I got a call from John Sutton, Team Leader for the Environment Agency Thames Region’s Fisheries Department (I hope that title’s right), a few days ago inviting me to watch the release of a batch of fish into the Chalvey Ditch that suffered a pollution incident about a year ago.
So the company, DS Holdings Ltd, trading as Envirogreen (what a suitable name that is for a waste company), and it’s director were fined a total of £52,600 and ordered to pay a further £8,170 in compensation to the EA. Of that compensation money, a fair bit goes towards the investigation of the incident and preparation of the court case, not much remains for the actual restocking of the watercourse that got polluted.
In many cases of pollution incidents, really mature fish of breeding age are lost and when any restocking occurs, it’s usually with smaller immature fish that will need some years before they genuinely replace the stock that were lost. In that time, and in the case of a total fish kill, there is no recruitment whatsoever, so no young native fish coming along as replacements. If it is a fishery frequented by anglers, then they will have to rely on the introduced stock until they are at such an age when they will start to breed.
It’s like starting from scratch all over again.
So this was the day, Tuesday, of the restocking and I went down to the Chalvey ditch, just outside of Eton, to meet with Adrian Bicknell and Steve Sherriden. Steve, I have known for many years now, but I hadn’t met Adrian before so it’s always nice to put a face to a name. I met up with Adrian in a lay-bye at the side of the Jubilee River, close to where the ditch joins the Thames also, Steve joined us later after we’d moved to another point to release the fish.
 |
| Would you mind keeping still, please? L-R Barbel, Dace, and Chub |
To be released were 300 dace, 300 chub, and 300 barbel, all came from the EA’s own fish farm at Calverton, Nottinghamshire. Not many, you might think, but that’s a considerable cost in fish and my thoughts are, how long before the stream gets polluted again and these get wiped out? Another question you could ask is, is this all worth it, why restock?
Well if you give up completely, that will be it, the polluters will have won and every ‘once-upon-a-time’ fishery in the country would remain polluted forever, just as it was in some rivers not that long ago. So whatever the chances are for these fish, it’s important to continue trying to recover these smaller side streams that are really quite important to our ecology.
Another factor of their importance is where they join the main river, in this case the Thames. When that is in flood, many of the fish will seek refuge in these feeder streams and in spring they are ideal for the successful breeding of many main river fish. Even though much of this particular stream is unfishable, it is still very important as some of these introductions will drop down and out into the main river at it’s confluence.
How many times has this small ditch been polluted in the past I don’t think anyone can remember, but it has earned the nickname of the ‘dirty-ditch’ amongst many anglers. I asked Steve how many times had he attended a restocking of this stream and he said he’d lost count, but maybe a dozen or so. Like I said earlier, I’ve known Steve for maybe 14 years or so and I’m not sure how long he’s been with the Thames fisheries teams, but to have attended so many re-stockings in such a short time is unbelievable.
Just when will these pollutions cease?
I believe that despite the heavy fine imposed on this company and its director, that to them it’s no more than a ‘minor’ setback, knock a few pence of the shares for a while, if it’s a public company, or curtail the amount of dividend paid at the year end. That’s about all.
This country should take the pollution of fisheries a lot more seriously than is shown at the moment. I have said often before that short prison sentences should be inflicted on either site managers or their directors and even up to the chairman and managing director. Even for a short term, say 3 months or so, it would be a real threat to their own freedom and you can bet that a lot more companies would tighten up on their practices then!
Steve was saying that if you disturb a bat’s nesting area you can be fined, kill any bats and it’s a £1000 fine for each and every bat, so he believes (see note below). The eel is protected now by the very same law enjoyed by bats, yet we read recently that a proposed hydro-electric power turbine on the Trent would be allowed to kill up to 100 eels per day. Imagine how profitable that turbine would be if the company had to cough up £100,000 every day in fines!
Note on bats: From the website of Greater Manchester Police – “The potential fine for each offence is £5,000. If more than one bat is involved, the fine is £5,000 per bat. In England and Wales an offender can also be imprisoned for six months.”
As regards pollutions though, because they (thankfully) happen quite infrequently on most rivers, fines alone are no longer appropriate, we need much stronger measures that threaten the freedoms of individuals. Only then will they prick up their ears and listen, and treat our watercourses with the respect they deserve!
By the way, on the restocking at least one bin full of fish, around 300, were discharged within 30 yards of the Thames. Hopefully some of these will soon find their way into the main river and be relatively safe from any further incidents in the Chalvey Ditch. One of them could even put a smile on an angler’s face one day.
The story of their journey. From the fish counter and random inspections –
 |
| Left – Steve, Right – Adrian transferring fish from airated tanks |
All freed, safe and sound.
