Before long we will find our fishing too expensive for people to bother turning out. The cost of fuel and travelling has already taken its toll on our numbers at competitions.

I know I'm a miserable, grumpy old sod on occasions, but I do have a firm set of principles and a strong feeling for fairness - for everybody and everything. I am afraid that I feel this massive launch fee is unfair.

Coming back to a point made by Dave. Yes float tubers can get to the fish better than a bank angler, and on waters where limit bags are quite high the fishery owner will 'lose' more fish to us, because we as a body are a pretty capable bunch when we set our minds to it. However, in this particular situation at Ravensthorpe the situation doesn't apply! We usually fish a two fish / catch and release ticket, or if a pensioner then there is an opportunity to fish a one fish / catch and release ticket a little cheaper. With the latter alternative ticket, that works out as a b****y expensive trout when a £10 launch fee is included in the ticket price. I know we don't go fishing  to take home a bag full of trout - (I virtually always give mine away to friends if I catch any), the fishing itself is reason enough to go and have an enjoyable day. BUT, there are occasions when the enjoyment can be spoiled by the feeling of being exploited or ripped off.

You posted as I was writing Andre. I do hope you manage to have some very constructive discussions and a constructive outcome to this dilemma. Personally I really would like to continue fishing this water, it is a super venue, but I will vote with my feet if the situation is not changed. I doubt it will worry them, but favourable BFTA Competition Reports will no longer appear from me on the general website either if I'm not present. (I am amazed how often I find myself reading my reports when doing a google search - quite worrying sometimes)! Someone else will have to be scribe!

Title: Re: South West Water
Post by: Lu1postie on May 20, 2014, 01:16:47 PM
Surely if anybody should be paying this launch fee it's the boat anglers as the boats, engines, fuel and maintenance are all looked after by Anglian water, can you imagine the out cry then if the price of a day boat jumped up by £10.
Also we cannot find anything about this increase on the Anglian water web site or any others to boot, does this increase only affect Ravensthorp or does that now mean all Anglian waters like Rutland, Pitsford etc.?
I know I've only been a member for a few years and that I don't get to fish with all you superb fly fishermen as much as I'd like to but surely we as an association have not given Anglian water any reason to be discriminated against (oh yes we are) because it does not apply to all who fish. We as a association have guidelines that most if not all sensible float tubers follow, we follow the fishery rules and as far as I'm aware there have not been any incidents on the water that required the rescue boat to be called out. I know Anglian water thinks it's a better way to get some more revenue, I understand really I do but I agree with Tony in that how long will it take for other water to jump on the band wagon perhaps next time it may be your favorite water and maybe they will charge £20.00 for the pleasure of launching your float tube. Who knows.
So what as an association are we going to do about the forthcoming meeting there. WALK OR PAY ????

Title: Re: South West Water
Post by: rider12351 on August 27, 2015, 02:59:38 PM
Is it to do with the insurance this launch fee, if a boat hits you type of thing? just a thought!!!!

Title: Re: South West Water
Post by: bracken on August 28, 2015, 08:46:26 AM
I don't think it has anything to do with insurance. As a member of the BFTA we have our own public liability insurance which was an essential pre-requisite to getting on many waters.

In days of yore when the BFTA first started, the club agreed to pay launch fees on many waters in order to gain permission to fish them, possibly as a sop to those boat and bank anglers who incorrectly argued that float tubers would decimate fish stocks etc. etc. I guess that current fishery management are just carrying on the trend, and also fisheries are trying to maximise income in any way possible. As you can see from prior postings however, there is a limit beyond which we will not accept! Ravensthorpe shot itself in the foot by hiking this unnecessary fee when we all walked away. In this instance we are still not sure whether it was an Anglian Water edict after they allowed kayaks on the water, (they are in the same position that float tubers were twenty odd years ago, where they are trying to get onto waters and apparently willing to pay), or whether it was an over-enthusiatic scheme implemented by a fishery warden. Whichever reason, it cost them at least some income. (Ravensthorpe was a very popular venue and several of us went there other than on competition days).

Title: Re: South West Water
Post by: rider12351 on August 28, 2015, 10:37:58 PM
Cheers for the reply I went to click fishing and asked the guy there he said it was to do with insurance but he was quit wrong it seems anyway thanks for the reply and the history found it very interesting

Title: Re: South West Water
Post by: bracken on August 30, 2015, 09:59:34 AM
No problem. Launch fees are something I can get quite enthused about. If waters were to make provision for launching float tubes - steady gravel sloping ramps etc with a nice handrail, then I could see the argument for them. However on some fisheries you walk backwards a few paces over a very uneven rocky bottom and then sit down - without knowing that you are over anything from 50 to 150 feet of water a few feet further out. Where? Wimbleball and Drift are two examples. On others, cloying mud will curl over your fins and effectively stick you to the bottom. Walking down concrete boat ramps may seem like a good idea - until you step on the silkweed and do some impromptu water skiing - you will get a few cheers from the onlookers but not much sympathy. If fisheries were at all bothered about your safety and insurance they would rectify the situation, or as in the case of United Utilities ban all float tubing under some spurious edict.

Most fisheries work on the basis that you are 'big-boys and girls' now, that you know the risks and that they will have the money anyway.

It's a bit like my other rant about a certain caravan organisation, who always charge extra for dogs. Why? They don't feed them or walk them, or indeed in most case make any provision for them to walked. Admittedly pooch might drink a bit of water, but he would have to go some to get to £1.50 a days worth. They also have a habit of charging extra for cars towed in by a motorhome, but don't charge for the car that tows a caravan on site. You have to pay for your visitors to be allowed on some sites too. Why?

Money grabbing or what?