Well worth a look. We hope to expand the content so any contributions will be gratefully accepted.
|
The following item has been forwarded by Wynne Griffiths, the secretary of Ogmore Angling Association, and provides a graphic example of why the EAW needs more funding. The Campaign’s sole objective it, by all means possible, to try to ensure adequate protection of our fisheries, which means, among other things, having a sufficiently funded enforcement agency who have the legal powers to apprehend offenders. Please use the report and incident tab to record all such illegal activity and provide useful information of suspected illegal activity: that way we have a chance of proving the need for higher levels of enforcement. IF YOU DO NOT REPORT THESE INCIDENTS AND RECORD THEM VIA THE CAMPAIGN WEB SITE, WE CAN NOT BUILD A CASE. SAFFA OF SUFFER? The Environment Agency has a statutory obligation to maintain, improve and develop fisheries. Fisheries enforcement is a vital aspect of this. As such, in their review of fisheries enforcement in 2007 the Environment Agency stated ‘We want protected fisheries and satisfied customers confident in our actions’. Not only is it clear that the above statement is not being achieved but it is clear that the Environment agency is failing in its statutory duty to protect our fisheries which is a requirement under the Salmon and Freshwater Fisheries Act (1975) (SAFFA). On the evening of Sunday 8th May members of the Ogmore Angling Association whilst fishing disturbed four poachers netting a notable pool on the river Ogmore during an incoming tide. Such a high impact incident should have been given the highest importance by the Agency, yet not only did they fail to respond but they failed to contact those members during and after that event. This incident is not unremarkable. This is in fact the third consecutive high impact incident on this river which has failed to attract a response from the Agency. In fact it would have been more far more surprising had the Agency attended given the number of enforcement officers who are available outside of office hours. The Agency’s senior management must now ‘come clean’ and acknowledge that they cannot possibly carry out their statutory duty to protect our fisheries with their current resources. In the meantime our fisheries, fish and fishermen will continue to suffer. Let us know if you would like to see other newsletters added to this tab. The following article from the angling times is self explanatory. What do you think? Thanks again to the Angling Times for their watchful eye on the net
Follow the link below to see the latest information about Red Vent Syndrome – Follow the link below to see the Recommended byelaws – all North Wales rivers, following the recent consultations. Please post your views on the Campaign forum of email via the contact link. The Angling Times are, once again, bringing the latest proposals to our attention. This is what the Campaign is all about and we thank the Angling Times for adding the fuel of publicity what is being considered. When will the politicians realise the damage that illegal fisheries activity is doing to our fisheries and thereby to massive revenues angling generates for the economy. Thank you ANGLING TIMES. (Magnify the image to improve readability)
Permalink
THE CELTIC SEA TROUT PROGRAMMECeltic Sea Trout Project, Angler Feedback, January 2011
Introduction The Celtic Sea Trout Project (CSTP) is a European Union, Interreg IV-funded, Ireland-Wales collaborative project looking into the status, distribution, genetics and ecology of sea trout around the Irish Sea (http://www.celticseatrout.com/about/programme.htm). This note briefly outlines progress in 2010 for the many helpers and participants in angling clubs, river trusts and other organisations. More detailed technical accounts will be available in due course. Project management Two fulltime Project Officers were appointed under contract in May 2010: one each in Ireland and Wales, to run the sampling and data handling tasks that support the rest of the CSTP. Contractors were also appointed by August 2010 to undertake certain of the specialist tasks (fisheries analysis, life history analysis ad modelling, and hydrodynamic modeling). Formal launch meetings were held in Wales and in Ireland. Sampling The CSTP is totally reliant upon effective field sampling to collect data and material from fish (tissues, gut contents, gonads scales etc) for the scientific analysis. For example, the genetics and microchemistry analysis, that will tell us about the mixing and distribution of stocks, requires a baseline of measurements to be made in all the principal rivers around the Irish Sea which are likely to contribute to sea trout stocks. River sampling of juvenile trout for the genetics was the focus of the CSTP team’s work in 2010 and was 95% completed in full using a large scale electro-fishing programme, taking samples from around 80 rivers. Some preliminary marine sampling was also carried out. A major part of the sampling programme is the collection of scales for analysis of life histories, and growth rates in sea trout. This is particularly difficult because, apart from fish traps, of which there are only three across the whole CSTP area, the sampling of adults in rivers has to be done by angling. Moreover, scale reading and analysis are labour-intensive and time-consuming which limits the numbers of samples that can be dealt with. Accordingly, we have restricted this part of the programme to 25-30 rivers, selected to cover the Irish Sea and where angling catch has historically been large enough to provide the samples. This part of the sampling programme has required extensive liaison with angler groups and distribution of sampling kits and scale envelopes. Several talks on the CSTP were given during the winters of 2008/9 and 2009/10 to clubs and associations across Wales, Ireland, Scotland and England. We aim to collect scales from at least 300 adult sea trout from each of the selected rivers over the two main years of sampling (angling seasons 2010 and 2011). A feature of the scale sampling programme is the need to collect samples from the full size range of sea trout in these rivers to reflect the overall population structure. The collection of scale samples in 2010 has not gone as well as the juvenile sampling and the returns to date fall well short of the indicative annual target of 150 fish /river (see Figure 1, which includes a small number of samples taken in 2009). Only the Nith and Border Esk in UK and the Argideen, Castletown and Currane in Ireland reached the target levels and most others achieved less than 20%. This was not due to fish shortage because catches were comparatively high last year. A major effort will be made in 2011 to raise awareness and to promote scale sampling by anglers, which will include a valuable incentive scheme. Data analysis Samples taken in last year’s surveys are being processed at the moment. Genetic analysis at the Universities of Cork and Bangor is now in full swing, and a first look at the base line description should be possible in March 2011. Scale data are being coupled with the extensive and catch statistics to describe variation in the complex life histories of sea trout and to develop analytical approaches that will enable the impacts of environmental pressures to be investigated. Other tasks on marine feeding and distribution modeling and fisheries analysis will start in 2011.
Sampling by anglers in 2011 The CSTP needs the continued support of anglers to collect the required scale samples in 2011. Scales from sea trout of all sizes across the full angling season are requested and can be taken easily once you have the basic kit which we provide. CSTP project team members are available to present talks to your club if required. Contact us through the CSTP website www.celticseatrout.com . THANK YOU FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE. If you wish to see the whole document, including graph please click on the link following this note There have been various developments which will require our attention over the next month or so – 1. ‘Workshops’ promoted by the ‘Access Sub-Group’ As you may have heard, the ‘Access Sub-Group’, which is affiliated to the WRWAG (formerly known as the Round Table Group) has decided that two worshops are needed to canvass opinion on how Voluntary Access Agreements might work. Both are to be held on Saturday 26th February from 10.30am to 3.00pm and the two venues are: – Owain Glyndwr Hotel, the Square, Corwen LL21 0DL – somewhere nr Brecon, to be announced … Whether we think these are needed or not, we must show willing and be prepared to turn up and state what we think. Both these are restricted to 30 participants so it seems to me essential that at least 15 well versed angling club secretaries / riparian owners / land agents or similar turn up to each meeting to put forward our views. You can be sure there will be no shortage of canoeists and probably ‘wild’ swimmers applying to attend, so, if you have not already done so, could I urge you to apply today ! Please either ring Sarah Gilder of Resources for Change on 01938 555759 or email her on sarah@r4c.org.uk When I find out more about these events I will get back to you with further information and suggestions as to how we might marshal our arguments. 2. WRMAG (Round Table) and the ‘Agreements Sub-Group’ At present there is no-one specifically representing the interests of and speaking up for the rights of riparian owners (who of course may be angling clubs) on either the main group or the sub-group. Yet it is these riparian owners whose rights are likely to be most affected by proposals for access to and along rivers which the sub-group is tasked with promoting and which the main group will oversee. I am therefore glad to report that the CLA have now been accepted as a member of WRMAG. Arguments put forward and concerns raised by the CLA are likely to be similar to and support those made by angling interests. When I hear the name of the person who will attend I will let you know. What I think we must do now is to press for riparian owner / angling representation on the sub-group where “target rivers” are “identified” and arrangements for access are being drawn up. You can see how much this sort of sensible representation is needed on the sub-group if you look at the Minutes of the first meeting (as circulated by Julia) and read: “written agreements not proposed because (they) may deter landowners” – whereas we know that more or less the complete opposite is true. 3. Referendum on more extensive powers for WAG This referendum on 3rd March is likely to be very important in the continuance of our efforts in this access to rivers debate. The Minister most involved, as well as other AMs, have made it clear in statements that they would very likely legislate in favour of ‘nationalising’ rivers to give complete unrestricted access at all times if they had the powers to do so, as the foolowing quotes illustrate: “Following a referendum in Wales and new powers being acquired here, a Government of the future could choose to move down the legislative route.” Jane Davidson, evidence to Sus Comm 21.1.1 “We do not have legislative competence to implement some of our agreed recommendations and the Minister’s response states that should next years referendum result in a ‘yes’ vote, the Assembly would have competence in the future”. Leanne Wood AM, Assembly debate on the SC report 29.9.10 Leanne rightly highlighted that we are stymied once agin by a lack of legislative competence and that there is so much more we could do if that competence lay with us …” Jane Davidson, Assembly debate 29.9.10. I think we should keep these views closely in mind when casting our votes and also when deciding which side of the referendum debate to support beforehand. If you have not already done so, may I encourage you to visit the True Wales website www.truewales.org.uk where there is a ‘no further powers’ petition and other helpful information. As David JP says – even apart from the access to rivers debate, do we really want to give Cardiff further extensive powers when there is no second chamber there to check any immoderate proposals ? I will circulate these points about the referendum to my database of Welsh angling club secretaries shortly. I would also be grateful if you could circulate this email to whom you think might be interested and – as it were – on our side. Kind regards to all Max THIS IS AN APPEAL TO PADDLERS TO AVOID PADDLING OVER OR WALKING THROUGH GRAVEL BEDS ON RIVERS FOR THE NEXT COOUPLE OF MONTHS. Salmon are endangered and becoming more and more scarce; please don’t assist in their demise. May we grow together by better understanding Thank you.
The following is abstracted from an American article on salmon spawning but never the less is described adequately what is taking place on many gravel beds on many of our rivers at this time and for teh next couple of months. “Spawning Biology Spawning, or redd (spawning nest) building, is a lengthy process taking 15 to 20 days to complete and includes the following three stages: 1. Pre-spawning – Over a period of five days, the female selects a spawning site and begins a set of tentative redd excavations. She may retreat to areas of cover adjacent to her test excavations and be difficult to observe. Disturbance from boat traffic at this time could result in prevention of redd establishment, displacement of fish to less suitable habitats, or creation of poorly- constructed redds (i.e., too shallow to protect eggs adequately). 2. Spawning – The female cleans out all loose gravel and fine sediment in a “pit” in preparation for depositing her eggs within a larger area called a “redd.” She alternately digs at the redd and settles back into the depression to release eggs. The male accompanies her continuously and releases sperm or “milt” over the newly laid eggs, which settle into spaces between the gravel. The result is a series of egg filled pits within the cleaned redd perimeter that takes approximately 5 days and is a period which the fish expend a tremendous amount of energy. Disturbance of fish during this period by boaters could result in improperly constructed egg pockets, open scattering of eggs, or prevent spawning all together. 3. Post-Spawning – The males are no longer attentive while the females remain at the redd for approximately 10 days until the great majority die. The females protect the redds by preventing other fish from digging up their redds and damaging the eggs. Disturbance of fish during this period from boating would result in inadequate post spawning gravel covering and early mortality of females. Egg to Fry Development The average female lays around 4000 eggs. The eggs take around 90 to 150 days to develop before emerging from the gravels as fry, usually in late January or February. Egg development time depends primarily on the water temperature. Cooler water slows egg development while warmer water speeds development. While the eggs are in the gravel they are very vulnerable to damage and mortality from the effects of trampling or boat grounding on redds. Many of the redds are located next to the river’s edge and near gravel bars where boaters may enter and exit the river. You may well say that this paper only relates to America and it has no relevance to Atlantic salmon and sea trout but I doubt this is the case as Atlantic salmon go through the same spawning process without the mortality stage of some females. With grateful thanks for all your help and support over the past year and in the hope that we can continue to make progress in our aim to protect our fisheries. The 2010 River Conwy season extension is now complete, to view a summary of the results visit the catch returns page: River Conwy Catch Returns Summary If you forgot to submit your return, please contact me ASAP at: Thanks, Alec This document sets out the alternatives available for changes to our fishery bye laws, including changes to the length of the season and methods that may be allowed. Your comments will be welcome on the forum The 2010 River Clwyd season extension is now complete, to view a summary of the results visit the catch returns page: River Clwyd Catch Returns Summary If you forgot to submit your return, please contact me ASAP at: Thanks, Alec |
