Discussion in 'North East Fresh Water Fishing' started by peter catchpole, Sep 14, 2011.
I'll stick to the Tom Sawyer look.
been in contact with the EA - our assumptions that the slalom is inaccessible to migratory fish at the moment is correct, currently it is only been used as a closed system with the turbines generating the flow for the slalom, and is therefore not connected to the lower river. it is due to be fed by gravity later in the year and then also connected to the lower river providing access to migaratory fish.
i imagine there is a collosal electricty bill for running the turbines at the moment - to keep the slalom going - I woner who is paying the bill - probably not the british canoe union.
The slalom needs to be connected to the lower river shortly so that they can start the final year fo teh taging program that was postponed while the slalom was been revamped - otherwise I can easily see it been posponed again and tehere will be one more year of delay, before anything is sorted.
There is an article about beaver introduction in this months flyfihing and flytying - there is concern that beaver dams may block migratory fish movement in to the feeder streams reducing the catchment that can be used for spawning. yet another dubious decision made by the scottish government.
Of even more concern are the idiots who have taken it upon themselves to release beavers onto the Tay, with out waiting for the results of the controlled release in argyll - not only becasue of the obstruction they will cause to migratory fish - but becasue they are apparently from eastern europe which carry parasites that can infect humans.
where do they get their brains
also of concern is the fact that the government have backed down form culling these unlawfully introduced beavers - which in my view shoudl be irradicated. Is should be treated as teh major crime it is and if possible the culprits should be tracked down and imprisoned.
we have enlough problems with the species that have already been introduced in to this country friom abroad either deliberately or accidently, with out people irresponsibly introducing species to suit themselves.
Alright noj , seems everyone at the ea has a differnt story on the barrage . I spoken to a lad who was going into the barrage office and he told me there was underground tunnels for the fish to get into the slalom , then i was soeaking to a water bailiff at broken scar who told me there was 2 underground tunnels going from the tidal to the fresh ....
Seems there havent a clue mate .
The only way for sure is to look at the plans .
Im thinking of going for a look up the tees later to see if there is anything about ....
i remain reserved about the reintroduction of beavers in the UK and await the results of the experiment in argyll
however I am dead set against the irresposnsible actions of those who have reintroduced the beavers with out permisson or official clearance in the TAY region. Their irresponsibility, lack of concern for the UK eccology and stupidity is clearly illustrated by the fact that they have sourced their beavers from an unclean source, that are probably carrying parasites; that not noly infect beavers but also human beings.
conversely the beavers that were sourced for the argyll experiment were at least sourced from a clean source with out parasites and presumably other diseases, as I imagine they will have been inspected by vets. Additionally, I would hope and expect these "official beavers" will be from a strain as genetically close to the original UK beaver population as possible.
My second problem is the apathy shown by the government, who have backed down form culling these beavers in the Tay region, thus giving tacit parmission for any one who wants to introduce anything they want in to the UK.
As I said earlier - we have enough problems in the UK with people accidentally or deliberatly introducing non-native species - the list is considerable and effects widespread.
who knows the effect of the introductioin of Beavers - that is why I would follow the results of the argyll experiment - we dont know if it would be beneficial or negative. Surprisingly the reintroduction of the wolf into yellow stone park was found to be beneficial overall - but again this was a controlled reintroduction. So who knows the the overall effect of the beavers on UK ecology/ wildlife, it coudl be positive or negative.
I am dead set against people introducing non-native species into the UK , with out permisson and not obeying the controlls and regulations in place, very often the people who carry out these introductions with out permission are incapable of thinking through the effects and consequences the introduction of these species can have. Either that or they dont care. Therefore I would advocate, custodial sentences for these people who have selfishly introduced these beaver in the TAY region. They are not only sh*tting in their own back yard but sh*tting in everybodys backyard without permission.
Nice to meet you the other day noj . Did you give it another go ?
likewise, it was nice to put a face to a name of another in the pursuit of the mythical tees springer,
have been out at worsall for a couple of hours this evening - again nothing sighted, moved or contacted.
I'm hoping april and may will be better than march and february - will probably have acouple of trips to some of higher stretches shortly.
If a few of us keep having a go sooner or later one of us might turn up a fish
"introduction of salmon, the rivers with low level runs? cos when stocking depleted rivers they never seem to get a strain of fish that matches the fish that are native to the said river,that also can cause problems over time..."
Thats the excuse the EA, or should i say Rivers Authority made regarding the discontinuation of stocking the Tees. They said it interfered genetically with indigenous fish. Obviously, the Tyne and Esk arn't as important as the Tees :suspious:
I wonder if they are worried about feeding the seals ,out of date dodgy imported salmon :cheesy: :cheesy:......yeah its shocking like .
just a thought
both the tyne and esk are stocked with smolts from eggs and milt taken from adult salmon taken from their repective rivers. then hatched and reared at keilder. rearing is completed at keilder in the case of the tyne progeny, where as esk fry or parr are returned to ponds fed by the esk for rearing to the smolt stage (otherwise probably they might migrate back to the tyne and not the esk - or for reasons of cost). this type of stocking would not be a challenge to the genepoo/ dilution of strain for those rivers.
There is no reason why such a process could not be carried out for the tees. except according to various EA sources Ive talked to the Tees is not salmon parr or smolt depleted. Which would suggest that conditons for breeding, hatching, growth and development for salmon must be ideal for those few salmon that do manage to make it past the barrage.
which suggests (bearing in mind the last 2 tagging studies would indicate almost a 100% attrition of salmon trying to get past the barrage) if more salmon were able to get in to the river and past the barrage tees salmon population would blossom.
their is also the possibility with such a large seal population that a large number of smolts do not make it out of the coastal waters and past our coastal waters. then yet again if the barrage was sorted out - the attraction of trapped salmon would be somewhat removed from the estuary and they would tend to forrage further afield. Thus giving any migrating smolts at least a running chance.
I my self am against stocking the tees at this time - the major problem appaears to be the burgeoning seal population combined with the barrage. unfortunately any stocking will do little to improve stocks of salmon on the tees only increase the size of the tees barrage table at which the seals dine.The smolts are probably considered a spring time starter.
OF CONCERN - I recently wrote to my MP complaining about the barrage, commenting about the effect on migratory effect the loss of this amenity to local anglers, and also on its effect on the local ecconomy.
his reply opened thanking me with bringing this matter to his attention, followed with the comment - while it is an important issue------ it is one of the less remarked upon ramifications of the tees barrage.
he has subsequently wriiten to british waterways CEO for his reponse to this problem.
My concern is I needed to bring this to his attention even though he is a stockton on tees MP - i would therefore suggest, people start writting to their MPs about this problem - we need to make sure they are aware of it - keep it fresh in their minds.
just seen the EA has put the tees barrage fish count statistics on line
only 4 fish were counted in march this year
the website also confirms that the fish passes in the slalom are not yet operational
I dont like the idea of one of the gates being left half open all the time or a majority of the time . I personally think it should only be opened on big tides or when it has to be open with a big river on . in any other water height the only running water should be coming from the ladder i reckon . Who knows maybe the fish get distracted from the ladder and waste all there energy and damage themself trying to leap the gates which is never gona happen .
I was speaking about this the other day . maybe if the gates were designed to go in over at the top the fish could swim up instead of trying to leap into ten tons of falling water ?
It would be nice if they could install a couple more proper ladders or make the existing one bigger ? instead of going up the slalom the fish will be knackered after going around that , and if they attempt the cork screws good luck to them as there is big grides on the inlet and outlet they are square holes tho , should be ok to about 10lb :cheesy: .
thinking about it You would expect the fish to just go up the ladder when they arrive why do they seem to loiter around for ages and just get picked off by the seals ? are they confused
I've seen the seals hanging around at the bottom of the ladder Dav, deterring the fish. They have sussed it well and truly out.
Maybe your right dave .
i still think the fish could be getting confused about the water spilling over one of the gates all the time now tho. if all the fish went to the pass straight away a majority may get through instead of them swimming around in circles down in the tide like what they do now . ? altho when i think about it they did that before the gate was left open all the time . i wonder why . i wonder if the seals are preventing a majjority going up like you say ...
I've even seen the seals sat in front of the gate when the fish were going over the top, but like you Dave, i think they must get confused at the situation. I bet most of the time, they are just thinking of survival, and moving up river might be least of their priorities, until theres a deluge.
I was talking to a member of the trout and salmon trust, and he said that they were arguing that pipes should be laid on the river bed for the fish to take refuge, until the time comes that they can move over the barrage easily. Maybe, thats too obvious on the EA?
seems to me that the seals are a major predator on the salmon is there no law or way they could be deterred or even culled ,or will every do gooder in the country jump down my throat .when i was keepering if something was killing your game .er well it was taken care of , surely anglers have a legal right to preserve their fish stocks ? im not advocateing anything drastic im saying is there any legal way of reduceing the seal numbers ?
Totally agree peter and i bet most others do to . Unfortunatly i can never see that happen , imagine the headlines in the papers if someone were to get caught ....
It would be nice if somthing was done tho .I dont know if it was on here but someone said they had tried to deter the seals by playing killer whale calls . dont know how true it is and if it made a blind bit f difference .
true but im sure somewhere somehow theres a legal way to deter the seals , im sure top class lawyers or barristers would take a few Â£1000 of the anglers to try to find away :laugh:i watched a programme in canada where the salmon fishermen (netsmen ) were allowed to shoot seals ,damageing salmon stocks ,but we all know it wont happen here , strange how all the netsman can be bought out here to preserve the stocks yet the seal have free reign to kill all they can
Well said Skunkhead, why should the seals be shot or culled because someone in their infinate wisdom built a big barrage across the river without a proper fish pass, the seals are only doing what they have to do to survive and like Skunkhead says they have more right to the fish than we do.
Do you think i meant loweting the gates to let the tidal water into the river skunkhead ? i didnt .
what i meant was i cant understand why they leave one of the gates open all the time , dont you think the fish will gather at the base of the falls for nothing unless the tides were big ? ?.
just clarifying the march count is low, but it was not counted with the cage but the modern electronic fish counter - so the reason the count is low is not because of the cage its just a low count
it must be remembered it was march the water was cold and the barrage including the fish pass and no matter what route the fish were to take over the obstacle would not just be a physical barrier it would be a temperature barrier, salmon will not normally negotiate large obstacles below about 4oC I think. Where as before the barrage there were no major obstacles on the river untill brocken scar so they could just mosey on up the river and wait below broken scar for the water to warm up, in comparitive safety - well safety form the seals. this would account for the very good fishing below brocken scar in the spring before the barrage was built.
i believe the EA are dictating the gate lowering, since teh last pitiful tagging study showing no salmon successfully negotiating the barrage. i have not been down theire recently but I think teh gate nearest the fish pass is the one that should be lowered most often as its flow provides an attractant to teh side where the fish pass is located. Unfortunately though for most of last year that gate had a mechanical fault - broken hydraulics I think so it could not be lowered so the middle gait was teh one lowered most of the year, thus effectively attracting them away from the pass. a fresh supply of meat on the fin for the seals - unless they were lucky enough to hist the tide right, river level right and teh gate right to be able run the seal gauntlet.
i spoke with some onefrom the salmon and trout associtation about 2 years ago who said the scieintists believe about 70% of returning salmon were probably being killed before ever they got into the estuary. At that time the seal colony was about 100 I dont know what it is now. What we see being killed in the estuary is only the tip of the ice berg. It may be significant that the biggest count for last year were july and august and not in september and october which would normally be expected, best months for the tyne were september and october and wear september but october wasnt bad either. One possiblility again would be the cold water, but again I dont remeber the water being that cold in the autumn last year untill november time. It would be unfortunate if the tees became a summer run river only becasue the barrage is too much of a temperature barrier. I think the poorer autumn numbers may be due to the mackeral departing, at which time any mackerel feeding seals may switch back on to the salmon - only a theory.
Lastly the one thing know some members of the forum are against is culling seals - while it would be very nice to live in a world where everything is abundant, unfortunately, i think some systems are so f**ked up, that they have to be managed. I am uncertain if it is the best option at this time as I see the barrage as being such a huge barrier, that it is the one thing that must be sorted out. but if the barrage is improved and fish do start to be able to negotiate it - but the limiting factor remains seals preventing reentry in to the esturay, then culling the seals may be a better and cheaper option than stocking, effectively allowing greater numbers of retruning salmon to reenter teh river and negotiate the barrage - kick starting the population. then the seal population could be allowed to recover, once we a have a healthy stock of fish in river. on teh other hand maybe culling now would be a solution , but i am uncertain - there can be a reasoned argument for it. However I expect the fluffy fur brigade would object big time. As somebody on one of these forums said a while ago if salmon had fur they would not be an endangered species.
to be abolutely honest culling the seals to allow an increase in the salmon population would ultimately be better for the health of the seal colony - with an increase in food supply for the coming populatioins
Separate names with a comma.