KEEP THE TRADITION OF SALMON NETTING ON THE TAMAR TAVY

Contact the author of the petition

This discussion topic has been automatically created of petition KEEP THE TRADITION OF SALMON NETTING ON THE TAMAR TAVY.

Netsman Bill

#51

2014-04-01 17:31

It still seems that there is an un-necessary and distasteful us and them in this discussion about netting. Please remember that both fisheries have a right to take salmon from the river. Sadly the Salmon numbers are not what they were in the 1970's and there is need for both fisheries to show some restrictions in their takings. I understand that a majority of Fly fishermen kill no more than one salmon a year and some return all that they catch. I have read of some Scottish research that shows that most fish released survive very well to go on to spawn. So rod fishermen for their £80 licence are fairly good at conservation. I also understand that some of the river owners carry out important work such as trash dam removal, cleaning of spawning beds and fencing to keep stock out of the river. I suppose that the rod fishermen carry out quite a lot of important work to help maintain our Salmon stocks and we should give them some credit for this, along with their self imposed conservation measures. Netsmen must stick together and play our own part in conservation to ensure that Salmon continue to run the river and both fisheries remain sustainable. Lets not fight each other but work with the rods to try and bring our Salmon numbers back to their former levels. We must remember that rod fisherman are not allowed to sell the fish that they catch so they can not earn any money from their sport, which is a benefit that the netsmen are allowed.

In reply to number 49 I have followed the fish counter figure since they started, and actually wish that there was a counter on my own river. There is little doubt that Gunnislake counter under reads in high flows and Tom's paper re-calculates this using the flow data and the research of Dr Solomon et al. Without this recalculation the Tamar would be considered "at risk" and there would be no fishing. Whilst this re-calculation has an element of caution in it, it also reflects some uncertainty in its calculations. However if the Tamar did not have a counter the EA would have to calculate the Conservation limit based on Rod catches as they do for most other rivers. This would probably lead to the Tamar being put at risk again, so the Toms recalculation is in everyone's favour. Luckily the EA spotted the errors in the counter and made corrections to accommodate these inaccuracies. I would urge everyone to read the index river reports, and find out in detail how the counter is validated and compared with trapping data. It then becomes apparent that the counter provides the best estimate of the stock returning that we can get.
I suspect that the main problem that has caused the declining stocks is a combination of Marine survival (as calculated from the index river schemes),poor (but improving) water quality and silted spawning beds. It is not current exploitation by rods or nets and is unlikely to be the catching of gravid fish caught. The season for rod fishing ends, by and large, before fish become Gravid which tend to be in the uppermost reaches which I believe are not fished.

Guest

#52

2014-04-01 18:43

I would not expect the EA or their partners to own up to a dereliction especially as they disclaim any responsibility for any loss,damage costs or claims arising either directly or indirectly from the counter data's use or interpretation. Of course the assumption that fish travel up stream on the Cornwall bank was the conclusion of a tracking programme performed years ago and now some what discredited by the Tom conclusions.As any EA official would know the use of rod catch CPUE is not a perfect science as it does not take in every element and comnditions.
Redd counts are no longer performed and electro fishing is only effective in shallow water,so
apart from Gunnislake supporting factors are questionable to say the least. Of course the fact thatr its taken nineteen years to find out that the figures were compromised a fact that mustbe investigated and compared to the annual rainfall and seasonal high water events between 1994 and 2004.I'm amazed that a Minister will allows defra to rule given the facts on Gunnislake and I hope the netsmen will tell him so tomorrow.I hope they will also ask him if he has any intention of becoming an ambassador for the Angling Trust especially as he will give the final deliberation on the NLO.As an avid reader of Trout and Salmon magazine and the river reports I find it unfair that netsmen will be limited to twenty salmon per season while anglers potentially can catch 1 per day between June and October.But this is the usual net bashing experienced throughout the British Isles a 90% reduction in netting effort and a 10% increase in rod licence uptake.The intention is obvious.

Guest

#53 Subject

2014-04-01 19:15

Why would a rod fisherman want to catch one fish per day between June and October. He can't sell the fish, and he certainly can't eat them all. Most rod Fishermen are keen on conservation and apart from the cost of a days fishing (£50 at Endsleigh) they could probably not afford to fish every day. Netsman Bill has a valid point the Nets should not be fighting the Rods but working with them and the EA for the conservation of Salmon Stocks for future generations to enjoy as well.

guest

#54 Re: Subject

2014-04-02 06:29

#53: Guest - Subject May I add, if a rod fisherman was in a position to fish every day he would not catch many fish in a season as the stock numbers are just not there. He would be lucky to catch 10 fish, fishing all day, everyday for a complete season and would be expected to return 7 out of 10. In most cases now all are returned. I know many anglers who fished the Tamar for upwards of 3 weeks last year and caught NO fish. The Tavy Salmon are critically low also.  Its a sad situation for all involved, but whats more important for the Salmon?

 

undercover economist

#55 Tamar Salmon

2014-04-02 06:47

I do not know the river that well but have read all the posts with great interest. I can understand why the traditions of the netsman are being appealed by some here, but also understand the plight of the salmon who's numbers have declined enormously.
However, I can not see how the arguments for the wealthy against the poor are in anyway valid? I presume, that due to Salmon fishing with rod a line, many "working class" people are in employment. Who looks after the river, who maintains the river banks, access, habitats. What about all the staff who are in employment for the service industry, hotels, guest houses and such. What about the small independent outdoor shops who service the visiting tourist anglers. What about the restaurants who cater for the visiting anglers. It seems that the netsman, 3 in number, are a very tiny piece of the Cornish and Devonian jigsaw who could potentially have a hugely pernicious effect to the SW economy. Think of the outcome for the hundreds of working men and women who will lose their lively hood in the southwest if the nets are allowed to take, what seems like a precious resource out of the economy. Not to mention, a creature that has been part of the river for centuries. This as a modern world where we all need to stand up and protect the greater good, hopefully common sense will prevail. Best wishes

Tree hugger

#56

2014-04-02 08:48

I think that the Gunnislake counter figures from 1994-2004 are fairly irrelevant to No 52's argument. We must remember that the 25 netsmen in 2004 all voluntarily accepted large sums of money not to fish for 10 years. This was spurred on by their declining catches and the un-viaability of the commercial net fishery. Much of this money was raised by the Riparian owners in an attempt to help stop the decline Salmon numbers. At the same time Riparian owners imposed strict catch and release to help conserve Salmon. The Riparian owners did not have to fund the net buyout, but chose to, to help stop the decline of Salmon in the river and avoid unnecessary hardship on the Netsmen whose livelihood could have questionably depended on netting .
I agree with the points raised by the "undercover economist". And again re-iterate the point made by Netsman Bill, that the proposed NLO does not stop netsmen fishing or do away with any of their rights. It does however defy all logic and sound conservation to have a commercial fishery operating which is unviable and has the potential to threaten fragile Salmon Stocks.

Guest

#57

2014-04-02 09:27

Funny because everyone suggests that it's been a bumper year for the rods but you cant have it both ways stocks are either improving or not after a ten year netting cessation.If they're notwhy the hell are EA GIA and European Structural Funds being spent to improve angling access and riparian assets and why are netsmen being curtailed for another TEN years.Netsmen are and always have been the scapegoats for poor conservation decisions taken to appease riparian owners rather than address salmon stocks.Are these regulations proportional? Certainly not.Why didn't all you conservation minded anglers agree to a ten year cessation as suggested by the nets in the 1975 FFA Review? Nets and Rods treated equally and suffering the same hardship but no the lucrative tax free,rate free,vat free existence of the gentry was threatened so EA had to find a way of avoiding court action.Catch and release with an added bonus of keeping 34% of fish caught was born.So lets get this right 54 you would keep three fish per season not a bad return on your £80but you multiply three fish by the extra new rod licence uptake and you far exceed the proposed quota for the Tamar Nets.Fair and proportional? Imagine if all rod licence holders took three fish(perhaps they are) would EA ban fishing not on your nelly.


Guest

#58

2014-04-02 09:47

55 Do you know how many salmon there are ? How are these figures calculated? Catch statistics?
If theres a decline in netting effort there is therefore a decline in catch statistics but in reality there is an actual increase in stock numbers? So a 90% reduction in netting effort actual realises an unaccounted 90% increase in salmon stocks.Smoke and mirrors just like the case being used to get rid of the Tamar nets.As for Gunnislake I can't accept the argument that the false data is not relevant? 15 netsmen lost their livelihood.

Orri

#59

2014-04-02 12:40

53 When have the angling lobby or river trusts ever offered to work with netsmen on anything?
As a past net representive I have attended public enquiries and Net Limitation Orders and as
an angler I have attended angling AGM's and presentations and I can assure you there is no will
from anglers to work with netsmen in any way or form in fact they are working vigorously to bring about their demise at every level.Even the EA offer very little assistance to netsmen and its not surprising as most of their fishery staff are anglers themselves,come from an angling backround or have done their training in angling establishments they are by vocation anti-net.When the 1975 Freshwater Fishery Act was being compiled (yes I took part)you'd be surprised how much horsetrading took place especially as the ACT later recognised three distinct groups nets,rods and owners two contributed to the RA/NRA/EA running costs through licence duty and one did not and the same applies today yet one of those recognised groups have now been nigh on eliminated by a EA,rods and owners stitch up proving my point precisely.
Welsh Jane.

#60

2014-04-02 14:12

As a regular visitor to Celtic Cornwall I was appalled to read that the powers to be intend closing the Tamar salmon netsmen down what a shame.We in Wales embrace our unique net heritage with coracle centres and museums plus we supply the superb 'west wales caught salmon and sewin(sea trout)'around the world and with our welsh lamb we have set up a thriving niche market.

You could have done the same with 'Tamar salmon and sea trout' it only takes a little effort and will.Summer will not be the same without that visit to see the salmon netsmen.I feel for those fishermen losing their jobs. Pob lwc cariads.

Fisherman's friend

#61

2014-04-02 14:25

59 When have the netsmen ever offered to work with the angling lobby or River's Trusts? Netsmen have certainly been invited to the Tamar AGM before, but never attended.Have the netsmen ever invited the Rods?
58 Run sizes in recent years have been calculated using the Data from the Gunnislake counter. Where there is no counter it is calculated from Rod catches as per the CL Model. A reduction in netting effort has no influence on the CL calculation Model so there is no smoke and mirrors.
The EA have fought very hard to allow netting to continue on the Tamar against tremendous pressure from rods, owners and conservation bodies. It should be seen as a tribute to the EA that the current NLO allows netting to return. I personally look forward to watching the netsmen at work and this will bring back fond childhood memories. Netsman Bill has the right ideas,and I welcome the return of Salmon netting as a hobby.
For the Record the Rods killed 37 Salmon in the 2013 season - hardly a bumper year!!!
Orri

#62

2014-04-02 14:32

Well now we have the EA's attention perhaps you can explain why it took you nineteen years to find the fault either you knew and it suited your purpose or more likely you failed to notice.
Grumpy

#63

2014-04-02 14:37

Welsh Jane please insure you know what you are talking about. There is no Plan to close salmon netting on the Tamar at present. In fact the plan is to allow netting to return this June.There are no fishermen losing there jobs and netting has not taken place on the Tamar for the Last ten years. This petition is a farce, and nothing but misleading. The proposed Net limitation order allows netting to return this season, after a 10 year break (for which netsmen were handsomely compensated) to allow stocks to improve. The NLO review should be welcomed by Tamar netsmen and rod fishermen alike.
Fisherman's friend

#64

2014-04-02 14:52

Orri, I am afraid I have nothing to do with the EA, so you have not got their attention yet. I can tell you that calculations of Conservation Limits is a highly complex process and is done on an internationally recognised model. The counter figures at Gunnislake and the other 4 index rivers are a way of checking the model for accuracy. It is because of the counter figures that and particularly Tom's re-evaluation which is only sound because of the historic data collected over the last 19 years that Netting is being allowed to continue. IF, as is the case on many other rivers the CL model was calculated using only Rod caught Data the taking of all fish on the Tamar would have to cease. I would therefore advise that you think carefully, and re-read the NLO review together with Tom's re-evaluation before Pooh-poohing the counter data.

Guest

#65

2014-04-02 15:02

Well only the EA knows the formulae how they collate and calculate the CL as they have certainly never divulges this before always ducking the question when asked. They keep it to themselves so that everyone believes the integrity of their formulae Now if we look beyond the Tamar and look at the bigger picture of UK stocks if the netting effort is reduced by 90% and the catch statistics are used to calculate the overall size of the uk salmon stock the 90% saved by the reduction in net effort is not counted.This was acknowledged in a conversation with an Ices scientist in Edinburgh.

Orri

#66

2014-04-02 15:29

There seems to be a lot of threats going on in Cornwall so we must be touching a nerve I know and understand what your saying 64 and I'm saying the methology is rigged to suit the argument if all the resistivity counters are inaccurate most of Nasco's calculations, future predictionsand rationale are incorrect.Because if the main component is faulty how are Nasco going to provide an overview of salmon catches, the status of the stocks, evaluate the management measures, provide age specific stock conservation limits.All the figures past and present will be compromised.


Guest

#67 Re:

2014-04-02 18:20

#60: Welsh Jane. - What are the Salmon and seatrout stocks like Jane? are they nearly extinct?

 

piorot

#68 Re:

2014-04-02 18:39

#37: Orri - Interesting point Orri, have any of the netsman talked about on this comments forum ever been prosecuted for illegally poaching salmon?

 

Orri

#69

2014-04-03 05:55

68 Have any anglers been caught without a licence this year? Have any anglers been caught selling their fish?
Orri.

#70

2014-04-03 06:00

Well good luck in Bodmin today lads and don't let EA officials take the lead they've had their say now you've got half an hour to put your case.
welsh Jane
Guest

#71

2014-04-03 06:06

Theres plenty of fish in Wales thats why all you anglers come here to catch our sea trout isn't it I don't see them stopping you though.So perhaps Tourism is as important to Wales as it is to Cornwall.

poirot

#72 Re:

2014-04-03 06:19

#69: Orri - I would sincerely hope not as that would be illegal poaching Orri.You seem to know a lot about this, as my per earlier question which you have not answered, do you know if any of the netsman applying for a license have been caught or convicted of illegal salmon poaching in the past? If so, it would make a complete mockery of this petition and insult the intelligence, and trust, of supporters for legal netting. Perhaps interested parties should investigate further as you have not clarified this very important question.

 

Ianto

#73

2014-04-03 06:27

Matt Hayes even calls the Tywi 'his river' while fishing in Russia.Chwarae teg Sian bwynt da.
guest

#74 Re:

2014-04-03 06:27

#71: welsh Jane - So you have completely contradicted yourself then Jane. There are lots of fish in Welsh rivers, so sustainable fishing by nets and plentiful supply of fish for visiting anglers to catch (and return in 90% case of seatrout as they are a valuable resource to Wales) which contributes a large economical boost for local tourist services. Take the fish away Jane, what do you have? Rivers devoid of precious fish stocks which should have been protected (OOPPSS too late!!!) thus, no visiting anglers, no revenue for this Welsh tourist sector. The EXACT point for conservation of Tamar salmon Jane.

 

Orri

#75

2014-04-03 06:30

It's your point you've made it obviously you have the evidence as you've made the accusation you do something about.