The Wild Fisheries Review, chaired by Andrew Thin and carried out during 2014 was, according to Scotland's First Minister intended to, "Develop and promote a modern evidence-based management system for wild fisheries fit for purpose in the 21st century, and capable of responding to the changing environment; and to manage, conserve and develop our wild fisheries to maximise the sustainable benefit of Scotland's wild fish resource to the country as a whole and particularly to rural areas. All the statutory buzz-words are there: evidence-based, fit for purpose, conserve, environment, sustainable.
And, to me, they sound remarkably familiar. Lord Hunter addressed these same issues in his reports in 1963 and 1965; Sir David Nickson did so again, in 1997, with his Salmon Strategy Task Force. Indeed, the number of reports about the future and structure of salmon fishing in Scotland that have appeared over the past sixty years would comfortably fill a medium sized room. All have two things in common: (1) they are dust-covered; (2) their contents have been substantially ignored by successive governments, regardless of political persuasion.
The result of the Mr Thin's review has, however, prompted government intervention and involvement in the problems facing wild salmon (and sea-trout) populations today. But in the view of many, your correspondent included, government has stirred up a hornet's nest of alarm and dismay by appearing to use unnecessary force - a blanket ban on killing wild salmon in many Scottish rivers - that appears to be 'criminalising' anglers.
In the Hebrides, the Stornoway Angling Association alleges that government has seriously underestimated the strength of salmon stocks in the Western Isles. From my own experience, I tend to agree that the government's decision to ban the killing of salmon in some rivers might be open to challenge. For instance, in one river where the catch and release rate is barely 24%, no restriction has been placed upon killing wild salmon?
Loch Lomond anglers also object to the ban. The Loch Lomond Angling Improvement Association (LLAIA) claim that the ban was based upon flawed research, founded on rod catches for each fishery in the previous five years. LLAIA member, Dick Dickson, who has fished the loch for more than 50 years, said, "The only reliable scientific method of accurately calculating fish stocks is electronic fish counters strategically located on a river. It is very clear that the Government's figures are flawed. Put simply, they do not have a clue how many fish run into Loch Lomond and its tributaries."
However, in the North of Scotland, a campaign has been launched to ensure that Highland anglers practice catch and release on waters where the new ban on killing wild salmon is in place. Police officers and a network of local water bailiffs throughout the North will be on patrol to tackle those who fail to obey the new regulations, which came in to effect in April. Chris Conroy, Director of the Ness District Salmon Fishery Board said, "A major effort is going on to ensure the new conservation regulations are effectively implemented in affected salmon districts, which includes the Ness system. A heavy fine and a criminal record could await those who attempt to keep any salmon they have caught."
A glance at the maps (see above) might give a clue as to what may have stirred government to action. The first shows the areas - coloured in yellow - where killing wild salmon is banned and, in conjunction with the fish farm location map, whilst the second map shows the location fish farms. All of Scotland's largely foreign-owned open-cage factory fish farms operate in the West Highlands and Islands and the Scottish Government is committed to their expansion. Many anglers feel that disease and pollution from these industrial farms could have been implicated in the collapse of distinct populations of wild salmon and sea-trout in these areas and have campaigned relentlessly to have them removed from Scotland's coastal waters. Nor can there be any doubt that consumers and the public in general are being influenced by the information that protesters disseminate.
What better way of deflecting angler's attention away from the seeming never-ending rise and rise of factory fish farming, than to give them something else to worry about, such as the new regulations now in place and the prospect of even greater government intervention in game fishing in the immediate future? I am probably wrong, but that is my honestly held and sincere belief. Factory salmon farming has brought enormous benefits: to shareholders who have invested in salmon farming companies; to fishery scientists who have made a career out of servicing the industry; to universities, who obtain grants to study various aspects of salmon farming; and to public relations organisations employed to encourage consumers to eat more farm salmon, and to portray the industry to the public in the best possible light.
But for Scotland's iconic wild salmon and sea-trout it has been a disaster; once famous fisheries are now but poor shadows of their former glory and more and more anglers are travelling overseas in search of sport; highland hotels that specialised in caring for anglers, such as the Loch Maree Hotel in Wester Ross, have closed their doors. It is beyond my imagination to understand how any reasonable, sane, thinking person could have contemplated conducting a review of freshwater fisheries without taking into account the impact of factory salmon farming - yet that is exactly what government ordered Andrew Thin's 2014 review to do - exclude fish farming from their deliberations.
In the early years of the 19th century a group of friends used fish St Mary's Loch in the Scottish Borders from Tibbie Shiels Inn: John Gibson Lockhart, an Edinburgh lawyer, James Hogg, shepherd and poet, and John Wilson, FRS, MA (Fisherman Royal of Scotland, Master Angler), Professor of Moral Philosophy at Edinburgh University. They contributed to Blackwoods Magazine where Gibson Lockhart was harshly critical of the poetry of John Keats; describing some of his work as being "calm, settled, imperturbable drivelling idiocy." Had they lived today, I wonder how these three would have reacted to the Scottish Governments current plans for the future of our well-loved art?
If it does all boil down to the pros and cons of fish farming V the pros and cons of removing fish farms and encouraging the growth of wild fish stocks then surely what is required is an in assessment of the economic value of continuing down each path ?
Those championing a policy which favours environmental pros while ignoring the economic cons will win fewer votes than vice versa.
What is the position regarding jobs and financial benefits to our communities ? What brings in the cash and creates the jobs, fish farming or angling?
I realise that I'm probably being more than a little naïve here but this is something that needs to be examined and reported on in terms of indisputable facts and figures. I think that unless we get this done, there will be no point in haggling over what will be seen as minor environmental concerns V jobs.
Are wild salmon and sea trout worth more to the Scottish economy than fish farming? We need to know the answer to that question because no one will be interested in removing fish farms based on opinion and sentiment. Get the facts and fiction sorted for once and for all or there will be no moving forward.
It beggars belief how wild salmon and sea troot have been allowed to get to the point of almost extinction in some areas of the Highlands and Islands where these salmon farms operate. Surely the way forward has to be land based closed containment fish farms.
I'm afraid that I now believe migratory fish in Scotland are a lost cause. Clearly government do not take the subject seriously, with flawed reviews and a laissez faire attitude to open cage salmon farming. Farmed salmon are Scotland's single biggest food export and our own public buy masses of it because it is cheap. Cheap and nasty maybe, but it is cheap and people look at price first. Most people I know buy it - they are good, sensible, responsible people, but they buy it even when they are perfectly aware of the environmental damage it causes. It is a free country.
You won't find much sympathy for salmon fishing out there, it is seen as an elitist passtime for people with lots of disposable income - many anglers even believe that and it is hard to argue against when you look at the cost of a day's fishing on even moderately decent water. It is beyond the reach of most; yes you can get inexpensive salmon fishing, but it is inexpensive for a reason.
The vast majority of Scottish people have no stake whatsoever in salmon fishing and as long as that continues attitudes are unlikely to change.
For the ordinary angler the proposed mass criminalisation of fishing and the transfer of draconian powers to landowners by the SNP is a far more serious issue, yet how many will even bother to respond to it?
To be totally honest im finding it hard to be concerned about the plight of salmon fisheries of course its tragic that mans greed yet again is destroyed yet another habitat and with it the creatures who live in it.
But having been harrassed and in many ways bullied by salmon obsessed morons ( I know they arnt all like that) virtually since i first started angling as a kid i find it hard to give a shit.
My worry is that angling in general is being dragged down with them.
Quote from: Hill loch gold on April 21, 2016, 07:30:56 AM
It beggars belief how wild salmon and sea troot have been allowed to get to the point of almost extinction in some areas of the Highlands and Islands where these salmon farms operate. Surely the way forward has to be land based closed containment fish farms.
Yeah, regardless of what the country thinks of salmon angling it is wrong to push salmon and sea trout stocks into such decline. Some would say it's an environmental crime. There are certainly many more measures that could be taken to eradicate the damage these fish farms are doing but it seems these steps will cost money and reduce company profits. Obviously they are having none of that hence the denials, misinformation from alleged experts in the pay of the companies and of course squirming lawyers doing everything in their power to thwart any changes that would reduce profits.
The Scottish Government needs to have a very close look at the economic facts. Is it better to have half a dozen men employed maintaining the running of a fish farm or have the same men perhaps working in hotels, estates, shops, garages, ferries etc ?
It should be quite possible to co exist and get the best of both worlds but once again that would mean changes to current fish farming practices and that would affect profits. I understand that the companies running these farms know that as providers of employment, they are holding the aces and have threatened to close their farms if pushed too hard on environmental issues.
Perhaps our ministers should 'grow a pair' and allow them to do just that ?
It may sound silly but what's to stop Scotland encouraging responsible environmentally friendly fish farming developing in a way that allows wild fish stocks to flourish? If the profits to be had for the sale of farmed salmon are so worthwhile then why not make it a national industry and get some dosh in the bank for the people who live here?
Quote from: fergie on April 21, 2016, 12:45:09 PM
But having been harassed and in many ways bullied by salmon obsessed morons ( I know they arnt all like that) virtually since i first started angling as a kid i find it hard to give a shit.
This is a very real, serious and divisive issue. Try getting trout permit on The North Esk or The Dee. I have heard anglers say they wish salmon would disappear completely because it might open up the rivers to more anglers.
I sometimes find myself thinking of just how blessed Clyde trout fishermen are to have the Falls of Clyde so far down the river. If salmon were able to get above Lanark anglers certainly would not enjoy the freedom they have on one of Scotland's best and most accessible trout rivers.
The current threat of criminalisation is without doubt a result of incompetent Scottish politicians who are as thick as shit being lobbied by landowning / salmon owning interests that are a lot smarter than they are. Under such threat why
should ordinary anglers give a damn about salmon?
I have been forming an impression that lice problems, certainly back in the Norwegian owners' back yard, have been pushing quite hard in the closed-containment system direction. Husbandry costs are becoming too high and losses of stock too high and methods seem to be changing. How quickly our rivers can recover is another question. It may well be much faster than we might think.
Quote from: fergie on April 21, 2016, 12:45:09 PM
To be totally honest im finding it hard to be concerned about the plight of salmon fisheries of course its tragic that mans greed yet again is destroyed yet another habitat and with it the creatures who live in it.
But having been harrassed and in many ways bullied by salmon obsessed morons ( I know they arnt all like that) virtually since i first started angling as a kid i find it hard to give a shit.
My worry is that angling in general is being dragged down with them.
That sums it up for me. I love fishing but I find it hard to give a shit where salmon angling is concerned. Lack of fish but people are up in arms when they cant kill them :shock: The whole thing is a money making scam, complete with private toilets, huts, mown banks and dick heads looking after it.
As Negley Farson said in his 1940's book 'going fishing' in regard to Uist sea trout fishing....Its beautiful, but was one place in the world he has no wish to go back to, 'fishing as a business, it was too well organised'
Money and greed divide and conquer everything.
Quote from: markirv on April 21, 2016, 06:59:26 PM
As Negley Farson said in his 1940's book 'going fishing' in regard to Uist sea trout fishing....Its beautiful, but was one place in the world he has no wish to go back to, 'fishing as a business, it was too well organised'
To be fair though that does not apply only to salmon fishing. It's the principle reason I do not go to Scourie.
Quote from: admin on April 22, 2016, 09:49:41 AM
To be fair though that does not apply only to salmon fishing. It's the principle reason I do not go to Scourie.
aye, the private toilets, huts and mown banks definitely detract from the wild country experience up there. shame really..... :roll:
Interesting thread! As one of said salmon fishing ghillie duck heads I shall give my two bobs worth one I sober up and get home tomorow night.
:lol:
I have to defend the salmon fishers ,my experience on the Tay when I started fishing was most of them wore Tweed and complained that you were within a mile of them, nowadays most stop for a chat and earlier this year I had one gentlemen wave me in front of him as a couple of trot were moving.
I just remembered this thread!
Too much fine malt whilst lounging in the palatial hut overlooking the manicured banks of the Spey at Easter Elchies affected my memory!
A good trip with three springers landed over three days and a couple departing prematurely.
A will not offend the trout anglers by displaying pictures of the fish or the river bank!
Anyway.
Aquaculture over my way is a disaster with sea lice problems out of control.
But, for the most part, salmon and sea trout stocks are stable or increasing.
And, crucially, almost all the fisheries are fully booked and employ a full compliment of keepers, ghillies, watchers and assorted other staff quite often on a full tie basis.
Any argument to change aquaculture using the "extinction of wild salmonids" argument will fail because of this.
Open minds, which can only be those with first hand experience of changes in the area over the last 30-40 years, would wonder what has changed differently in the islands compared to west coast areas.
Starter(s) for 10 are land use and monofilament nets!
As the ferry was docking in Stornoway, there was a brand new Marine harvest boat on the other side of the pier. A massive live fish carrier ( I think) which illustrated to me the scale of local aquaculture operations. It also told me the aquaculture industry felt confident enough of its future to be investing in such vessels!
Quote from: Laxdale on April 27, 2016, 02:55:44 PM
It also told me the aquaculture industry felt confident enough of its future to be investing in such vessels!
And they should be confident. This is a battle long lost. They have Scotland's politicians in their pockets. The only way they will be checked is through some major disaster or more likely that they find another, cheaper place to produce their fish with standards even lower than they are allowed to operate under here. I have to admit I find myself moving deeper into the "so what" camp.
Wild salmon in Scotland are not pivotal to the ecosystem as they are in North America - in fact our natural wild environment is so highly degraded anyway the disappearance of salmon would really only be missed by a few anglers and not a lot else. Depressing I know, but you have to be realistic.
Angling in Scotland in general is now living on borrowed time with hostile, interfering government and a general lack of will within the angling community to stand up and be counted. Perhaps like fox hunting and hare coursing it's just had its day.
As I always say, there is the option of fishing abroad.
i just wonder how much input the manufactures and shops selling angling equipment are putting into this, surely they should be getting together and getting some of their representatives to lobby the government :roll:
One thing this review will do it take the function of fishery management out of the control of private interests. This for me was one of the reasons the aquaculture industry thrived. In the end the votes available from those that fished the likes of Loch Maree didn't compare to those that could have worked in the fish farms. At the time it was a simple political calculation. The east coast had a much more developed economy for game fish whereas those that went to the west coast were more gentrified and unlikely to vote labour.
If the fishing had been more "public" would it have been subjected to the aquaculture industry. In reality we don't know and never will know.
It's just a shame that fisheries on the west coast were so devastatingly trashed.
They say you get the politicians you deserve. I honestly don't know what we've done to deserve the politicians we've had for the past 40 years.
If you have a fishery interest which is salmon focused then you get to where much Scottish river fishing has ended up. Same again in a way with landowner benefit from windfarms. There is actually now scope for better participation from across all anglers for all species. That needs folk who are the users on the ground to participate but, sadly, there is not a good track record of the average Joe doing that.
I rarely fish for salmon. Over the past 60+ years I have caught about a dozen salmon. I much prefer
fishing for wild brown trout, and, from time to time sea-trout. This issue has little to do with rod and
line fishing for salmon - and I too have observed the less than generous behavior of some salmon
anglers - but why, I ask, should salmonids that have lived and thrived in Scottish waters since the
end of the last Ice Age be driven to the point of extinction simply to provide income for shareholders
and staff of an unsustainable, dirty industry? For as long as I am able I will continue to do all that I
can to protect and preserve Scotland's precious environment. Right or wrong, I think that this is the
proper thing to do.... and a big thank you to Fred and all who inhabit these pages for sharing their
views.
I agree Fergie, with the proviso that you are referring to the expensive private salmon rivers - it's a wealth divide - along the banks notices to trout anglers reinforce their second-class status.
But many angling associations, clubs, and councils do sterling work, making salmon fishing available at a very affordable price - eg to take just one, the Devon, referred to elsewhere on the forum - £35 per season for brown trout, sea-trout AND salmon.
Mind you, nae grayling... :crap