Dear Beachcaster,
The pictures on the FishTweed page were included to illustrate what fishing on the Tweed used to be like in the context of the hot air on FishTweed we now get about record years and the Tweed being the best salmon river in the known universe.
I admit attitudes were different then.
We on our beat have adapted as time has gone by. A big proportion go back whether they are coloured or not and although it is a different point, in the light of the care we try to take I resent being told by management that if a fish does die I have to drive it to the Teviot Smokery where it will be converted into smoked for their use. I have killed a total of three fish in the last two and a half years and I do not like being lectured by Mr Home about conservation.
The spat with Grant is rather different. As you might have gathered if you have read the banter on the various pages, I rather think he is connected with head office. Many of the things he says are provocative platitudes which do not stand up in fact. I would enjoy holing Grant below the waterline and, probably, vice versa.
The problem with your suggestions is this: they only address a bit of the picture.
What I would like to see out of this blog would be for the penny to drop at head office that there needs to be change and a strategy worked out which includes those who depend on the river for a livelihood, the fishermen, the owners and most important of all the fish. We all need to work together and a barmy eight week catch and release policy unilaterally imposed (and which causes enormous ill feeling) is not the way.
Research.
I would like an independent review of the work that could be done in the light of modern genetics, the cost the time span. I would like the review to be done urgently.
I would like to know if several trusts could get together to pool scientific effort on one river, give one river a big hit.
I would like wherever possible the fishermen and the Ghillies to be involved in sampling.
Similarly I would like to know how the Tweed might make a real contribution into research as to what is going on at sea.
We need to know the life history of the springers, the grilse, the big fish where they go within the system and we need to know fast.
At the AGM one of the Commissioners asked the obvious question of James Hunt. He asked: "you say there is no need for a hatchery because eg the Ettrick is full of fish. How do you know they are the progeny of springers?"
Mr Hunt: (paraphrased) "We can't. Our conclusion is a best guess based on ten year old research"
Interjection by Dr Campbell: (again paraphrased): "Oh yes we do because…"
I do not want to be rude to Dr Campbell but the truth is they are guessing. They do not know. You look at a sample of fry or parr in the Ettrick and you have no idea what type of fish they will produce. They don't wear different coloured Tweed Foundation sweatshirts.
We need to get real answers through genetic research.
Last year when the Foundation netted Paxton they tagged 15 fish. What on earth is the point of that? What sort of a scientific sample does 15 fish produce against the number in the river.
Someone is kidding us if they try and pretend this is proper research The fishermen could help to sample 10-15,000.
We need to start now. The project could take five to ten years.
Etc.
Hatchery
We do not have the management information we need to make a measured judgment about hatcheries on the Tweed.
The Salmon world is full of hatcheries. Do you know how many juvenile salmon are produced in North America alone? Apparently they are all out of step except the Tweed.
Our lot have put the cart before the horse and said "no". They have given ten comic reasons for their premature decision. I think there are really two. First, it would be an admission of failure, an admission that we have a problem. Second, the cost.
We all know we have a problem.
The cost estimate they have given is absurd. The biggest single overhead would be fish food. For circa £700.00 you can buy a ton and produce half a ton of youngsters.
We have three full time scientists and a bailiff force of what? Ten? What extra labour would we need?
My view is that we should have plans in place in case hatcheries really are required. No planning is taking place at all, as far as I know and if and when it does it cannot be sorted overnight. I would like plan B to be worked out now if not put into effect.
Water quality
Abstraction for drinking water, and agriculture, agricultural pollution and run off phosphate pollution from sewage works are hardly mentioned by the Foundation/RTC. Why?
In the same buildings they have an organisation known as the Tweed Forum which has a specific interest in water quality and abstraction.
Head Office and the Forum for some reason enjoy a frosty relationship. Why?
Of course four (?) of the top RTC committee are farmers. What a difference in attitude: it's hot and my spuds need water. No problem use a mega pump and take it from the river. But the river is very low and fish are going belly up. Sorry our spuds come first.
The cormorants are hoovering up the fish. Sorry you can't shoot them you might go to prison.
You only have to see the state of the gravel when the river warms up to realise that something is not right.
Conservation
Barbless hooks. Singles. Doubles. No lifting by tail. Recovery nets. Fish limits. Shutting tributaries to fishing. Shortening the season. Permitting Sunday fishing if there are a lot of fish around. Tagging system for rod caught fish. Etc etc.
The next best thing to catching a salmon is a sea trout. Why are they neglected? More are taken at Paxton than by all the fishermen put together.
The price last year was rock bottom. Cat food prices. It is a crime.
But you also need the owners to chip in and give concessions. The fishermen cannot keep on taking all the hits.
The ducks
Appoint a sawbill Zsar. What about Bill Quarry? He is the sort of bloke who might get it sorted. Get him away from those stupid Wheelyboats, give them back to the people who are there to do the job - the Wheelyboat Trust - and let someone like Bill organise deterrence monitoring etc etc. Get him round the other Trusts so that we have strength to confront Government. Get your act together. Get all the Ghillies involved.
The seals.
When Ian Bruce was netting at Berwick last year seals were almost round his feet.
Stupid question. In this day and age one would have thought there was some (electronic?) way of keeping them from the mouth of the river.
Are we looking into means of protecting fish from seals in the estuary?
Management.
Why are the people who are on the river every day, the Ghillies, not part of management?
Re-organise so that there are sub-committees for each area of concern, ducks, conservation etc. Bring in outsiders to help. There are some very astute people up and down the river, keen fishermen who might help.
Alternatively divide along geographical lines. Upper, middle and lower river.
Publish minutes for discussion. Detailed minutes. Stop making it look like a closed shop. You would be amazed how many people would like to contribute if you give them the chance.
Get away from the present situation in which there appears to be conflicts of interest between the salmon and the members of the principal committee.
Marketing.
Complete review of marketing. Could fishing be marketed with other activities? Shooting? Even pigeon shooting has a value.
Someone ringing round before the season starts offering a discount for early booking?
Blocks of days? Spring days with Autumn days? Coaching/guiding.
Show catches for groups of beats rather than for individual beats.Or have weekly reports for sections emphasising, for example, that when beats have been fished they have been taking fish rather than baldly telling the world that nothing as been caught.
FishTweed will turn out to be a disaster unless the catches dramatically improve. Livelihoods are at risk.
PR
The PR is dreadful. I cannot see how you can keep putting up prices (when catches are going down and catch and release is forced on the fishermen) without a lot of people being cross.
People will accept that we have a problem that needs to be addressed if there is give and take on both sides. At the moment there is only take.
Now Mr Beachcaster, pick the bones out of my rant!
5 comments:
First, I am flattered to have my own page. I am not sure how I came to deserve this. Second, I will comment upon your various points, but it may take several attempts to complete the task. You really have quite a lot to say for yourself!
The first stage in my analysis is to look for the problems and there appear to be at least three: a declining number of salmon returning to the river; the salmon that do return are often smaller than expected (cf. the Lennel 2 lber); and the RTC/Foundation do not appear to wish to engage with you (or others?) in explaining their position or in debating your concerns. There may be other problems such as the in-river environment biodiversity etc. but these would seem to be linked to the first 2.
As for the last of the 3 problems, I think this is a shame. It is clear to me (as it will be to anyone who met you at the angling fair and read one of your leaflets) that you care very much about the river and its fate and that you are committed to seeking improvement if it can be achieved. I believe that many at the RTC/Foundation are similarly motivated. I also believe that no progress will ever be made by hurling abuse or by the RTC hiding from the arguments.
As for the need for genetic research, I agree that this might help. It is a long term project and I would expect that suitable research grants could indeed be funded by several authorities joining forces (e.g. EA, SEPA, AST, NASF, rivers boards in Scotland etc). Do we know for sure that it has not been commissioned by somebody? I suspect that it would be too big a task for the RTC to undertake alone. But it would be nice to know what they have done about it.
I appreciate that my suggestions only address a bit of the picture. However, it is a very significant bit - conservation. And in my experience more progress can be achieved by taking one step at a time rather than expecting everything to happen at once.
The hatchery may or may not be a good idea. I expect that there will be more than one school of thought. I would nevertheless like to see some mature debate about this. At present I tend to agree with you if only because I cannot see how your approach can do any harm, whereas to do nothing could be disasterous.
I too have seen the slime that appears in the summer. Have you asked the Forum what there view about this is? I must say that it looks like the algal bloom that affects lowland lakes and reservoirs in the summer - and we all know what causes that!
I want to respond to your comments about conservation measures and predator control. I will do so upon my next visit. In the meantime, can anybody suggest how we can get the RTC to engage or respond?
It seems almost beyond doubt that the salmon is in decline in the UK. to my untrained eye there are 2 sensible responses to this: (a)we must find out what is causing the decline and try to fix the problem if we can; and, in the meantime (b)we must do our utmost to preserve what we have.
Investigating the cause is for others cleverer and with more resources than me. But it is for fishermen (and women) to put pressure on those with the resources to use them appropriately.
Preservation and conservation is where we can play our part. Anglers must exercise restraint: the old attitudes including "I've paid good money for this fishing so I'll kill a fish if I want to" will not do. Hence my earlier suggestions.
The other steps that can be taken are habitat improvement and predator control to ensure maximum production of smolts. There should be no reason why the Tweed should be anything other than pristine. If there is harmful agricultural run off that is to be deprecated and discouraged whoever the perpetrators are. What does the Tweed Forum have to say about this? More pertinently, what does SEPA have to say?
I agree that concerted action against feathered predators is called for, but in this contest the bird lobby seems to be better organised than the fish lobby. Perhaps therefore you should be seeking to support and encourage RTC in this respect rather than complaining about lack of results. No matter how venal they might be I cannot imagine that any of them are actually in favour of increasing numbers cormorants and sawbill ducks.
This highlights one of the problems with blogs like this one. It is great for people like you and me for sounding off. But I wonder whether anybody takes any notice. I suspect that your leaflets reached a far wider audience.
With that I shall head to the beach.
Hello! Is there anybody there?
Mnn pollution on the river, what was the outcome of the chemical discharge at Alstrohm (Chirnside)into the Whiteadder circa Dec 2007.Any prosecutions?
I live in a bit of a valley.
Down one side of the house is a stream the source of which is way above, maybe 1,000 yards. In fact there are a couple of sources one is a spring 20-30 yards from the ineffective septic tank serving my neighbours farm.
To the other side of the house and below is a smaller watercourse emanating from a spring.
The two coincide around 200 yds below my place. I will try and put up a photograph but a photograph will not show up the smell of a diesel spillage four weeks ago, a tank burst at the farm.
The picture will show the confluence. At one side the water is crystal clear. At the other the stones are already covered with brown slime.
Which side comes from the farm?
What are the RTC doing about abstraction and agricultural run off?
Post a Comment