Newsletter February 2006

Number 31

President : The Earl of Normanton

Vice Presidents: Orri Vigfusson and Hugh Miles

Registered Charity No: 1051068

FORMAL NOTICE

Please take notice that the 14th Annual General Meeting of the Wessex Salmon and Rivers Trust will be held on Friday the 17th of March 2006 at the Brian Whitehead Centre, Wick Lane, Downton Wiltshire at 7:00 PM. Any member wishing a formal proposal to be included in the agenda must notify me of that proposal, and the name of the member seconding the proposal, in writing; to be in my hands at least 7 days before the date of the meeting. Nominations for election to the executive committee, which will be welcome, should also be made and seconded by members, in writing, and should be in my hands at least 7 days before the meeting.

Dear members and friends,

There is so much happening at the moment that we could fill three newsletters. I will be brief in my introduction to make room for the real news and debate.
First, hands up those who noticed a change in our header. We are delighted to announce that Hugh Miles, founder member, international conservationist, skilled angler, renowned film maker and quite a nice guy has agreed to accept our invitation to become a Vice President of the Trust. A most welcome and important addition to our strength. (‘Ringwood Best’ please Hugh.)

I touched on the prospect of expansion and diversification in the November issue. We have made exciting progress in this respect and I am pleased to report that three new committee members have been co-opted and will seek confirmation at the AGM. They are Jonathan Bass, Trevor Harrop, and Adam Price. Also supporting us, ex officio for the time being, is Darren Smith who is heavily engaged in a river improvement project near Ringwood that is taking up all his time for a while. Between them they add a wide spectrum of skills, interests and representation, outside the perhaps somewhat exclusively salmon related approach we have adopted thus far. Do not think, for one moment that our attention to the dire state of our salmon will be lessened. On the contrary, we are joined by experts who will support all the things we are trying to do by adding a new dimension to our homogenous approach to the severe troubles of the rivers and their whole ecology.
The timing is good. Defra have instructed all water companies to draw up drought plans. Drought orders, if secured by the companies, mean more than hose pipe bans. They mean more abstractions from the bore holes and the rivers when they can least afford them.

We have enjoyed, or endured, a series of press headlines here and in Ireland, as well as some pretty feisty radio broadcasts over there. Dramatic, sometimes outrageous statements from Pat the Cope Gallagher and Irish officials and a ‘mea culpa’ letter form them to the EU. My optimism is tinged with scepticism. There is still continuing silence from our minister and his officials, who continue to steadfastly ignore our letters. Our local M P’s are supporting our efforts to generate some official action from that quarter.

Canoeists demanding open access to all rivers. The B C U refusing to make or honour local voluntary agreements.
Threats of live imports of salmon and ova from Norway where Gyrodactylus salaris thrives. Where have all the eels gone? And Ireland? Phew! Some extraordinary stuff happening. It would be funny if it were not so serious. Read on and I hope enjoy. Come to the AGM and learn more. Join in the debate, treat yourself at the auction and swell our funds, enjoy the craic.

I now yield to our valued contributors.

Brian Marshall

Chairman Brian Marshall returning a sixteen pounder

11 years of the Tesco ‘Swap a Salmon Scheme

2005 was the 11th year of the Tesco ‘Swap a Salmon’ scheme on the River Hampshire Avon.

In that period Tesco have rewarded the voluntary return of 323 salmon weighing 2921 Lbs. Assuming a 50% male and female mix @ c. 500 eggs / lb the scheme has generated a potential 730,000 eggs. Many more fish have been returned of course. The personal annual limit is five fish per angler but we know that anglers continue to return their fish alive throughout the season.

Not only the Avon benefits from Tesco’s generosity. Rivers from the Test and Itchen to the East of us down to the Devon and Cornwall salmon waters take part.

WSRT have much more that this to thank Tesco for. Their core funding sponsorship enables us, in turn, to fund all the research and educational activities we report, as well as 1400 copies of this newsletter each year and the cost of running the shop. We are very grateful indeed.

The Avon Salmon Group: John Slader reports.

Last year saw the publication by the Environment Agency of the Hampshire Avon Salmon Action Plan review consultation document. As part of the consultation process WSRT raised a number of issues in its written response and this was subsequently followed up with committee members meeting EA representatives in what proved to be a very constructive discussion. One of the outcomes was the formation of the "Avon Salmon Group" which comprises representation from WSRT, Avon & Stour Rivers Association, the nets and the EA. The first two meetings have focused on the group’s aims and aspirations which has led to the following being adopted:-

Overall aim

To promote the rapid recovery of the salmon population in the Hampshire Avon to historic levels (considered as those that would be expected in a near pristine environment), which will sustain an optimum yield to rod and net fisheries for present and future generations of anglers. This will be achieved by working towards common goals by all the fisheries and conservation organisations in the Avon Valley.

Targets:10 year aspirations

The focus for the group is now to put in place actions which will hopefully result in the targets being met.

(John Slader and Dr. Mike Twitchen represent WSRT on the SAG. Ed.)

Count update (so far).

River Hampshire Avon. Figures in brackets represent 2004 catches

Salmon Rods 121 (126)

Mudeford Nets

Salmon 56 (108) Sea Trout 177 (646)

River Frome

Salmon 52 of which 40 (77%) returned

Sea Trout 100 of which 21 returned

River Piddle

Salmon 4 all returned

Sea Trout 36 of which 21 (58%) released.

Poole Harbour net

Salmon 6 (---) Sea Trout 15 (---)

Preliminary & Partial Results

River Test Rods 429 (459)

River Itchen Rods 87 (148)

Counters

R.Test 624
Little River N/A ?+? (Total 1129)
R. Itchen 456 (410)

Our thanks to Miranda Moss at South Wessex EA at Blandford and Andy Thomas at EA Southern Region for help in collating these provisional figures.

Catchment Abstraction Management Strategy (CAMS)

The start of February and the river is flowing below 50% long term average flow and the chalk aquifers, that contain the water that form the base flow of our chalkstreams, are in desperate need of recharge. We still have time for sufficient rainfall to fill the void; hopefully February fill dyke will live up to the name. If we are lucky enough to get the rain the time scale will inevitably mean we go into spring with the rivers well out in their flood plains. The alternative is not a scenario that gives rise to a great deal of comfort, desperately low rivers and a potential clash between environment and public water supply which I mentioned in the previous newsletter.

As you read what is written below bear in mind the question; if you had to make the choice between your home water supply being restricted or damage to the ecology of the rivers where would you put your cross?

Hopefully by the time you read this the Hampshire Avon Catchment Abstraction Management Strategy should be published or shortly be so. The processes that determine what future abstraction will take place in the catchment will be clearly defined for those involved in the decision making. The CAMS process is just one part of an ongoing and very thorough review of abstraction and its implications for the environment of the Avon.

The review of each abstraction licence under the EU Habitats Directive is attempting to define those licenses that are, or have the potential to be, damaging to the environment.
Under the Asset Management Planning (AMP) process those Public Water Supply (PWS) licenses that are giving rise to concern are being closely monitored to better understand the impact.
We then have the Water Framework Directive that sets ecological condition as the criteria for uses to which the river may be subjected. If the new conditions that will be attached to abstraction licenses under the new issuing format contained within the CAMS process such as "hands off" and "time limited" are working as intended this will pave the way to a smooth introduction of the (WFD).
Unfortunately all is not as straight forward as it may appear; running in parallel to all these commendable tiers of environmental legislation are further tiers aimed at protecting the PWS in the form of drought orders. If we were to see a disastrously low rainfall winter, aquifers at levels similar to or below 1976 levels, we may well have abstraction severely impacting of the ecological integrity of the rivers. If this were to happen it would be a direct confrontation to the environmental legislation and some one would have to decide which takes precedence. Similarly if the review of consents process were to demand that existing abstractions be reduced or even refused. We may well then see the PWS companies unable to meet their statutory obligations under the water supply legislation and be forced into a position of challenging the environmental legislation. A choice between environment and PWS would have to be made; presumably the initial choice would be the Secretary of State’s and depending on what direction his decision took, appeals and challenges would arise under the vying European legislation. Ultimately the decision will rest with Europe, which agency, group or company will be asking them to decide remains to be seen. Hopefully we will not find ourselves in this desperate position this year and nature will balance out the shortfalls that are beginning to look so ominous.

John Levell

Fish migration

One of the many implications of the low flows which we have suffered at various times during the past decade and will undoubtedly experience again in the future is that of disrupted fish migration throughout the river system.
The difficulty of attempting to unravel the problems of fish movement is that we do not fully understand the natural migratory patterns of many of the species that inhabit our rivers. We know that adult salmon swim upstream to spawn and the resultant smolt travel downstream in order to reach the high seas feeding grounds. Seatrout behave similarly with the smolt perhaps remaining closer to our coastline when they eventually reach the sea. Our cyprinids also have upstream movement of adults with dace, chub, barbel and roach moving upstream to spawn. One modern fish pass constructed on the Rhine had a count of over twenty three thousand barbel passing upstream on the spawning migration. The emergent fry dispersing downstream in search of suitable juvenile habitat, to what extent we don’t know. Studies on European rivers indicate the larval stage of some species drift with the current for long distances, sometimes many kilometres. Ditches and drains associated with the Avon have populations of juvenile dace, roach and barbel many thousands of meters downstream of any known spawning sites. To this we must add the annual elver run to the list of species attempting to ascend our river as juveniles and return downstream many years later as silver eels heading for the Sargasso to spawn.

River flow and water temperature are defining influences, high, colder water tending to favour salmonids and the lower, warmer flows are more suited to the cyprinids. We have migrations such as that of juvenile salmonids down the New Forest streams as they dry out with increasing frequency of the low flow summers with the associated loss of juvenile salmonid habitat. We also see the one hundred year flood events that we have experienced on at least three occasions during the previous fifteen years flushing out the juvenile cyprinids as the carriers and side streams have become fast flowing torrents with the loss of sanctuary areas associated with these braided channels.

If we believe cyprinid and salmonid species require different conditions to achieve efficient movement, what can we do to smooth the passage of these fish? Salmon have the advantage of legislation aimed at protecting them on their travels as it is an offence to interfere with the passage of migratory salmonids. How does this fit into the changing climatic conditions that we increasingly face on our rivers. If we have a relatively high even flow through out the year the passage of salmon is relatively straight forward. If we are confronted with rivers that are running at a considerably reduced percentage of long term average flow (LTA is the average measure of flow for the period of records at the site in question) the scenario changes significantly. If salmon are unable to ascend a river due to lack of rain or barriers to passage they will eventually run to the extent available to them. This brings about spawning low in the catchment on potentially less suitable sites with the risk of increased exposure to the cumulative effects of effluent discharges and diffuse pollution entering the river; this would appear to be the case this year. If we are to endure more of these low flow summers, as a result of climate change, we have to face the fact and ensure the means to by-pass man made barriers are adjusted accordingly; what was acceptable in the past under historically higher flows now constitutes a barrier to passage under the low flow conditions as experienced today. It is to the EA we must look to see that barriers to passage are removed where ever possible and efficiently by-passed where this is not achievable.

I stated earlier there are subtler upstream migrations within our river systems than those of the anadromous salmon, what is to be done for these less well equipped swimmers? The ideal solution would obviously be as with the salmon to remove the barriers but this is not always possible. On the Rhine, as I mentioned earlier with the barbel, they have overcome this by investing in state of the art fish passes that allow for the free movement of all species and that should definitely be the aim for our rivers. Expensive, well constructed, shallow gradient passes, if that is what it takes to protect the species within the rivers then the passes must be built.

Many of these barriers are also associated with fish farms that have to be screened to prevent the ingress of juvenile salmonids by law, yet the downstream drift of juvenile cyprinids is totally ignored. In a low flow year when over 50% of the river may be directed through the stews of fish farms, they are acting as huge sieves, straining juvenile cyprinids from the system; no fry going in the top is going to survive the attentions of thousands of hungry mouths. This problem has to be overcome, otherwise the year classes will get progressively weaker and the stock will loose its ability to be self sustaining. We look to the EA to provide the location of species spawning sites and associated juvenile habitat and make sure the two are not separated by an impassable barrier. If impoundment between barriers are to remain isolated then a means to ensure their isolated populations have all the requirements to be self sustaining has to be addressed. Spawning sites, protected fry areas, variations of depth and cover, clearing blocked drains and carriers, all involving considerable outlay of both time and money.

Which ever route is adopted if we are to retain the biodiversity of our lowland Wessex Rivers through the extremes of flow and temperature we are to face, there has to be considerably increased investment. Determining who should shoulder that financial burden needs to be established fairly rapidly if long term damage is to be prevented.

John Levell

Hydrometric Report - January.

In a word; dire.

2005 was the driest calendar year since 1933. This is the driest winter period since 1973, the 5th driest since 1909. South East reservoirs are 64% empty.
Southern England has been under the same high pressure area for 15 months

Rivers: Mean Monthly Flow Long Term Average (LTA)
R. Avon: 45%, Stour: 41%, Piddle: 50%, Frome 56%

Area Rainfall @ 70% - just 16mm to the Avon.

Soil Moisture Deficit. Above LTA and rising.

Groundwater: All sites below LTA and falling

With thanks to EA Blandford Hydrometry & Telemetry Team. (For the information, not the situation Ed.).

On average, every day 41 million litres (0.47 cubic metre per second) of Avon water are pumped from Knapp Mill to Fawley oil refinery as cooling water.

Irish Salmon Drift nets

We are devoting a lot of space to this subject. The process is at a critical stage and is about a lot of our fish.

In November the EU Commission was waiting for a response from the Irish Government to their letter of warning of proceedings. So were we and many others. The response was received and, once again, we are refused sight of it. Indeed, Minister Gallagher has refused to tell his own Parliament the contents of the Government’s reply. He also denied, during parliamentary questions, knowledge of the source of the EU complaint. We have been allowed a summary of the contents thus;

In their response they indicate that they now accept the view that the requirements of the Habitats Directive must be adhered to.
It points out that the Marine Minister; Pat the Cope Gallagher, fully accepts that more needs to be done to ensure the conservation of wild salmon. The Minister has provided specific terms to the National Salmon Commission, (NSC) the statutory body that recommends salmon quotas, requiring that any practical recommendations made to the Minister must be considered in relation to obligations under European Union legislation.
The Minister considers that these terms of reference will ensure that NSC advice for 2006 and beyond will take full account of the Habitats Directive. To avoid any doubt in this matter, the Minister intends writing to the Chairman of the NSC to ensure that it is aware of the need to have full regard to the requirements of the Habitats Directive. He will ask the Chairman to ensure that the specific requirements of the Directive are complied with by the Standing Scientific Committee and the NSC when compiling their advice for the Minister.
Since then a lot has been said and written but not, I believe, the promised letter.
During a warm exchange of views on Irish Radio which included efforts to discredit Orri Vigfusson’s sterling work, the Department of Communications Marine & Natural Resources (DCMNR) issued an extraordinary statement. Orri effectively deals with this nonsense in his statement which follows.
The National Salmon Commission (NSC) is tasked to advise the Minister what Total Allowable Catches (TAC) should be allowed by all methods, including angling, each year guided by scientific advice provided by the Standing Scientific Committee. (SSC). Traditionally the minister ignores that advice and, for reasons best known only to him, allows a TAC scores of thousands of Ireland’s and Europe’s salmon above the advice. The SSC have deliberated and issued what I can only describe as very confused advice to the NSC. Their report includes, for example, the following, when referring to the National Coded Wire Tag programme.

"There is good evidence from this programme that exploitation rates averaging 10 to 12 % (ICES 2005) may be possible on some UK stocks. Exploitation rates have not been calculated for other European stocks but tagged salmon originating from France, Spain, Germany, Norway and Denmark have been captured in Irish drift nets."

(Please remember that quoted figures take no account of illegal fishing and seal damage.)

"Data from the Burrishoole index site indicates that current marine survival is also lower than that recorded since 1970"(when the arctic feeding grounds were being fished.)
"Given the low level of stock generally, it is not currently possible to manage existing mixed stock fisheries (i.e. drift nets and some draft nets) such that only those stocks meeting their Conservation Limits will be caught and that only the number of fish in excess of the Conservation Limits for these stocks will be harvested."
What a sequence of ‘Scientific advice’ against any drift net fishing being allowed to continue. The SSC then goes on to advise the NSC to allow a TAC by all methods of 106,367 salmon! We, the EU, our friends doing such sterling work at the front line in Ireland, Orri and the NASF International coalition all await the advice offered to the Minister by the NSC and, perhaps more pertinent to the welfare of Europe’s salmon, the number of fish he allows to be killed.

And who will that minister be? As I write rumours of a re-shuffle of junior ministers in Ireland are circulating. Details of all of these matters have been drawn to the attention of our Minister Ben Bradshaw by personal letters but, like previous letters on this subject, with no response.

We have also written to Desmond Swayne MP (New Forest West) and Robert Key MP (Salisbury). They acknowledge the importance of the issues and have undertaken to take action. Desmond Swayne asked the following Parliamentary Question.;

"To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what representations she has made to the (a) government of Ireland and (b) EU Commission regarding the use of Irish salmon drift nets in relation to the Habitats Directive; and if she will make a statement."

And the reply? Mr Bradshaw

"I will reply to the hon. Member as soon as possible"

I have written personally to Joey Murrin, Chair of the NSC emphasising their responsibilities and the Minister’s undertakings. This has also been sent to Niall O’Maoileidigh, Chair of SCC. (The full text is in the News / Irish drift Net Campaign on our website).

We are not discouraged by this obfuscation, nor by the lack of interest at senior Government level. On the contrary, not one word has been written or spoken by the Irish Government denying their responsibilities under the Habitats Directive; both national and international Ours is just one contribution to a massive international campaign. Throughout we are supported, assisted and guided by our friends Noel Carr and Niall Greene in Ireland who themselves are waging an impressive and effective domestic campaign. Our EU Commission contact too gives us invaluable technical and legal guidance throughout this complex business.

To keep up to date and much more use our web site at www.wsrt.org.uk and the ‘Stop Now’ site at www.stopnow.ie for more comprehensive news.

Brian Marshall

The NASF view: a statement from Orri Vigfusson

For the last 20 years the future of the Atlantic salmon has been in jeopardy throughout its range. There is still a minority of rivers that contain sustainable stocks, but the numbers of their fish are dwindling rapidly. While substantial efforts are being made elsewhere to rebuild these stocks, the Irish salmon nets take the very fish that are most needed to spawn and support these restoration efforts.
Last week the Department of the Marine (DCMNR) in Ireland made an inaccurate and deliberately misleading statement. Indeed, the statement contradicts itself. Having declared that there was "there is no evidence to support Mr. Vigfússon´s claim that Irish drift nets are intercepting salmon that would otherwise return to European rivers" it immediately goes on to give details of tags, taken from fish the Irish drift nets have killed, that were returning to French and German rivers.
More significantly, the statement appears to ignore completely the fact that the UK is part of Europe, since 1402 tags from salmon released in English and Welsh rivers have also been reported from the Irish fishery in the past 5 years and 4,703 tags in the past 20 years.
During these 20 years, no less than 8,228 tags from salmon tagged in France, Spain, Germany, Denmark, Scotland, England and Wales were recovered from the Irish nets, In recent years, tagging has stopped in most regions of France as the Irish driftnets had wiped out much of their native stocks. Indeed, if one compares the ICES statistics of netting catches of a decade ago with the ICES figures of the last few years it is clear that in that time the Irish nets have increased their share of the total Southern European salmon catch from 26% to over 50%. Thus the 362 non-Irish Republic salmon tags that were returned from fish caught by Irish driftnets in 2003 represent a large proportion of salmon stocks native to these countries. There is, of course, no guarantee that these tags represent all or even the majority of their European neighbours tagged fish taken by Irish nets. The figures depend entirely on the number of tags that the captors of tagged salmon choose to return to the authorities. In addition, many other tagged fish will have been taken from the nets by seals and illegal fishing.
The Department of the Marine also falsely maintains that no EU country has to date raised this issue with the Irish Government. Again, nothing is further from the truth. There have been persistent discussions between UK and Irish Government officials for many years about the interception of UK salmon in Irish waters, as well as joint English / Irish scientific studies that provide the evidence that the Irish Department of the Marine is now apparently trying to disown.
The European Parliament held a special session last June where this issue was debated. The Governments of France, Spain and Germany have also expressed their concern to the Irish Government about the effects of the drift netting on their salmon rivers. The fact is that just about every salmon interest group in Europe has expressed their dissatisfaction with the Irish salmon policy. It negates the benefits that should be flowing from the domestic salmon restoration work these nations have introduced over the last decade including catch-and-release policies in all UK SAC rivers. It is ironic and indeed tragic that many of the fish that are produced and nurtured by conservation measures in these countries simply end up in the Irish nets.
Furthermore, diplomatic pressure on the Irish Republic from North America has intensified in recent months. The Irish delegation at the UN has received warnings, the Canadian Government has sent a strong written message to the Irish Government and the US Government continues to express its interest through diplomatic channels. The United States has designated the Atlantic salmon an endangered species and strictly prohibits any kind of fishing for Atlantic salmon. There are also serious risks that the Irish Government’s continued insistence on licensing drift netting will trigger a resumption of the high seas salmon fisheries.

"Avon Roaching is Fine Sport"

There is a danger that being a committee member of the Trust results in you being perceived as an exclusively salmon angler. This type of preconception is dangerous and divisive at a time when angling needs unity.
John Levell’s recent appeal for fresh blood to join our committee and subsequent emails about the sad state of the Avon’s roach population made me reminisce about roach.
As a boy I started fishing with the proverbial garden cane, a green and yellow cork float and worms from my grandfather’s compost heap. The River Soar flowed at the bottom of his garden in Leicestershire and was mine to fish when we stayed for summer holidays. I loved watching stripy perch, in the clear water, as they toyed with my worm and made my float bob. Perch were easy to catch, but the river also held silver scaled, red finned roach. These defeated my childish skills and their elusiveness made them more desirable. A friend of my grandfather’s lent me a copy of "Mr Crabtree Goes Fishing" and it became a bible. Lucky Peter was taken by Mr Crabtree to fish the Hampshire Avon and how I envied him his father and his opportunities! The chapter on trotting for roach in the Autumn still stirs a hunger in my heart for an Avon two pounder. As the book says "The fight of these roach will probably be a revelation to the newcomer from quieter waters. They have a fine muscular tone. In any case playing them at the end of a long line in this strong water has its excitements. Avon roaching is fine sport."
Age eleven I had my first proper tackle, chosen by Barry, a work colleague of my father and a good match fisherman. I became the proud owner of a 12 foot Milbro Solite float rod, a Mitchell 324 reel, a second-hand creel and a box of floats and shot. With this I fished the tiny River Bourne, near my parent’s home in Surrey. The River Wey was my nearest proper river. Small chub, dace, gudgeon and roach were my reward for careful trotting of these streams or free lining a worm. The river Bourne was tiny, no bigger than a large Avon carrier, and very clear. It rewarded careful stalking, with fine tackle, to visible fish. Several years’ patient work rewarded me with a monster roach of 10 oz! My approach to this Lilliputian river was heavily influenced by "Small Stream Fishing" by David Carl Forbes. This thoughtful book was beautifully illustrated by the authors own line drawings and I was deeply saddened by his death in a car crash in the 1970’s.
1976 brought the "great drought" and my little river Bourne shrunk away to nothing. I was invited to fish for a week with my tackle guide Barry and his son Stephen. This week brought my best ever catch of roach, but aged only 13 my youth made me fail to appreciate its quality. Stephen and I were left for a day at Frensham Great Pond, ledgering for tench. Despite the passage of 30 years the day is still vivid in my mind. By lunch time we were tench less and a breeze had risen to produce 4 inch wavelets on our shore. Stephen switched over to float tackle with a maggot and caster cocktail and soon netted a 1lb roach. I changed my tackle and soon we were catching solid silvery roach at almost every cast. My float was an Ivan Marks "waggler", free with tokens I had collected from the "Angling Times". Lacking waders we walked out in our wellies and trousers until we were thigh deep in the lake and could cover the feeding shoal more easily with our loose feed, aiming to keep the roach interested. There was a strangely satisfying moment as the float sank, I struck and my rod throbbed as a roach was hooked. The nearest sensation I can liken this to is that moment when a salmon first pulls on a sunk fly. The beauty of this net full of pound plus roach is still so emotive I had to get out my Milbro Solite float rod and relive the memory whilst writing this article!
I never returned to Frensham Ponds, but my desire to catch more such bewitching fish led me to the River Wey at Pyrford, a ranunculus tressed mini Avon. To improve my roaching I sought advice from Peter Wheat’s "Pelham Manual of River Coarse Fishing" and Dave Stuart’s "Roach" in the Osprey Anglers series. Bread flake and paste were patiently trotted, but ignored by any roach over 1 ½ lb. Even a new rod, a Bruce and Walker 11 foot Mk 1V Avon, made no difference.
Age 18 took me to university and I had little time to fish again until I was in my mid 20’s. Trout and grayling became my new loves, especially in the clear waters of Salisbury Angling Club’s West Amesbury fishery. These fish were certainly easier to catch than large roach. Love of something may lie dormant, but it never dies, it simply waits to be rekindled. On holiday in France in 1990 I jealously watched roach fisherman on the Cher, a tributary of the Loire. My broken French was enough to equip me with a telescopic roach pole and some delicate floats to match. Many warm afternoons were idled away fishing for small roach and catfish in the slow water above a weir. Fishing below the weir I hooked a better fish which took all my skill to land on 2lb line in fast water with no net. At 1 ½ lb it was my smallest ever barbel. The French angles were amazed when I returned it and offered to give my wife barbel recipes so I never wasted such a good meal again! I often found myself rereading my copies of "Angling" magazine from the 1970’s, especially the articles by Dave Stuart. Mostly about chub, barbel and roach, but also about Avon salmon fishing, including his capture of a 39lb spring salmon on the Severals Fishery. For me he epitomised the sort of good all round angler the Avon could produce and I aspired to be, capable of trotting with a centre pin, working a rolling ledger or spinning a Devon minnow; enjoying each species of fish for the pleasure their capture can bring, unfettered by the stupid prejudices that beset too many game and coarse anglers. For the last 3 years I have finally been in a position to emulate my childhood heroes by having a Saturday rod on the Severals Fishery. Ian Ashby and I fish and walk the river together. Last year we saw perhaps 6 salmon, many chub and barbel, some dace and no roach. Considering how tiny the Avon salmon run is, it is scandalous that they outnumber roach in some parts of the river.
I am glad that the roach’s sad decline may at last be recognised and addressed. To lose these gentle and delicate fish from a river would be very sad. Hopefully we are moving away from any concept of single species conservation to appreciating that we need to work on the river as a whole and value all fish, even if we do not always fish for them.
To understand what we have lost I can do no better than quote from an article by John Byfield about the Avon’s decline. Entitled "Lament" it was published in "Angling" magazine in the mid 1970’s.
"Coarse fishing took more of a back seat during this period, partly because of restricted time, but also, I regret to say, because we took it all for granted as something which would continue indefinitely....We thought nothing of a catch of 50-70lb of prime roach, dace and chub, plus pike, perch and grayling....I remember one occasion when my much missed friend, the late Hubert Wheeler, caught so many fish in one outing in 1950 at Downton that Gregor Mackenzie had to use a half-submerged punt to transport the fish to another part of the river. Included in that catch were 23 roach between 2lb and 3lb 1 oz."

Michael Twitchen

Colin Gilson with a brace of 3 pounders

Colin Gilson with his magnificent brace of three pound roach, probably the best brace ever from the Avon at 3.8 and 3.15.

Threats

There are a number of very worrying activities coinciding in which concerned organisations, including Wessex Salmon, have become involved on behalf of our rivers and environment. We are very active in all of the following cases and borrow from the Salmon and Trout Association their excellent summaries for your information.

(1) Gyrodactylus salaris

A large tranche of the salmon farms in Scotland are owned by Norwegian interests. Norway is host to gyrodactylus salaris, a parasite fatal to salmon. There are plans to allow the live imports of salmon and salmon ova from Norway to Scotland. WSRT, with others, are very active in support of moves to ban this practise. Here is a view from S&TA and ACA.

Gyrodactylus salaris is a freshwater parasitic fluke of Atlantic salmon. Its native host is the Baltic strain of Atlantic salmon, in which the parasite does not cause clinical disease. However, the transfer of the parasite to Norwegian Atlantic salmon strains in the late 1970’s produced disease outbreaks resulting in an average loss of 89% of salmon from infected rivers. The Atlantic strain of salmon present in Norway, are the same as in the UK. Experimental exposure of UK stocks to G. salaris has shown they are susceptible to the parasite.
Government campaigns have been directed at anglers and canoeists, correctly urging them to clean their equipment after contact with Norwegian waters. However, fears are growing that the movement of eggs and live fish between the Norwegian and Scottish salmon farming industries carries with it the risk, which we should not be taking, of introducing G. salaris into our fisheries and salmon stocks. The net economic capital value of salmon fishing in the UK has been estimated to be over £250 million. G. salaris infects the skin, gills and fins of salmon, trout and some other species of freshwater fish and it could decimate salmonid stocks throughout the UK.
The Salmon & Trout Association takes very seriously the potential threats to UK salmon stocks and before Christmas Paul Knight met with Defra Fisheries 2 and Andrew Wallace, Director, Association of Scottish Fishery Board to discuss our G. salaris concerns. In brief discussions included:-contingency plans in place to stop G. salaris entering our rivers. In particular the veterinary inspections procedures both here and the country of origin. Seeking to stop the import of live fish. Co-ordinated approach with Scotland
In addition it is taking a leading role within Fisheries and Angling Conservation Trust discussions and also working closely with the ACA who have recently issued a press release on the subject.
The ACA has threatened to take legal action against anyone who brings a deadly new fish parasite to the UK. Gyrodactylus Salaris is a real threat to salmon fisheries in the UK. It has cost Norway more than £350m so far and Norwegian rivers, apparently cleaned and re-stocked, have become re-infected. It would be catastrophic if the parasite reached our shores, as it spreads very rapidly through river systems and is initially difficult to detect. Mark Lloyd, ACA Executive Director, said:

"It is quite clear that G. salaris has the potential to cause untold damage if it were to reach the UK. The ACA’s message to the salmon farming industry is clear: if infected fish or eggs are imported from Norway, the ACA will seek many tens of millions of pounds in compensation for our members for their loss of angling amenity and the diminution in capital value of fisheries. The ACA is working closely with other members of the Fisheries and Angling Conservation Trust (FACT) to do everything we can to prevent this nightmare scenario occurring."

WSRT have also suggested that the enormous risks of litigation and damages be drawn to the attention of the insurance industry, acting for salmon farms. Many millions of pounds could be involved. We have also consulted the EU Commission with threats to SAC rivers in mind. Only if the importers are deemed to be reckless could the EU take action. If the importers are warned of the dangers and proceed regardless to infect UK rivers is that not reckless?

Prevention is imperative. As Norway demonstrates, cure is impossible.

(2) CEH CLOSURE PROPOSED

In December the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) released plans for the future of its wholly owned research centre the Centre for Ecology & Hydrology (CEH) which involves site closures and a reduction in staff from 600 to 400. The NERC claims it has known for some time that the CEH current structure is unsustainable.
In short the proposal is for CEH to move away from its present structure of eight research sites plus its headquarters site. The new proposal is for four sites (one of which would include the head-quarters) and staff numbers to reduce from currently 600 to 400. The four sites to be retained are: Edinburgh, Lancaster, Bangor and Wallingford (which would be the Headquarters site) and the sites to be closed: Banchory, Dorset, Monks Wood, Oxford and the CEH Director's office in Swindon.
Nationally the Salmon & Trout Association, along with a number of other prominent organisations, is very concerned at the potential impact on both current and future scientific projects (not just fish related) and are taking the opportunity to make their views known by responding to a public consultation exercise. Britain’s best known naturalist Sir David Attenborough is reported in the press as saying the proposals were "very disturbing indeed". One of the highlights of a recent "Life in the Undergrowth" episode was the story of how the large blue butterfly which became extinct in Britain in 1979, has been reintroduced thanks to work by Jeremy Thomas of Winfrith (Dorset) research centre.
The S & TA believes the proposed changes shows a lack of commitment to the management and conservation of the freshwater aquatic environment, which is particularly frustrating in the light of Government’s responsibilities under the European Union’s Water Framework (WFD) and Habitats Directives. It also shows a lack of vision in the need to research the potential impacts of global warming on vulnerable aquatic ecosystems.
Under WFD, UK rivers must reach ‘good ecological status’ by 2015, yet the Environment Agency (EA) admits that 95% would fail that target today. If the decisions required to turn this situation round are to be based on sound scientific evidence (the only conceivable scenario), then it is highly irresponsible to downgrade research and monitoring in the way envisaged.
The Wessex Branch of the S & TA is equally concerned particularly as the CEH’s Dorset Research site is in our area and has carried out valuable research over many years into various aspects of river ecology, specialising in chalk streams. Recently they have focussed on the south coast salmon decline, and in particular on the impact of diffuse pollution on salmon spawning success and juvenile recruitment. As part of this work they have been tagging parr and utilising the new smolt counter/bubble curtain technology which permits them to count juveniles out to sea and the same fish returning as adults. Whilst no announcement has yet to be made on the future of such research it would be a travesty if the project work on our chalkstreams was to be discontinued.

Consequently the Wessex Branch has written to NERC outlining a number of issues relating to the Dorset site and in response to NERC’s overall proposals stating the following concerns:-

We have urged NERC to reconsider its proposals or provide a reassurance that our concerns are unfounded.
This is a public consultation exercise and we encourage other local organisations and individuals to make their voice heard by writing to: CEH consultation, Natural Environment Research Council, Polaris House, Swindon SN2 1EU. Deadline for receipt of letters 6pm 15th February 2006. Further information is available from accessing the CEH web site: www.ceh.ac.uk.

By way of an example of some of the work being undertaken by the CEH Research Centre in Dorset, in collaboration with CEFAS and EA, is a project which includes the re-introduction of salmon into the Tadnoll Brook, a part of the Frome catchment. A few Frome salmon have been stripped this winter and eggs placed in stream-side incubator boxes. The performance of which is to be closely monitored and through the use of passive integrated transponders (PIT) tags and tag detection methods survival rates will be assessed at all stages of the salmon’s life cycle.

Important work if we are to further develop our understanding of the issues to be addressed. Without this knowledge our ability to provide a helping hand in restoring salmonid stocks to levels of abundance will be severely hampered. We do not know what the impact on such projects will be in the event of the closure of the CEH Dorset operation but we can be quite rightly concerned and take the opportunity raise these concerns before it is too late. The Rt. Hon. Margaret Beckett MP; replying to WSRT’s letter of objection to these proposals, describes NERC as independent from government and the top level decision making body.. She also says "Defra does not object in principle to the NERC proposal."

(3) CANOE ACCESS

In the latter part of last year John Groggan MP introduced a Parliamentary Early Day Motion (EDM) in support of demands being made by canoeists for free access to English and Welsh waterways for all water users. To date 101 MP’s have pledged their support. It urges Government to extend legislation on access to the countryside to allow canoeists and users of other non-powered craft the same access rights as those provided for walkers. Fisheries and Angling Conservation Trust (FACT), of which the Salmon & Trout Association is a very active participating member, is working closely with Martin Salter MP (Parliamentary Spokesman for Angling) and this has resulted in an amendment to the original Early Day Motion (EDM 957) being tabled which reads:-

FACT’s amendment reads, "urges the Government not to alter riparian rights; recommends that any increase in access to canoeists and non-powered craft be by voluntary access agreements only, which have been proven to work in both England and Wales; believes that the users of all canoes and non-powered craft on inland waterways should be subject to the same restrictions as anglers, and penalties for infringements; further believes that the Environment Agency should have the power to close any waterway to any craft in the interests of protecting sensitive aquatic environments; and considers that, notwithstanding the forthcoming Olympic Games, it should be remembered that angling is a sport which has 4 million participants in England and Wales with an annual economy of £3.5 billion and which has had great success in recent World Championships."

Salisbury MP, Robert Key, is supportive of our stance and has signed up to the amendment. Whilst anglers are perfectly willing to seek voluntary joint access agreements with other water users, sustainable protection of the aquatic environment must be paramount, together with the proper regulation of all craft, whether or not they are powered, on inland waters. Angling is heavily regulated, and provides £17m net income to the Environment Agency’s Fisheries Department. Anglers also provide many times that figure each year through fishing fees for habitat management and environmental protection, which gives the sport genuine stakeholder status in the aquatic environment. Other water users should be made to take a similar responsibility for their environment.

Individuals and associations are encouraged to write to their local MP. Find them at www.locata.co.uk/commons) seeking their support to the amended EDM. A draft letter is also available for download from the www.salmon-trout.org

John Slader

An update from the local team at the Environment Agency, South Wessex.

The survey programme for 2005 was completed. We are waiting for age data from the licensing centre and the final redd count data from the fieldwork to complete the analysis. The report should be available by the end of February. If you would like a copy, contact Rachel Jacobs on 01258 483373
By the time you read this, project bids will have been submitted for further work to ease fish migration on the Avon at Burgate, and at Loud’s Mill on the Frome. The work at Burgate will also involve spawning enhancement.
Jon Bilbrough was appointed in December as the Project Officer to commission and test fish counting equipment at Knapp Mill on the River Avon. The counter data will be used in conjunction with net and rod catches to assess compliance with the salmon conservation limit. So, I hope it is now ‘full steam ahead’ for capturing the run of fish this spring and summer.
We have produced the first of an occasional print run of a team Newsletter, giving brief information on a range of work undertaken by the Agency’s Fisheries, Recreation & Biodiversity team. If you want a copy, contact Neil on 01258 483486, Can I remind you that two Agency groups exist to raise fishery issues in the South Wessex area? The Fishery Forum covers all aspects of fishery work, and meets twice a year, while the newly formed Avon Salmon Working Group is mainly focussing, as its name suggests, on salmon on the Avon. Wessex Salmon and Rivers Trust is represented on both, so make full use of these groups to raise and debate issues.

And finally, pray for rain - flows are below average and groundwater recovery appears extremely tentative as we move into Spring.

Judith Crompton Team Leader, Fisheries, Recreation & Biodiversity

Trout in Schools

As I write, our batches of brown trout eggs have just been delivered to three local schools, and we are looking forward to a third successful year of rearing baby trout from eyed ova to fry in the classroom.
The eggs were generously donated again by Trafalgar Fisheries and are developing in equipment that the Tesco sponsorship has paid for at Applemore College, Priestlands School, and Ringwood School. Adrian Simmonds is using our gear to raise fry from some of his own ova at Great Wishford Primary, near Salisbury.
The success of the scheme at Ringwood School contributed to the school gaining the prestigious Green Flag Award for promoting environmental awareness amongst its students and staff.
The arrival of the eggs at Ringwood soon had younger students fascinated and asking questions about survival rates and release dates, and sixth formers getting into discussions about triploidy and issues of genetics! A team of willing students are planning out their rota for caring for the fish on a daily basis, cleaning out the tanks and logging the progress of the trout.

Hugh Miles will be coming in to film the care and subsequent release of the fish, and we expect this to become a sequence in his forthcoming TV series about fish, fishing and fishermen.

Pete Reading

Researching the Past to Protect the Future

[sic] "So violent a storm of rain, attended with thunder and lightning, fell near Fordingbridge and Ringwood in Hampshire, that the water of the brooks running from the New Forest into the river Avon, were in less than hour's time raised to the height of ten or twelve feet perpendicular. At Redbrook, a waggon with five horses, passing that brook, were with great difficulty saved from being carried away by the rapidity of the water, which rose so high, that it ran through the house of a farmer there, at least a foot in depth, and in a house opposite was near halfway between the floor and the cieling [sic]. At Stuckton, a gentleman being stopt in his journey by the flood, was obliged to rest in his chariot all night. Great quantities of hay, and thread which was whitening in the meadows near Fordingbridge, were swept away by the inundation, as were also great numbers of hogs, together with their sties. At Gorley eighteen hogs were carried off at once, but saved by the diligence of a neighbouring farmer. The river was swelled to such a height, that it is probable the mills thereon would have been born down by the violence of the stream, which would have carried all before it, had not the diligence of the people who attended all night, opening flood-gates and hatches, abated its force by dispersing its waters..."

Annual Register Vol. 3 1760 Chronicle page 118/119

This passage from the 1760’s highlights many things that we are trying to achieve in the project. Not only is it an excellent contemporary account of a rather dramatic flood event, it also highlights how people tried to deal with the flood and the personal impact of the flooding. There is an increasing realisation that our past holds many keys to helping us prepare for the future. Over the next eighteen months the project will be collecting archive material from local communities in order to help the Environment Agency with its flood risk management. We see it very much about working in partnership with communities to ensure that the collected archive is a resource for the community as well as being of use to the Agency.
I recently spent a pleasant morning with Brian, briefly exploring some of the New Forest streams and was impressed in the way that the Trust is already working in partnership with the Agency and other organisations. It would be a real bonus for us to work with the Trust in collecting an archive based around the Avon and other rivers that you are involved with. Most of our project groups are town or village based and it would be exciting to have a river community working with us.

Dave Hornby, Flood Risk Management Mapping & Data Officer, developed the project from an archive produced by Gillingham Museum Trust. After a public meeting that raised questions about the flood map, the Trust produced a detailed flood history for their community with over one hundred photographs going back to 1917. We thought that if one community could produce such a useful document, maybe others could be encouraged to do so as well. We are aiming to work with as many community groups as possible with the hope of discovering new flood information. The reports will illustrate how flooding patterns have changed over the years, how communities have dealt with flooding and will allow us to better manage flood risk for the future.
As the focus is on the communities researching their own flood histories, Dave was able to obtain a Heritage Lottery Grant to provide funds to assist them and, early in September, I was appointed to help manage the project.
Although it has a major effect on people’s lives, flooding is quite transitory and can be very localised. Contemporary records collected at the time of an event can give us valuable information about the flooding sequence and extent. This is clearly illustrated by the Martinstown event. In 1955, 11 inches of rain fell over Martinstown, near Dorchester. This is still a UK record for rainfall in a twenty-four hour period. This compares with 9 inches for the more famous Lynton and Lynmouth event, three years earlier. What is surprising about this event is that within five miles of the village less than half that volume of rain fell, while in Wareham, approximately twenty miles from Martinstown less than an inch of rain fell.
Photographs are the obvious way of collecting information about past flood events and will form a major part of the archives. Not only do they show what has or has not flooded; they can also record the progress of the flood and can provide bench marking to estimate the height of the flood. This benchmarking of levels enables the Agency to improve the accuracy of its flood risk maps and places the flood event in relation to other events. Photographs of flooding in Salisbury in 1915 have thrown up several anomalies and these could be explained by comparing photographs from other towns and villages in the same catchment.

Modern technology has given us the camcorder and video footage that can complement the information obtained from still photographs. Moving images can show the flow of the water and can give valuable information about the dynamic nature of the flood event. A video already collected as part of the project was shot by a local farmer and dramatically shows the floods in Swanage in 1990. We are also hoping that the project will turn up old ciné films from the 1970’s, 60’s, 50’s or even earlier to enable us to build our understanding of the more historic events.
As the memories of events fade so does the accuracy of the recollections. Consequently, contemporary records of flood events are crucial in understanding the course of events. This is particularly true of events outside living memory. Good examples of this are the accounts of the 1841 floods on Salisbury Plain. These floods were unusual in that the flooding was instantaneous rather than the rather slow build up more associated with chalk catchments. The accounts give details of how the villages flooded, the speed of the water and the depth it reached.
In order to produce accurate information the Agency needs to gather reliable data. However, the problem for past flood events is that this data may not have been collected. Much of the official data held does not go back past the 1960’s and so any information that supports the more anecdotal and visual historic records will help build our understanding of flooding. These records could include rainfall data, river levels, dates when springs begin to flow and ground water levels. All of this information can be used to help validate the various models the Agency produce.
Project groups have already commenced in Christchurch, Wimborne, Portland, Bridport and Blandford with future groups being planned for Salisbury, Devizes, Amesbury and Tisbury. In addition to the records gathered by the community, we also hope to collect information from individuals who send information into the Environment Agency directly.

At the end of the project the collected archives will be put onto CD-ROM and distributed to the community groups involved. They will also be given to museums, local history libraries and schools within the area. As well as creating a lasting historical record of flood events that will be of use to the Environment Agency and local communities the hope is that the project will also help raise awareness of flooding in the communities that collect the archives

I will have a small display explaining about the project at your AGM. If anyone has any interesting material that they think may be of interest I would be happy to look at it then or discuss the project further. As I said earlier it would be lovely to get a real river community collecting an archive. I can be contacted at Blandford on 01258 483462

Nick Reed. Environment Agency: South Wessex Community Flood Archive Project Manager

Fish Momitoring

Rachael Jacobs, Ecological Appraisal Officer at E A. Blandford has allowed early look at the 2005 survey results. We have room only for the briefest extracts. The full report will be available on the EA. Web site; www.environment-agency.gov.uk .

Avon Salmon No Long Term Data set. Highest mean catch rate since 1991
Regression Analysis. Uses data from 5 sites
Positive upward trend in salmon parr numbers since 1994,
Five of the original 13 sites were re-established in 2005
Threes sites on Longford Estate - permission to fish denied
R.Avon Based on Timed runs, data provided as number of fish caught per minute. Fished one month earlier, less weed, on average catches doubled on last year (2004)
Similar pattern of catch rates. Roach - predominately caught in the top and bottom reach (152 of the 175) (Our emphasis Ed.)
Avon side streams Catch dominated by juveniles, particularly chub, barbel and pike. Dace - caught cross section of population. Roach - only 11 caught - insufficient numbers. Juvenile barbel @ 5 Sites (0+, 1+)
A7R (Royalty to Clay Pool & S5R Ringwood to confluence of the Bickerley - appears to be free passage of fish - bleak present in Stour and in Avon below Great Weir. Chub, barbel and dace most common.
River Stour S1R fiddleford to Child Oakford & S4R Dudsbury to Merrytown. Highest catch rates. Catches dominated by roach, chub and dace. Juveniles of all species present. Low catch on tidal run (S5R) - caught tide wrong.

We are grateful to Davis Tackle of Christchurch for their support of this newsletter.

Wessex Salmon and Rivers Trust, and the editor in particular, are grateful to all those who have contributed to this newsletter or provided information. Opinions expressed and/or statements made by individuals are not those of the committee of trustees collectively unless it is specifically indicated otherwise.