|
Post by Alex Robertson on Nov 14, 2013 18:44:09 GMT
See on the Grampian news that the netsmen are wanting to start their season on time and not as they did in the past after the annual river opening, and have said that if they can delay their opening day to allow fresh fish to enter the rivers to improve stocks then so can the angler, but have also said they want compensated should they have to delay their opening again. Considering that the opening to each river takes in a lot of money to the local economy, the nestsmen or I should say the owners see most if not all of the Salmon sale prices go into their own pockets, and where on a lot of rivers there is a rule on catch and release or a certain number of fish that can be kept, comes nowhere near what the nestmen kill or for that matter declare. Having once worked as a netsman, I thought I would have a bit of sympathy towards a old trade, but these guys now want it all the their own way and can see there will still be a lot of moaning and groaning from these guys still to come.
|
|
dunkeld
Active Member
Tay Springer April 2010
Posts: 2,946
|
Post by dunkeld on Nov 14, 2013 19:21:03 GMT
|
|
|
Post by devronmac on Nov 15, 2013 12:19:56 GMT
If ever there was a good reason for all salmon anglers to become members of the Salmon & Trout Association this must be a very good one. Netsmen now want to plunder even more of our endangered fish stocks and want to keep their nets in the water over the weekend as well. Anglers are making very laudable efforts to conserve stocks from catch and release in ever increasing percentages each year. There is certainly a very strong case now for compulsory 100% catch and release in all rivers and there may even be a case to reduce fishing effort by delaying the start of the season in an effort to see fragile spring stocks recover but how can this happen if netsmen increase their efforts ? There does seem to be some option of voluntary agreements between netsmen and fishery boards and this seems to be the only option current available short term. Hopefully in the interests of our salmon stocks common sense will prevail and strong efforts made by DSFBs to mitigate this further unwelcome threat.
|
|
|
Post by MzFishing on Nov 15, 2013 16:39:28 GMT
Did you see this? Don't know what to say. Does anyone know how many fish they kill each year?
"Netsmen hit back
Keith Allan, the secretary of the netsmen’s association, refuted the anglers claims, accusing the anglers of doing nothing for salmon conservation for 14 years while netsmen had suffered financially as a result of their voluntary postponement.
Mr Allan declared: “The netsmen do have a very strong and ongoing respect for the conservation of salmon stocks, despite a perceived absence of reciprocation from anglers. We have said for 14 years that we are the only ones who have done anything positive and effective in terms of conserving stocks.
“Catch and release is not proven to work because there are lots of scientific papers on catch and release which show there is damage to the fish - they are stressed and nobody really knows what happens to them once they go back into the river.
“If (anglers) are that keen on conservation, why don’t they stop fishing for six weeks as well at the start of the season. But, of course, the economic argument for that is that they want the money for selling their beats at high prices.” "
|
|
|
Post by adipose on Nov 15, 2013 17:14:51 GMT
Having once worked as a nets man, I thought I would have a bit of sympathy towards a old trade, but these guys now want it all the their own way and can see there will still be a lot of moaning and groaning from these guys still to come. Sadly it is now clear that the campaign of S&TA, the foolproof science of AST and the management requirements of DSFBs are not having the slightest effect in persuading our government to put an end to mixed stocks netting. Government views are based on the idea that there should be fairness ie equal pain to rods and nets. As I see it the only solution is to close rivers where there is reasonable concern about the well being of particular populations (especially spring fish). By "close" I mean complete closure of specified rivers for periods up to the whole season. If we demand that in order to save the fish there will be undoubted economic and social impacts, but surely the fish are more important than the rights of anyone, nets man or rod fisher? If we make that demand the government will take note that the measure requested is fair. I know it is a draconian prospect, but how else are we to break the logjam in this ridiculous standoff? Let's put the survival of our salmon and sea trout first, not the people who exploit them. The alternative will be that our grandchildren will look at our shortsighted and greedy attitudes and rightly blame us for their extinction.
|
|
|
Post by adipose on Nov 15, 2013 17:44:46 GMT
Considering that the opening to each river takes in a lot of money to the local economy, the nestsmen or I should say the owners see most if not all of the Salmon sale prices go into their own pockets. Very few fishery owners make money from letting their fishing. Costs of managing a rod fishery are huge and rents, especially on beats showing average catches of less than 150 salmon each year, are insufficient to cover those costs. Let me give you an example of one 150 average catch fishery I know on the South Esk Annual rent from all sources is just under £20,000 Fishery Board levy £8000 Maintenance and cleaning of huts £1500 - £2500 Cutting of grass paths and maintenance of pools £5000 + River watcher and Ghillie wages about £8000 The owner, who manages to let a good proportion of the available weeks at an average of £60 per rod day, ends up subsidising the people who come to fish. But he doesn't resent doing that (see below). So why would someone do that? Why would they knowingly lose money? The answer is very simple (and I am now thinking of three owners on well known east coast rivers). They enjoy managing a fishery, living close to the river, meeting their visiting fishers, looking after the natural riverside environment and wildlife. it is a way of life. None of the three people I have in mind wants to make a quick buck. Nor do they want to sell their beats and benefit from the very considerable capital locked up in their property. Actually, the only possible profit they might make would come from selling their beats. And then they would have lost their way of life. Isn't it a wonderful thing that there are idiots around who are prepared to look after our rivers and lose money in the process? Most of these beats are well looked after too! It is an absolute myth that riparian owners are "pocketing" huge amounts of cash. There is no such cash available, except on the very few big river or famous premium beats. If you disagree with me please give me examples and amounts of money involved. I think you will find it hard to find a single example of profiteering by riparian owners on 'modest beats' (150 salmon per year average). Now, let's put that scenario in the context of what the netting interests are doing: Their levy is far less than the riparian owner's levy. why? They reap huge amounts of money from selling dead spring salmon. In May 2011 Usan Fisheries killed 2307 salmon worth over £300,000. Just one month!!! If you want to know who is profiteering from our salmon you need look no further. The Usan company employs very few people, pays very little money to conserve salmon and sea trout and kills 100% of their catches. What a way to run a country!
|
|
ptg
Active Member
Posts: 164
|
Post by ptg on Nov 15, 2013 19:26:12 GMT
Great post adipose!
|
|
|
Post by earnfisher on Nov 17, 2013 21:02:07 GMT
Adipose why do the netsmen get away with killing everything. Answer because the fishers are to busy fighting each other over someone killing a fish. We pay D.S.F.B.and others to look after our intrests but you seldom hear a cheap from them. Your figures do not always add up. There are beats on the Tweed that make a lot of money [and i am not going to name them incase i loose some fishing] and the gillies usualy maintain the beats and often look after the birds as well [pheasants]. When you add up the V.A.T. on the rentals./fishing tackle./fuel to get there and many other things like the various other taxes we all pay then i am sure that the rod angling gives more to the country than the netsmen ever do. Bob
|
|
|
Post by adipose on Nov 18, 2013 3:25:14 GMT
Bob, in my last post I was referring to beats averaging 150 salmon or less. Tweed is in a very different situation. Everything you write about the contributions made by salmon anglers is right, and you are also right to make the point that my figures also may be wrong. I spoke with one of the owners of a famous Esk beat yesterday and he reminded me that my figure for maintenance and infrastructure costs is less than half of what it costs him annually, so you can add at least another £5000 to the bill that the owner must pay!
|
|
|
Post by davidphillips95 on Nov 18, 2013 19:51:43 GMT
Ian Gordon is looking at starting a petition..please follow the the link below and share his post on your Facebook account. The more that share the better, we need everyone's support to make a difference. Cheers
|
|
|
Post by adipose on Nov 19, 2013 4:15:06 GMT
Ian Gordon is looking at starting a petition..please follow the the link below and share his post on your Facebook account. The more that share the better, we need everyone's support to make a difference. www.facebook.com/ian.gordon....01003859920980Cheers I have checked that the change of dates will not happen until the start of the 2015 season, not in February 2014 as I had feared. We therefore have fifteen months before the new regime starts.that should give us time to get properly organised. We have options, including a properly organised campaign to win public support, a petition to Holyrood, targeted lobbying of politicians and civil servants, and a well constructed complaint to the European Commission. This should be an integrated and concerted campaign, not a series of one-offs. I think that, rather than simply mount a petition which on its own may have only a minor effect, we gather together the whole Scottish salmon fishing community - managers, anglers, conservationists and owners. We should ask the relevant bodies to mount a national event to which ministers should be invited to answer the question, "Whither Scottish wild salmon?". If there is agreement to this idea can I suggest that a group of us approach the new Chairman of ASFB (Alastair Laing) to ask him to bring everyone together? The event should be high profile and obtain maximum press coverage in order to make it very clear to the SG that they cannot mess around with our natural heritage in this way. Finally, can I just finish by saying that this is a first stab at the problem? We need more brains that just mine to focus on what we should do, and I am sure others will improve on my suggestion. Adipose
|
|
|
Post by devronmac on Nov 19, 2013 14:18:34 GMT
Essentially this is a good idea Adipose but it is also good that Ian Gordon, who is well known in angling circles in Scotland and abroad has taken the initiative. Ideally the Atlantic Salmon Trust, The Salmon & Trout Association, as well as ASFB should be making moves to get this initiative off the stocks. The time for moaning is over. Hopefully these bodies can talk to each other immediately. 15 months is not long. However I also feel that anglers should be mobilised through as many angling periodicals and newspapers and social media as possible. All salmon anglers, writing letters and e-mails and flooding the mailboxes of their MSPs and MPs will also help to get the message across and create further impetus. I'm putting together my next epistle NOW !
|
|
|
Post by sinkingtip on Nov 19, 2013 16:15:18 GMT
Ian Gordon is looking at starting a petition..please follow the the link below and share his post on your Facebook account. The more that share the better, we need everyone's support to make a difference. www.facebook.com/ian.gordon....01003859920980Cheers I got this message last night and today when I tried to click. I assume you have to already have a FB account (which I don't) to do the biz ? "Sorry, this page isn't available
The link you followed may be broken, or the page may have been removed".
|
|
|
Post by devronmac on Nov 19, 2013 17:31:48 GMT
Sinking Tip You are right. The link is broken. The petition is not yet up on Ian Gordon's website either but if you keep checking www.speyonline.com over the next couple of days I am sure you will find it. Devronmac
|
|
|
Post by davidphillips95 on Nov 19, 2013 18:42:42 GMT
Ian Gordon is looking at starting a petition..please follow the the link below and share his post on your Facebook account. The more that share the better, we need everyone's support to make a difference. www.facebook.com/ian.gordon....01003859920980Cheers I got this message last night and today when I tried to click. I assume you have to already have a FB account (which I don't) to do the biz ? "Sorry, this page isn't available
The link you followed may be broken, or the page may have been removed".Yes you will need a Facebook account in order to view and share his post. I have updated the link, should be working again. Thanks David
|
|
|
Post by allysshrimp on Nov 19, 2013 20:44:14 GMT
Sinking Tip You are right. The link is broken. The petition is not yet up on Ian Gordon's website either but if you keep checking www.speyonline.com over the next couple of days I am sure you will find it. Devronmac Will be keeping an eye out for it there Mel.
|
|
|
Post by adipose on Nov 20, 2013 7:58:05 GMT
I haven't been able to connect with the petition but I would like to know what it requests. The important thing is that the wording is aimed at getting a response from the decision makers. All too often petitions become a rant expressing anger & frustration but they then fail to move the issue forward. That is why I would like to see the words before I sign it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2013 9:00:58 GMT
Anglers can sign all and every petition going It will make no difference at all...who are these anglers ?
|
|
dunkeld
Active Member
Tay Springer April 2010
Posts: 2,946
|
Post by dunkeld on Nov 20, 2013 17:03:08 GMT
Anglers can sign all and every petition going It will make no difference at all...who are these anglers ? I suppose its better than nothing
|
|
|
Post by adipose on Nov 20, 2013 18:23:18 GMT
Kenny,
I feel we can do better than that. If we take the view that we have lost before we start there really isn't much point in starting. While I accept Deveronmac's point that Ian Gordon is a great guy with lots of contacts, that alone is not going to change a situation that has become a major logjam in Scottish fishery politics. No, as I said earlier in this thread, we need a concerted national plan under good leadership.
It also needs to be new. It is no use us banging on in the same old way. Nor should we take the "at least we are doing something" line (no criticism Kenny). I have been thinking about this and have reached the point where a campaign under 4 headings may work: 1) economic considerations building on the SE review of the value of freshwater recreational fishing to the economy 2) social considerations. Jobs, communities, support for rural businesses. 3) environments. I like the AST line "the wise hunter is the best conservationist". Science, marine mortality, levies & resources etc 4) political and cultural considerations. International opinion of Scotland's approach to salmon management, Greenland, Faroes & he English lay off of mixed stocks nets by 2022.
To start the ball rolling we need a workshop involving the major players to discuss and agree a strategy and action plan. Money. Roles and clearly stated targets, responsibilities, inputs and outcomes.
Does anyone agree with this new approach? If not, then I will shut up.
Adipose (redd counting in Quebec)
|
|