By now most of you will have heard of the publication of the Salmon and Freshwater Fisheries Review. This is potentially an extremely important landmark, which may determine many of the factors which will govern and influence angling for much of the new century.
This article will give a brief view of the Review and hopefully prompt you to read a copy and make representations to MAFF (Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries & Food).
The review is certainly a comprehensive piece of work and whatever one might think of individual recommendations, it seems to me to be, on the whole, a very professional and well produced review. It makes a total of 195 recommendations, the majority of which do not require legislation and may therefore result in relatively swift action. It is important to realise though that the publication of a review such as this does not mean that all the recommendations will result in action. Consultation may result in some recommendations being dropped; some may be left on the shelf as impractical, too expensive or too controversial. Changes requiring legislation may be affected by lack of political will and implementation will be affected by parliamentary timetabling considerations.
MAFF have asked for responses to the Review by 31 July 2000. It is crucial that as many of us as possible respond, not only to offer constructive criticism of recommendations with which we disagree, but also to support recommendations which we wish to see enacted. As there are no guarantees that measures will be implemented, positive support is just as important as criticism.
You can find a copy of the report on the MAFF website at http://www.maff.gov.uk/fish/salmon/backgrnd.htm or you can write for a copy to MAFF at the address below.
I found one of the chapters would not download from the website, so if you have similar problems or your printer won’t stand printing a 200 page document then you might be best writing for a copy, or e-mailing your request (remember to include your postal address).
Do get a copy and read it, it is our chance to influence the framework of law and regulation that may govern our fishing for many years to come.
MAFF contacts for copies of the report and to forward your comments :-
MAFF Fisheries Division 11
Room 308
Nobel House
17 Smith Square
London SW1P 3JR
An In-depth Look at some of the Issues of Concern
The Coarse Fish Closed Season
Obviously this has generated the greatest attention and will probably give rise to more disagreement amongst anglers than most of the other recommendations as the forum section of FISHINGmagic.com has already shown. The group recommended that the closed season for coarse fish be abolished on rivers, but with the power to enforce a closed season being retained for cases where it would avoid damage to fish stocks. Although the report is very clear on the matter of the closed season for canals and stillwaters the main body of the report is less certain on the matter of rivers and although coming down on the side of abolition the authors state that the case is ‘less conclusive’.
Eels
The report recognises that there are problems with eel stocks and makes a number of what look (to me at least) to be sensible measures to restrict the exploitation of eel stocks. Personally I was very pleased to see such attention given to eels, as they are wonderful mysterious creatures, even if like many anglers I do sometimes wish I could never catch another.
Predation
The cormorant issue! A disappointment to some, but I do think that many anglers and certainly some of the angling press have had unrealistic ideas about what is achievable on this issue. The report puts the case that the balance has been tilted too far in favour of bird conservation at the expense of fish. A number of measures are proposed that streamline the process of licensing the shooting of fish eating birds and also promote fish conservation as being equally as important as bird conservation. I would urge those responding to the report to look carefully at the measures proposed and not to stray into the rather fundamentalist ‘shoot ’em all’ attitude which has occasionally reared its head in the angling press. Our best chance of success lies in reasoned argument for carefully measured actions. I am afraid this may mean little help for commercial fisheries, but hopefully it will mean more protection for wild fish. I do think we have to accept that there is little political mileage in arguing for the killing of wild birds to protect artificial fish stocks.
Conservation of Salmon Stocks
The report devotes some considerable space to the decline in salmon stocks and measures that can be taken to help preserve and hopefully enhance stocks. A ban on the sale of rod caught salmon and a carcass tagging scheme with an annual bag limit, are proposed. The report also says that the phasing out of the North Sea drift net fishery should be accelerated and pressure put on the Irish government to remove their drift net fishery. I would suggest it does not go far enough in the case of the North Sea fishery and as for the Irish fishery, our voice is likely to go unheard until our own North Sea fishery is closed. The carcass tagging scheme whilst in principle a good idea is I feel unlikely to be practical due to the difficulty of aligning regulations with Scotland. Finally the report makes the important point that sea trout should not be treated as second class to salmon, but the point would be better made if the they included sea trout in all the measures they propose for salmon.
Livebaiting
A really contentious area, and the one where I feel there is most chance of a controversial outcome. The report does not concern itself with the debate over the ethical issues of livebaiting, but looks at the problems of livebaiting leading to the transfer of fish stocks. It certainly seems likely that the report will lead to a livebaiting ban on waters that contain endangered fish, which is mainly those containing Whitefish (schelly, vendace, etc). Of more concern to predator anglers will be the suggestion that if there is evidence of fish transfer byelaws being widely broken then livebaiting should be banned on all unenclosed waters. Predator anglers groups are going to have to work hard to ensure that the breaking of these byelaws ceases and that the Environment Agency is made aware that it has.
This article has inevitably only looked at some of the more important areas of the report and there are other areas that are also of great importance, such as: stocking policies, the institutional framework, fish farm regulation, the funding of angling and the social importance of angling. Do have a read of the report and look at all the issues. There is much that will be of great interest to all anglers as well as the important issues.
The final paragraph of the report makes the fascinating and important point that the government grant in aid to the Environment Agency is a fraction of the support that is provided to English National Opera or The Royal Ballet. To me that makes a vital point about how we present ourselves to policy-makers in government. Angling does not present a united front, and we do not, on both an individual and collective basis, put our point of view across. This is an important reason why we should all respond to the consultation about the Review. If MAFF receive little response then angling will be pushed back into a dark corner because of our apathy.
