tweedsider
Active Member
Quietness is best
Posts: 993
|
Post by tweedsider on Jul 16, 2015 14:58:10 GMT
From two separate sources over the weekend I heard the following story. The teller in both instances did not know exactly who was involved but it goes like this. A Scottish Parliament rep, perhaps a Minister was meeting representatives from interested parties. during the course of discussion the matter was raised of," problems at sea for salmon". At this the SNP Minister posed the question of ,"what has the sea got to do with salmon"?
It would be difficult to find a more devious body than the Scottish Government in this Wild Fisheries Review. I am told that next Wednesday there is an open meeting at Melrose for interested parties. To me the most interested of all parties who would like to attend this meeting would be Tweed ghillies. So are the hours for this meeting arranged to accommodate those whose livelihoods could be threatened by the SNP proposals. Silly question. Hours for the meeting are from 11am to 3pm . Where will most ghillies be at those hours, where else but on the river bank either attending to their Rods or engaged in on going summer work of grass or weed cutting.
Tweedsider
|
|
|
Post by earnfisher on Jul 16, 2015 19:13:05 GMT
The government works backwards. It has the answers it wants so there is just the questions to be asked. From what I have read and I hope I am wrong, salmon fishing as we know it is about to come to an end very soon. Bob
|
|
tweedsider
Active Member
Quietness is best
Posts: 993
|
Post by tweedsider on Jul 17, 2015 9:26:09 GMT
It is sad Bob. Apparently the Scottish Government aka SNP are having a road show of some kind at Melrose on 22 July. I think the most interested parties in this political debacle, because it has nothing to do with conservation, are the river ghillies. So when do the SNP hold their road show? Between 11 am and 3 pm when ghillies will be on the riverbank either with Rods or doing maintainance.
Tweedsider
|
|
|
Post by earnfisher on Jul 17, 2015 14:43:11 GMT
Same hear TS. The G.A.C. is holding it on the 27th {?} this month same hours. The fishers are as I have said before the only ones who are really interested in the salmons welfare. Can understand to a point the Scottish Governments position as there are more votes in farmed salmon and jobs/money etc. If they looked at the whole picture and counted gillies/hotels/garages/anglers/other shops etc. then they would be on our side possibly. All the different groups that are supposed to be looking after the fish were to get together then there would be a powerful voice which anglers etc. could support. Bob
|
|
|
Post by adipose on Jul 25, 2015 11:09:33 GMT
Same hear TS. The fishers are as I have said before the only ones who are really interested in the salmons welfare. Can understand to a point the Scottish Governments position as there are more votes in farmed salmon and jobs/money etc. If they looked at the whole picture and counted gillies/hotels/garages/anglers/other shops etc. then they would be on our side possibly. All the different groups that are supposed to be looking after the fish were to get together then there would be a powerful voice which anglers etc. could support. Bob Bob, Perhaps the proposal to end mixed stocks coastal netting from 2016 contradicts your assertion that only anglers care. I would argue that anglers are great at complaining and loudly voicing their opinions, but not much good at getting things done! The fact is that the proposed measures to license the killing of wild Atlantic salmon and to end coastal netting comes at the end of a long period of international and scientific influencing of politicians. My reading of the situation is that the NASCO 2014 meeting, when Scotland was described as "at the bottom of the class" as far as salmon conservation is concerned, was the final straw. The result is that Scotland is now nearly at the top of the class, except that salmon farming is set to expand massively. On the subject of salmon farming it is time we anglers hit the reality button. The industry is here to stay because of its economic value to an independence-aspiring Scotland which wants a thriving rural economy with salmon aquaculture exports at its heart. So, what do we do? First, accept that wild salmon and farmed salmon will continue to exist, and we need to ensure there is no interaction between the two. Then stop trying to ban salmon farming. Then persuade the industry to adopt sustainable practices on the grounds that it is certainly possible to have a less damaging industry. For example, closed containment, careful siting of grow-out pens at sea, appropriate amounts of biomass in carefully selected locations, and beefed up monitoring of performance and enforcement of standards, are all aspects of future development which we anglers should encourage. We just need to box clever, because it can work! Adipose
|
|
|
Post by devronmac on Jul 25, 2015 18:09:51 GMT
Adipose,I would respectfully suggest that the decision to end mixed stocks netting has also been a result of a great deal of angler/public lobbying of Scottish Government, notably by Ian Gordon's petitions as well as international pressure and sustained pressure from bodies like S&TA & ASFB. It is unfortunate that recent SG action has taken so long but better late than never. The Salmon farming industry certainly needs to clean up its act. I have suggested through the online forum instigated by Marine Scotland following the kill licence proposal that the Wild Fisheries Review must also include a thorough examination of other significant present threats to wild fishery management such as open cage fish farming and river and marine predation. The decision to cease mixed stocks netting is very welcome indeed and hopefully this is something which will continue as long as the threat to our wild salmon continues to pertain. However anglers must contribute more to step up the pressure to get better regulation and control of the salmon farming industry which as you say is certainly here to stay.Lets go one step better than nearly at the top of the class and try to ensure that the expansion of salmon farming is more closely monitored and controlled.
|
|
fredo
Active Member
Posts: 1,095
|
Post by fredo on Jul 25, 2015 19:10:38 GMT
ideas.scotland.gov.uk/fishing-for-wild-salmon-in-scotland/home?sort_order=most_commentsThe kill tag proposals are getting a good shredding on the above forum and quite rightly too. I pity the pour soul who has been tasked with defending the indefensible on behalf of the government. The end to mixed stock netting should have happened without imposing kill tags on Scottish salmon anglers.As things stand, I really do fear for angling clubs and the future of low cost angling. As this is just one part of the WFR, taking it as a whole the cost of participating in the sport is going to put it out of reach of the poorer sections of society. Not forgetting the whole charade is about controlling law abiding anglers. There is no mention of how to tackle the "dark side". Times are hard and the SG will not pump money into making the outcome of their WFR actually work. The voluntary sector involved in fisheries will inevitably shrink with no money available to fill the void. For the first time ever, the excuse of "not being able to afford the cost of the fuel" has been given by SPFA for not patrolling the coastline looking for salmon nets. They expect volunteers to do that and tell them where the nets are......after the same volunteers pay through the nose for tags, licences and permits? Aye, right. We are about to have a fantastic new management system that looks great on paper foisted upon us. A bit like Eire, I suppose, in that it ticks all the boxes for the pen pushers but is an unworkable disaster for the salmon population. (Rant over).
|
|
|
Post by adipose on Jul 26, 2015 9:18:39 GMT
Adipose,I would respectfully suggest that the decision to end mixed stocks netting has also been a result of a great deal of angler/public lobbying of Scottish Government, notably by Ian Gordon's petitions as well as international pressure and sustained pressure from bodies like S&TA & ASFB. It is unfortunate that recent SG action has taken so long but better late than never. The Salmon farming industry certainly needs to clean up its act. I have suggested through the online forum instigated by Marine Scotland following the kill licence proposal that the Wild Fisheries Review must also include a thorough examination of other significant present threats to wild fishery management such as open cage fish farming and river and marine predation. The decision to cease mixed stocks netting is very welcome indeed and hopefully this is something which will continue as long as the threat to our wild salmon continues to pertain. However anglers must contribute more to step up the pressure to get better regulation and control of the salmon farming industry which as you say is certainly here to stay.Lets go one step better than nearly at the top of the class and try to ensure that the expansion of salmon farming is more closely monitored and controlled. Devronmac, I agree with you that the pressure on government has been widespread, and I think it important that there is not a scramble for the accolade. I think everyone involved should be quietly satisfied with the result, and avoid triumphalist statements because some people are losing their jobs as a result of closure of the nets. Having seen the NASCO situation at close quarters, backed by the conclusive evidence provided by Marine Scotland's South Esk tagging project, I am in no doubt that the reason government took the action it did when it did was because of a) incontrovertible scientific evidence of damage to EU designated SAC rivers from mixed stocks killing of salmon, and the risk of a hefty EU fine and b) the excruciating embarrassment of Scotland's exposure as totally inept in managing its precious resource of wild salmon at the NASCO meeting at La Rochelle in 2014. All the pressure exerted by S&TA, Ian Gordon, ASFB, the angling community and the angling press would continue to have been ignored by government had the science and international censure not provided the coup de grace. I have been involved in political lobbying in the rural sector in Scotland for twelve years and have yet to see any government respond directly to lobbying alone, although, as I said above, there is no doubt that it helps! The real issue here is not who should receive the accolade, but the fact that at last we have the prospect of sensible legislation to protect wild salmon. My concern is sea trout. Where is the comparable legislation to protect this important species? John Armstrong at the Esk meeting on Thursday suggested that sea trout will be protected by the removal of stake nets from coastal waters. I heard that response from Marine Scotland and just wondered whether sea trout are getting the protection necessary to ensure their abundance. As for salmon aquaculture, that really is an intractable issue until new methods and technologies are introduced. There are signs (e.g. Marine Harvest) that change is quietly taking place. Adipose
|
|
|
Post by adipose on Jul 26, 2015 9:31:37 GMT
ideas.scotland.gov.uk/fishing-for-wild-salmon-in-scotland/home?sort_order=most_commentsThe kill tag proposals are getting a good shredding on the above forum and quite rightly too. I pity the pour soul who has been tasked with defending the indefensible on behalf of the government. The end to mixed stock netting should have happened without imposing kill tags on Scottish salmon anglers.As things stand, I really do fear for angling clubs and the future of low cost angling. As this is just one part of the WFR, taking it as a whole the cost of participating in the sport is going to put it out of reach of the poorer sections of society. Not forgetting the whole charade is about controlling law abiding anglers. There is no mention of how to tackle the "dark side". Times are hard and the SG will not pump money into making the outcome of their WFR actually work. The voluntary sector involved in fisheries will inevitably shrink with no money available to fill the void. For the first time ever, the excuse of "not being able to afford the cost of the fuel" has been given by SPFA for not patrolling the coastline looking for salmon nets. They expect volunteers to do that and tell them where the nets are......after the same volunteers pay through the nose for tags, licences and permits? Aye, right. We are about to have a fantastic new management system that looks great on paper foisted upon us. A bit like Eire, I suppose, in that it ticks all the boxes for the pen pushers but is an unworkable disaster for the salmon population. (Rant over). Dear Fredo, I understand that you are frustrated but I cannot understand why. Please could you explain what it is that concerns you about the carcass tagging proposal? I read all you said about the cost of salmon fishing, but surely proprietors will only be able to charge what the ageing and diminishing market can bear? I look at Fishpal and I am astonished at the reasonable prices being charged for a day's salmon or sea trout fishing on many of our rivers and lochs. Compared with a round of golf or a day fishing for stocked trout on a chalk stream our fishing in Scotland is widely available to people of all economic groups. Will that change? I very much doubt it because anglers will simply vote with their feet. Salmon and sea trout fisheries are businesses and can only charge what the customer is prepared to pay. I am certain that government will not kill the goose that lays the golden egg! Let's await decisions rather than getting worried prematurely. Adipose
|
|
|
Post by earnfisher on Jul 26, 2015 10:57:59 GMT
My personal view and it is only my own view is that this review has not much to do with salmon fishing or salmon netting but has more to do with farmed salmon. Think about who has the government's ear. Wild salmon or farmed salmon. The more wild salmon are left alone the more farmed salmon will be purchased. The various petitions raised with good intentions going by my non fishing friends who enjoy there wild salmon are that the fishers are killing all the salmon that is why there want them all returned. Netting has been going on for centuries so can not be that bad. The present "golden egg" is the fish farmers for the government I would add that I have nothing to do with the fish farming industry but just a simple fisher who enjoys eating fish. Would add that when I started fishing well over 60 years ago I was always told to put more into your sport than what you take out. Bob
|
|
fredo
Active Member
Posts: 1,095
|
Post by fredo on Jul 26, 2015 10:59:06 GMT
Hi Adipose My concerns relate to angling clubs and fisheries that are run on a shoe string, and rely on volunteers to survive. These tend to be in economically deprived areas. £10 for a rod licence for the day plus £? for a kill tag is a different proposition for someone paying £1000 for a day on the Junction and someone on benefits saving up to introduce his children to fishing on association water. I spent a good few years working to make association water viable and there is a real danger that the WFR (of which kill tags are just one part of a series of measures which will hurt clubs financially) is going to finish off angling clubs that are already struggling to cover costs.
|
|
|
Post by adipose on Jul 26, 2015 11:21:46 GMT
Hi Adipose My concerns relate to angling clubs and fisheries that are run on a shoe string, and rely on volunteers to survive. These tend to be in economically deprived areas. £10 for a rod licence for the day plus £? for a kill tag is a different proposition for someone paying £1000 for a day on the Junction and someone on benefits saving up to introduce his children to fishing on association water. I spent a good few years working to make association water viable and there is a real danger that the WFR (of which kill tags are just one part of a series of measures which will hurt clubs financially) is going to finish off angling clubs that are already struggling to cover costs. Fredo, I have a strong respect for your concern about the viability of angling clubs. I know the KAC on the upper South Esk very well, having been a member when I was a student at St Andrews University 45 years ago. The very last thing that should happen is that angling clubs go to the wall. We are of course referring to affordable, accessible fishing where there is a chance of catching a fish. The KAC used to have 120 members and a waiting list. Restrictions on methods - it is now a fly only club - have discouraged youngsters from joining and old rods (like me!) don't want to go fishing if occasionally one cannot take a fish home. The club now struggles to keep its fifty members. It offers some of the best salmon and sea trout fishing in the country, over miles and miles of the South Esk, Prosen and Isla. I guess it is a question of balance, politically, socially and in conservation terms. We must not kill more fish than sustainability of the river ecosystem allows: I think every angler in the country would agree with that. The lifeblood of angling as a sport depends on bringing in newcomers to our sport, as well as tourists from afar. To have a thriving angling sector in Scotland we need our pools to have salmon and sea trout in them. Andrew Thin's review I thought made some useful proposals, especially in the 'angling for all' section. As I say, it is a question of balance. We can never satisfy everyone because stocks of wild fish simply could not survive if everyone killed fish as we used to. It's all in the melting pot at present, so we should definitely make our views known because, oddly enough, I think this WFR consultation has been pretty much listened to by civil servants and ministers. Adipose
|
|
fredo
Active Member
Posts: 1,095
|
Post by fredo on Jul 26, 2015 12:09:47 GMT
The success of the current "project" will depend on how much of the management decisions are left in the hands of the local FMOs. As you say, the government appears to be listening, hence the need to make them aware of the dangers their proposals contain now.
|
|
tweedsider
Active Member
Quietness is best
Posts: 993
|
Post by tweedsider on Aug 2, 2015 12:52:41 GMT
Well I was at the SNP 'roadshow' at Melrose on July 22nd and was in the room for an hour around 1 till 2pm. It was an informal discussion with two young civil servants the time I was there, no sign of any politicians. Quite a few ghillies attending despite the sly move by SNP to hold the meeting within ,'fishing hours' when most workers would be on the riverside. Also present were anglers such as myself dependant on Association Membership for most of their sport. Also from the south bank of the Tweed one beat owner whose message to the politicians was, " there was no way that he was going to pay levy from England to a Scottish organisation." The message from those present was dont meddle with the fishing, it would seem that what takes place at the moment through The Tweed Commission and associated Tweed river charities is the blue print of what the Government seek. At the moment its self financing, paid through the levy on fish caught, no charge to the taxpayer. Yet here was a civil servant telling us that it would take only a small group of his ilk in Edinburgh perhaps four or five to administer the entire wild fisheries throughout Scotland. So let us say five at £30,000 per annum equals £150,000 a year from the public purse and jobs removed from rural areas to Edinburgh. I heard no one speak in favour of the WFR and those present during the time I was in attendance was, " dont interfere the Tweed Commission is managing the river as it has done for decades without being hindered by politicians'. Another question or rather two which were being raised was predator control and west coast sea lice. There was also a whisper from some of the audience that there had been a near riot at a similair meeting at Stirling, any members know if this is true.
Tweedsider
|
|
burnie
Active Member
Posts: 1,181
|
Post by burnie on Aug 2, 2015 14:00:33 GMT
|
|
|
Post by earnfisher on Aug 2, 2015 15:13:41 GMT
The government has it all sown up and the fish farmers are laughing all the way to there overseas banks.
|
|
dunkeld
Active Member
Tay Springer April 2010
Posts: 2,946
|
Post by dunkeld on Sept 29, 2015 8:41:14 GMT
|
|