Rising or Falling

Welcome to 2014

July 30th

Sad person that I am, in an idle moment I have been cruising the pretender to this blog - "River Tweed News".

Even sadder was the passing thought: I might take up the Foundation's invitation - turn up at Paxton next month to watch the netting.

The netsmen and the boys from the Foundation are big mates so when the boffins want a few fish to try out their new tracking gear, Paxton  happily provide, after all they are the only people catching any fish.  

It must stick in throats.  Watching good saleable salmon go back in the river but that's life.  There must be a price for the palsy walsy relationship with the Commission.

But hey, what's this?  The river is warm, the fish might be distressed and, well, the whole thing might have to be called off.   

I suppose, were I a salmon, I would prefer to be knocked on the head than be handled, fitted with a new transmitter down the jaxy and put back struggling to survive in baking hot de-oxygenated water.

But then I came to wonder why is rod fishing allowed to carry on in these conditions?  Flying condom down the neck.  That starved of oxygen fight .  Dragged up the bank - sorry, I meant beached.  The clumsy attempts to remove the barbed trebles.  Picked up for the fishing photo.

So why is it?  If the families of summer salmon are dwindling why are we fishing for them at all?  Set an example?

Oh, I see.  We can't.  There's money at stake.


July 2014

Tweedbeats

I have been avidly following the weekly - and very interesting - editorial to “Tweedbeats”. 

I am horrified to learn that yesterday, the 27th of July, the distinguished Editor reported he had been in the toilet suffering flashbacks.

Worse, he has convinced himself that a poor spring is the natural precursor to a bumper autumn.  Autumn 2014 is going to be the finale to a high fives bonanza season.

And to illustrate his point he has rounded on his erstwhile critics - those who dared to question his tenure in charge of  the big boys private club, the Tweed Commission.

Well chew on this:  the season so far has been abysmal.  Catch and release has not made one iota of difference to the spring season.  Radical measures were required in 2010 and are required now.  Don’t try and paper over the problems by pedalling a big autumn total.

  

November 2011

Well, the season is ending. Two years in which the river has been alive with fish. Catch and release has worked the expected miracle.



This last week two new papers have been written by the folk at the Foundation. The first to explain the oft asked question: so many fish but why so few takers. The second, why so much disease?


Now,  the answer to the first puzzle is, apparently, that the longer a salmon is in the river the less likely it is to take. That’s new? But when a fish has been in the river for 120 days plus (and the closer it gets to spawning) it becomes aggressive and we have a better chance of hooking, yes, a springer. Will we get a sweatshirt? At this time of the year perhaps a side of smoked kelt.


So deep into November we can catch springers again. Good news what?


The answer to the second is apparently that as the fish’s skin is broken in go the fungi. Good news for the springers then too. Hooked, netted, handled must work miracles for their chances.


Can we, dear Foundation, ask some more pertinent questions? Why does the season go on so long? Would the cause be promoted by ending the season early if only in the upper reaches? When there are so many fish could the stock be better managed by extending the netting season against a deal to leave the spring fish/sea trout alone? Etc


I suppose these are questions the bosses won’t let you answer - it might cost.


Yrs etc

The Chairman,

The RTC,

Drygrange Steading

2nd May 2011

Dear Sir,

I gather that no agreement has been reached this season between the RTC and the nets, in-river or coastal, to prohibit salmon netting until the end of June.

1.         Is that true?

2.         If it is, why has the fact not been publicised with the same fanfare that accompanied last year's agreement?

3.         What attempt was made to reach an agreement?

4.         What was the stumbling block?

5.         How many spring fish are going to be "saved" this year by your catch and release policy?  What difference do you think it will make to the chances of the spring fish?  Why did you not adopt a single barbless hook and no spinning policy like the Dee but at least let us retain the chance of keeping a fish?

We are now in this absurd position:  I pay £40.00 odd to catch a salmon back I am forced to put back.  You charge  the nets £1.40 to kill one and they can kill as many as they like.  Your tagging policy was an expensive disaster. 

Last year, you were talking survival of the species, we must act.  You made it appear that it was not worth fishing the Tweed until the summer, there were so few spring fish.  Now, there is any amount of fishing available - more than I can ever remember.

The sea trout are no doubt going to be hammered again, the fish which would carry the summer fishing when the salmon are absent.

What are you going to do now?  Why can there not be an integrated management plan?  Take fish in times of plenty and use restraint when times are hard?

Last year you asked if the rods did not show restraint how you could you ask the nets to do likewise? Last year you said that if your catch and release code was not adhered to voluntarily you would go to the Minister for an order. So why don't you get on with it?  Why should the rods take and pay for the pain?  Put it another way, why should I show restraint when the nets do not?

You have statutory duties to preserve the fish stocks why don't you start performing them?

Yours faithfully,

Tweed Lover



The Chairman,
The RTC,

18.3.2011

Dear Sir,

I see you say this in your 2010 report:

"In mid April we asked all anglers and in-river nets to stop killing Salmon until 30th June for conservation purposes. This provoked fury amongst some anglers and angling pundits; much of the subsequent blogging, correspondence and press comment was low grade, often pretty unpleasant and vitriolic stuff, some anonymous (which is unforgiveable). As Chairman, flak-taking goes with the territory, but much was directed personally at our senior staff, and I cannot forgive that."

"It was a depressing period which I trust will never again be visited on the wholly excellent senior RTC and Tweed Foundation staff."

The spring decision was controversial. The timing was controversial. The potential effects worrying for many of those who work on the river.

Nevertheless, it must be unprecedented for an organisation such as yours to have been the butt of such an unpleasant reaction. Has it crossed your mind that "fury", "blogging" "unpleasant and vitriolic" and even "anonymous" comment is not the usual response even to a controversial decision and wondered why the reaction was so bitter?

In my case in particular you have singled me out for Coventry. You say you will speak to any member of my Syndicate bar me. Real schoolboy stuff. I cannot get any member of your staff to reply to correspondence unless I underline the threat of a "data protection" complaint.

My perception is that neither you nor your staff are used to having decisions questioned. The principal committee is hand picked by you. Your meetings are in camera. There are no public minutes and so on.

I cannot speak for anyone else but if the way I am treated is the norm (and anecdotally I hear many stories about the manner of individuals associated with Drygrange) I can fully appreciate the reaction, unpleasant though it might be.

For as long as I can remember we, as a group, have made a voluntary donation to the Foundation.  In 2009 we argued about it for the first time.  In 2010 not one spoke up for you.  No donation this year.  When will the message sink in?

The question is not, therefore, whether you will forgive your organisations' critics. It is whether they will forgive you.

Yours faithfully,

Tweedlover





March 4


The RTC,
Drygrange Steading

4.3.2011


Dear Sirs,


I would appreciate an explanation of your 2010 decision to make the spring "catch and release".

What were the facts on which you based that decision?

Our beat recorded ten spring fish in 2009 (February to June) and twenty-three in the same period in 2010 - an increase of 230%. 

If we fish an optimum number of four rods (we can fish double that number) in the months between February and June we could (give or take a few depending on the calendar) fish 576 rod days.

In the period to June 2009 154  rod days were fished out of the 576 available. 

In the same period in 2010 only 119 rod days were fished - a drop of 23%.  In other words only 21% of the available days were fished.  So the number of days fished dropped by 23% but 230% more fish were caught and only 21% of the available days were fished. 

Now, wherever you go on the river you are (illogically) asked what is the point of fishing the spring when you can't take a fish?  Or, you are met with the statement you might as well fish for kelts. 

The question is illogical because out of the 23 fish caught on our beat in 2010 only one was killed deliberately. All the rest were returned. 

The fact that spring fishers have voted with their feet is demonstrated by the amount of available spring fishing and the fact that the B and Bs and the hotels are empty.

But if, as your Chairman pronounces to the world, "we are talking of survival of the species" equating the state of the spring stock with the plight of the white tiger what do you expect? 

If you get up the noses of fishers by trying to pretend that a dead fish becomes your property and has to be transported to the Teviot Smokery, what do you expect? 

If you put the Dee on a pedestal when their spring catch fell in 2009 despite catch and release what do you expect?

Anyway, perhaps you might explain the statistical reasons behind (and the timing of) your decision.

Yours etc

February 25

In an idle moment (lots of those nowadays) your correspondent typed "abstraction" into the Foundation's search facility and produced this from 2007:


"Friday 3rd July: Joint monthly RTC / TF staff meeting in the morning. Spend the afternoon on admin and getting ready for tomorrow's netting. In the evening, go up the Oxnam Water as concerns expressed in the morning meeting about the reduction in water levels due to spray irrigation abstraction. It's clear that the river level downstream of the abstraction point has dropped by a couple of inches and that there have to be limits to  how much of this can be done. Take photos and notes."

Well those limits were well and truly exceeded in 2010.

Can we ask again how many commissioners abstract water, is there not a conflict of interest and what have you the RTC done about it?

February 23

Do you remember how last year your correspondent  (in the middle of that very dry spell when everywhere you looked  there was an irrigation pump draining water from the river) asked how many Commissioners abstracted water for agricultural irrigation?

 

You might also recall how your correspondent received the usual response from our totally objective and independent leaders, silence.

 

 

This is an extract from the record of an Angling Trust  meeting with George Gerring, the Thames Catchment Officer raising issues beyond the fact that when the river needed it most,  farmers were taking our water.

 

George made clear at this point that water abstraction is by far a greater cause of fish deaths than cormorants. We often hear how it slows the flow of the river but little of the impact on fish populations. When water gets abstracted at the intakes, fish eggs, fry and juvenile fish get sucked in as well, passing through the mesh of the screens. Abstraction is the silent killer on the Thames.

Electro-fishing results show markedly what a devastating effect these water intakes have. Electro-fishing temporarily stuns fish so that they float to the surface and can be inspected. Between Hurley and Teddington at 16 survey points, the lowest fish densities were found downstream of Walton intake and downstream of Surbiton intake. The greatest number of species in one spot (11) was found above Datchet intake yet the lowest number of species (4) was found below Datchet intake.

So how can this be fixed? The EA now instruct that mesh as small as 1-3 millimetres may be specified on Thames abstraction screens. This is small enough to protect elvers and glass eels. The one silver lining to the dark cloud of Thames eel decline is that it is now afforded protection. The EA Fisheries team can use new eel legislation to ensure water companies are not damaging eel stocks.

In addition, ‘behavioural screens’ are being investigated. Strobe lighting in front of intakes is a possibility. In Holland, strobe lighting has been shown to scare fish away but more study needs to be done on what species and ages are deterred. For it to be effective, strobes need to work on fry and juveniles. Most of the Thames Water intakes already have acoustic deterrents to help deter salmon smolts and other species from being sucked in. George had returned recently from a national assignment where he has been working on this very promising subject and will be pursuing options for the Thames.

 

Might I try again?  How many Commissioners abstract water, is there not a conflict of interest and what is the RTC/Foundation doing about it instead of sidestepping the issue and blaming SEPA?

You have a duty to protect the fish stocks.  What are you doing to fulfil your obligations?

February 21st

Good afternoon.

Do you subscribe to the Angling Trust - Fish Legal?

This is an extract from their newscast for the 18th of February 2011:

Welcome to the latest update from the Angling Trust. Please read on and click the links to find out more about what we have been doing to protect fishing and fish over the past month. If you like what you read, use the link at the bottom to forward this to a friend and encourage them to join us. We can only do what we do with the support of anglers.

And another:

Have a Cormo Rant!

Following the Minister's announcement of a Defra review into cormorant licensing, we need as much information as possible from the angling world to present as evidence for a change to policy and practice. We will soon have a survey on our web site where you can let off steam to us about the impact of cormorants and any problems you have faced getting a licence to control the birds. We will also include information about other methods for protecting fisheries from predators and we'll let you know more about this in the weeks ahead. This survey will replace our cormorants@anglingtrust.net email address as the means to report your experience of cormorants and their impact on your fishing. Thank you to all those who have emailed and written to us so far. Click HERE to print out our cormorant campaign poster, produced in partnership with the Angling Times.

Now RTC/Foundation here are some lessons you might learn:

• You need the support of anglers, not just as to cormorants but all round.

• Your PR is dreadful. Look at the Angling Trust Newscast sent by eMail at virtually no cost. They tell the world what they are doing and get the fishing public on their side. Why are you so secretive and arrogant?

And two questions:  

• When it is obvious that the Cormorant problem has been conceived in Brussels and needs to be addressed by Government why are you not getting your act together with all the other Scottish river trusts and organisations to get on the Minister's back?

• Why when your correspondent suggested that you started a petition at your August public meeting was he just ignored?

  

February 18

I have just had an ethereal distress call from a distant relative of long ago, Uncle Lobworm.

He had been reading the Berwickshire when he came across this pronouncement from our leader:

"There was a huge number of spawning fish running the river.

“We now think they were delayed because of the cold weather last year - fish cannot spawn in cold water. We expect the big run of spawning fish to continue.”

How, mused Uncle Lobworm, did our leader know such things? So he turned to the heavenly PC and aimed it at the Wetgrange website.

There it was again, the same alarm with some sage advice.

"Spot the difference"

"Fishing very early in the season can result in catching fish which have not yet spawned."

How true he thought. Then, the advice continued:

"avoid females which are plump, soft and "baggy" with big vents."

Father told me that thought Uncle Lobworm.

But why why why, mused the ancient relative, why should we be fishing when all these spawners were about?   It just wasn't cricket.

So being a good and dutiful nephew I asked my friends at Wetgrange. If you are so worried about spawning stock (and these springers) why does the season begin so early and end so late was the question.

Well Uncle Lobworm, I tried. They didn't even acknowledge my question. I knocked and knocked on the door and shouted through the letterbox but maybe no-one was at home. It was odd, a ghostly wind got up, I could have sworn the wind whispered "money".

Have you tried Mystic Meg?

February 2011

A dram fine catch for River Tweed

THE Tweed Foundation could benefit to the tune of £100,000 from the launch of a bespoke whisky named after the famous salmon river.

The Dalmore Tweed Dram was officially launched in Ednam House Hotel, Kelso, on the banks of the Tweed last week, with a minimum of £4 from each bottle sold going towards supporting the Tweed Foundation’s work.

The Foundation is expanding again. Yesterday, habitat work and research. Today, drink and the modelling industry, our Director heroically posing for the cause on a soggy riverbank. Tomorrow, the Paris catwalks? Some dieting required but it will be worth it, and better than a damp patch on the Director's trousers.

I was a tad surprised about the choice of alcohol. I expected Grant's.

We should not complain - what is left for the Foundation to do? The Tweed went catch and release and, abracadabra, within weeks we had the best rod season since Adam. So what now for the folks of the Foundation other than to pose by the river having saved the Tweed? A calendar? The members of the big committee posing naked? What delight. Required: one PhD student studying advanced airbrush techniques.

A thought. Have you seen the amount of fishing available this season?

Now we are a marketing company what about marketing the Tweed?

Carham has disappeared from FishTweed, so at least one of the Tweed big "four" has some common sense.

Despite FishPal's best shot at taking the mystique and anticipation out of our fishing, spring and summer letting is on its knees in many parts of the river. Last year was bad, this looks worse.

So what about it Foundation and RTC? Instead of pictures of your favourite Dee biologist in a little black dress with a tray of whisky or of our Director posing on the bank a la washed up tree stump might we know what our leaders are doing to get fishermen back in the spring and summer and better still what it is you are doing to make sure this year and next will be as good as last?

2010

-->

These remarks are not aimed in any way whatsoever at the Berwick Salmon Company.

I am not in a position to say exactly how many sea trout have been taken at Paxton this year.

I was given a figure which I am told is wrong.  Everyone does say, however, it has been a good year. 

I asked the RTC a while ago what the figures were for 2009 but they declined to tell me.  Commercially sensitive you know.

So to resolve it, if the netsman at Paxton would like to publicly tell us what their returns are for the 2010 season (so that they can be published on this blog) I will put up our returns.

No misunderstandings then about who does what. Within reason, anyone who would like to see the returns for our beat is welcome to ask.  Sizes, whether returned and so on.  Number of rods.  All there.

The netting at Paxton is run as a commercial food business.  The four proprietors who monopolise the Tweed Committee are part of the leisure industry.

At the August 16th meeting I heard a choir of angels in song whilst Paxton told us how they supported Paxton House financially, how people stayed in local bed and breakfast accommodation (because they wanted to see the nets), how they put back the coloured fish.

Despite all this worthiness we went on to be told, sit down before this revelation, that if the cheque was big enough the netting would stop.  Whether it would be shared with Paxton, or the local accommodation businesses was not disclosed.

Then our leader told us that if we (the rods) did not show restraint we were in no moral position to ask the nets to do likewise.  I agree that he is no moral position to ask the nets to stop.  The big proprietors making large sums in rents are as bad as Paxton.

The reason is, of course, that we have just had catch and release imposed until June because we are talking "survival of the species" and they are all talking about money. 

But there is another point of view. The majority on our beat, the overwhelming majority, enjoy the fishing and do not sell salmon nor make a rental profit.

I have to pay £40 odd to put a salmon back in the river - the same as the proprietor big boys who are running their beats as a business.

Paxton pay £1.44 to kill a salmon and 47p to kill a sea trout.  I buy accommodation, pay wages, buy food, petrol and pay £40.00 to put a fish back.  Paxton £1.44 to kill it.

Of course our beat favours lowish water which also favours Paxton.  Ever wondered why the returns are better on Mondays after the nets have been off?  I pay through the nose they don't and they interfere with my fishing on top.

I have a proposition for you, Paxton.  It is this:  You net from the beginning of the season, pay £40.00 a fish caught but put them all back.  In that way Paxton will still get the visitors, the bed and breakfasts their custom and you could have the moral high ground if someone gets your catch figures wrong.

And one for you at Drygrange.  We have netting rights.  I wonder …..

18th of August 2010

Dear Chairman,

"Survival of the species" is the phrase you used on Monday to describe the plight of the spring salmon.  Preservation of the species was the phrase you used in your 2009 report.

You are the treasurer of FishTweed.  You market the Tweed in this unqualified way:

"After recent record breaking years, not only does Tweed catch more Atlantic salmon and grilse than any other river in the European Union, but it also now ranks among the very top salmon rivers in the world."

How does your assertion at the meeting (that we are talking survival of the species) fit with what you say on FishTweed when you are promoting the fishing?

Your clerk when asked on Monday about his spinning policy replied he needed more research to be able to make a measured judgment.  That was the gist of what he said.

I was under the illusion that you turned your nose up at spinning.  You used this memorable sentence in your last report:   "When the might of the - I hate the affectation "Tweed" -  Tweed's fly and Toby spoon-wielding anglers can only catch some 1,100…."  

Your beat sent an eMail to Bill Stanworth last month denigrating the party fishing your beat who insisted on fishing the fly in highish water (I am sure your fly fishing (and sporting) guests would have been pleased to read what was said on the internet) and saying that the next party would "get at them  …  with a carrot Rap".

I suppose that if you play the numbers game getting at them with a carrot Rap is just the ticket but my next question for you is this:  how can you reconcile your statutory duty to preserve fragile fish stocks (survival stakes) with "getting at them with a carrot Rap"? 

A question for your clerk.  Would your clerk send me a list of the wild trout 'catch and release' fisheries that permit spinning or treble hooks or barbed hooks or lure fishing? 

Finally, another couple of questions for you.  As you know we, your neighbours, try to promote fly fishing - the overwhelming majority of our group fish fly only.  Of your spring total (February to June 2010) how many spring salmon were caught on your beat on a spinner (as opposed to the fly), how many were hooked in the throat, how many suffered eye damage because the hook had pierced the orbit, how many became "mercy killings" and how many returned fish were later found dead?

For the record, I do not propose a blanket spinning ban but I would appreciate your answers in the context of the forthcoming Commissioners meeting.

Yours faithfully,

Tweed Lover

Dr Campbell - we try again  - see Dear Dr Campbell

Dear RTC,

Cormorant predation is a major problem across Europe.  The Scottish Rural Directorate have to interpret a European directive when considering applications to cull. 

You claim to be constantly battling with the government about the problem.  Only you believe that you are dealing with it competently, your last application was criticised and you don't involve the Ghillies and fishermen who see you as, bluntly, useless.

There is a public meeting in Kelso on the 16th of August.  This is your chance to start a petition to present to our MPs and MEPs.  To give the eMail addresses of those who represent us, of the Scottish Directorate etc we can all start lobbying.  To get a petition in every hut on the river.  To get young Mr Galt round the trout clubs.  To get Mr Yonge doing something worthwhile for a change and get him round all the other Trusts.

Dr Campbell, Dr Campbell, anybody at home?  The weeks come the weeks go and the pile of unanswered post just gets bigger.  Did you read last week's Sunday Times?   The EA say the Tweed is in danger as a result of abstraction.  Can you see it through the window when you are having one of your good lunches?

NEWS - the RTC has announced a public meeting to discuss the Spring policy.  Brilliant.  But your correspondent wonders whether it will be chaired by the RTC Chairman (who has already declared his view) or someone truly independent.  Will it be fully minuted so that those unable to be in Kelso on an August Monday evening will be able to read what was said and by whom?  And will further comments be invited when the mnutes are published?

NEWS - The Foundation's day out propaganda jolly - intended to show the (what, 200+?)  Boatmen of the Tweed the results of the Foundation's good works - was enthusiastically attended by .........five.   

Hello again Mr Ronald  Johnson, Vice Chairman of the River Tweed Commission Tweed Lover has some bedtime reading for you.  Have a look at this:

http://www.salmonatlas.com/forums/news-announcements/14444-iceland-s-2010-salmon-season-opens-bumper-catches.html

and when you have digested it ask our leader to spend less time looking in a mirror with Andrew Wallace whilst telling one another how wonderful they are and politely suggest that others are doing better.

Mr Ronald Johnson, Vice Chairman of the River Tweed Commission - greetings from Tweed Lover. 

Turn the pages of this blog to "Dear Dr Campbell".  Count how many letters have been unanswered and then write to Trout and Salmon.  Tell them what you said is not true.  The RTC only answer questions when forced to do with the threat of the Information Commissioner and the Foundation when the Charities Commissioners are knocking on the door.

Today there is another for the head biologist.  Write to Trout and Salmon and explain why all the letters are ignored.  Let us get the record straight.  


NEWS -29th of June of the 34 lots offered by the Foundation's autumn fishing auction 14 remain unsold despite the fact that this year substantially less lots were on offer than last.  Why?  Bidders voting with their feet?

NEWS - 29th of June Ronald Johnson Vice Chairman of the River Tweed Commission angrily replies in Trout and Salmon to the Commission's critics by trotting out the party line.

Why don't they get in touch with the RTC and discuss it was one of the letter's more comical suggestions.  They don't have discussions  with people who disagree with them Mr Johnson.  Didn't they mention that when they were telling you what to say in the letter? 

NEWS - 28th of June Richard Caborn (the former Minister for Sport) proclaims:  England will not succeed until they are set up to play the game, not set up to financially exploit it.  Quite right Mr Caborn. 

 


NEWS -  17th June.  Two more important papers from the Foundation one on catch and release rates the other on DNA identification of salmon groups within the river.  The first VERY important paper concludes: "the evidence is that Spring recapture rates are much lower than 10%, only around 3%".  Well if I were you I would have a look at the Carron research 

"However, the most significant result from the marking trials is the number of times that marked salmon were re-captured and not only twice but three and even four times. Despite the fact that the Carron is a very lightly fished river (on average less than 4 rods per day for the entire river during the peak of the season) and that only the lower third of the river is fished effectively, a surprising number of salmon were caught more than once."

and then click on this link:   

http://www.marlab.ac.uk/Uploads/Documents/FW18RodCap.pdf. 


The second VERY important paper is on DNA research.  How come we can raise £100,000.00 for a wheelyboat no-one wanted but you can't copper up £20.00 for a DNA analysis - anyway it is only a tenner, don't exaggerate, and what's the plan boys?  Have you got one?

NEWS - Wednesday the 16th of June.  Drygrange calling, Drygrange calling, the RTC propagandist (codenamed 'Oracle') announces we have shut our minds to any possibility of a hatchery.  Not now, not never.  No we won't listen to arguments, no we won't talk about it.  No no no la la la la la we can't hear you la la la la. Drygrange calling, Drygrange calling.

NEWS - Wednesday the 16th of June.  The wraps are off the new wheelyboat prototype.  

Here you see the Tweed Commissioners demonstrating the boat and how to handle those spring fish.  Note the gaff is a barbless single hook.

NO NEWS – 14th June are you still sitting down? Still no reply from Dr Campbell. No response from our leader. Your correspondent has had yet another go. Look at Dear Dr Campbell. 

NEWS - Friday the 11th of June, Dr Campbell has to abandon netting at Berwick after just four attempts "due to the sheer weight of weed". Dr Campbell unable to comment about what caused the "sheer weight of weed". Eutrophication perchance Dr Campbell? What causes that Dr Campbell? Phosphates? Nitrates? Farmers reducing the flow by abstraction Dr Campbell? Any connection with the declining health of the river Dr Campbell?

News - Dr Campbell in cyberspace. He's lost his blog. "Due to a Gremlin in the works the previously posted Monday to Wednesday reports have somehow vanished into Cyberspace. To continue:"

Funny coincidence: he has lost his readers (adverse) comments as well

News: 11th June. Is the penny dropping? Dr Campbell says: "A good box of tissue samples in from one of the beats that has been collecting them for the salmon genetics work, including a 19lb fish caught in May - always extra interest to see which part of the catchment such fish come from." 

Exactly Dr Cambell so what's your plan? Have we got one? Why won't you take samples from your correspondent?  No, no, I mean correspondent's salmon.

Dear Dr Campbell - tell us about summer salmon. Look right

.

Friday the 11th of June. We regret to announce that the Foundation now censor their web site - their blog. Only those who agree with them are allowed to post comments about the Foundation. Is this what we have descended to? It is a very very sad day.

New page "The Foundation and the Wheelyboats"  Look right

Rising or Falling - Spring conservation - smoke and mirrors.

Mr A. Douglas-Home,
Chairman,
The RTC.

26.4.2010

Dear Sir,

Spring conservation

 The well trailed and predicted has arrived. Total catch and release until July.

I wonder whether you would enlighten me (and everyone else who reads this blog) by answering these questions:

• We have had partial catch and release now for twelve years. Is not your announcement an admission that catch and release has failed?

• Where do all the springers go after they have been released?  Back in the river is the answer.  What happens to them then?  They are caught and knocked on the head in July, August, September, October and November.  Explain how your new conservation policy enhances their chances.

• You say the policy was agreed at the March (2010) meeting of the RTC. I have the agenda and the quarterly report. I was at that meeting.  There was no forewarning of the proposal and no debate. You brushed off one challenge by saying there was not enough time and the meeting had to move on. Admit it this policy had been decided in advance by you and long before the start of the 2010 season. The hidden agenda is total catch and release full stop.

• If that is wrong, tell me how you have measured this season's stock given the long very cold winter, the collapse in fishing effort and in the middle and lower river the prolonged high water levels. You have no idea whatsoever how many fish are in the river.

• Is it not right the Ettrick counter has shown no improvement in stocks despite the removal of the drift nets and extensive catch and release?

• You say there were circa 1,150 spring fish caught last year. How many were killed? 20%? 220 fish? Are you saying the situation is so critical 220 fish are crucial?

• You say in the context of the autumn run that only 10% are caught. Can I therefore conclude that there are 10,000 spring fish in the river of which 220 are killed?

• You say you are doing this in the name of conservation. There are many cynics in the Tweed valley who believe that the angler is a soft target and you hope that total catch and release is on the way so you can head off the day when you have to pay for proper genetic research and/or consider a hatchery.

• If you really believe you are doing this to fulfil your statutory duty to preserve the spring salmon stock why don't you shut down the Ettrick to fishing altogether?

• What is your justification for your "conservation scheme" payments to those who have tributary and upper river fishing? They can happily collect rent for fishing over gravid and spawning fish in the backend? Are those not the areas in which fishing should be discouraged altogether never mind subsidised?

• Have you ever thought of trying to carry the rods with you? Have you ever thought of asking the fishers to assist survival by using singles or doubles not trebles? Barbless? Not lifting fish by the tail? Dishing out survival nets a la Carron instead of T shirts? 

• Have you ever thought about a course in public relations? Do you not realise how badly all this comes across?

• Are you going to reduce your rents at the Lees?

 I have no doubt whatsoever I will not receive a reply but I hope you will forgive me for asking.

Best wishes,

Tweed Lover

Rising or falling?

Is this the moment for new blood at the River Tweed Commission? I think so and hope I can persuade you to agree - it's time for a change.

I have written a series of letters asking questions, general and specific, about the management of the river. I telephone. I went un-invited to the RTC's boatmans' meeting on the 21st of January 2010 but, as soon as I challenged the RTC as to the question of the fish numbers, I was asked to leave.

They refuse to speak to me. I am apparently rude and vexatious - hence this blog.

I arrived in Kelso for the first time as a fourteen year old to fish for roach. Two of us, tackle and a tent were planted on the Mayfield Walk whilst parents enjoyed the Ednam.

In later holidays our home range grew. Perch and pike at Yetholm Loch, stalking trout with a worm up the Eden and soon a first trout on a fly (and a silk line) off the Cobby.

For thirty years I have been a Syndicate member - Lennel on the lower Tweed below the Lees and opposite Tillmouth.

I hoped that I would retire to the Borders. I like the valley, the history, the river and the people.

In my thirty years the biggest single event was the buy-out of the netting stations but I am afraid that bigger events are on the way - the changes in the river.

The coarse fishermen disappeared twenty years ago. There are now no clouds of big dace or roach. After the netting buy out the proportion of fresh run fish caught in my bit of the river dropped markedly. Then the numbers started to slide then the size.

The Commission say this all this is wrong. The 2009 headline figure is only 10,465 but says our Chairman Mr Douglas-Home he hopes "it is just a blip" and comments "we have had years like this before".
I challenge that view. Do you? If you want to take part it is simple:

• remember to try and be constructive. The aim is to provoke thought and discussion rather than be rude.

• Look to the right of your screen. There are other pages as to different topics. Click on those pages and see what you feel about what is said.

• If you want to comment it is easy. Click on post a comment and fill in the box.

• The hardest decision is as to your name. There is nothing to stop you using your real name. If you do not want to do that go to "Anonymous" but better still use "name" it can be any name. As soon as you choose the "name" box you can add a nom de plume which can use for all your comments and it is easier for others reply to a comment.

• give a clue as to whether you work on the river, have a business which depends on it or are a fisherman.

• Add a photograph from your mobile phone or digital camera

• Members of the Commission and the Foundation are welcomed especially.

If when you have read some of the topics I have raised on these pages you feel that I am right or wrong say so - be blunt - let us hope that those who run the river might, at last, listen to those who love it.

Thank you.