|
Post by highplains on Mar 22, 2007 18:54:34 GMT -1
Greetings,
Just a quick update to let you know that I have emailed details of the situation at present to Mark Isherwood AM, requesting his continued participation in our campaign. You will remember that it was Mark who presented our appeal to the Welsh Assembly Government and who has been supportive through out the campaign thus far.
I have asked Mark if he will allow me to put on the web details of the correspondence between us so that you are all aware of what is going on.
As Hoppy said, PM me if you would like a draft guide of the type letter to send to your local Assembly candidates seeking their promise of support in the future.
Many thanks.
Highplains.
|
|
|
Post by rwgbridgend on Mar 23, 2007 18:42:33 GMT -1
Highplains,
i think carwyn's reply to your letter is pretty much what we expected from our many telephone conversations! He ordered a review which will be pulished prior to an election, take weeks to digest the contents by which time the cabinet would have been reshuffled and hey presto, we have a new minister for the countryside and environment!
This is nothing short of brushing the issue under the carpet and passing the buck.
Whoever is sitting in carwyn's chair come may must realise that this issue is not going to go away and that we are not going to go away! If Mr is still sitting in the 'same' chair then there will be no avoiding this issue. If there is a new minister, then we may have to start all over again! But hey I am up for a good fight and I know you are as well Highplains!
All the best.
RWG_Bridgend
|
|
|
Post by clwydman on Mar 24, 2007 18:59:27 GMT -1
Typical politicians answer. At the risk of sounding rude, this is what we are dealing with. No Balls. None of these polititians have the balls to stand up and be counted for fear of losing the odd vote from wherever they can grab them. Gone have the days when you knew what you were voting for.Gone are the days when politicians nailed their colours to the mast and asked people to vote for their views. We are in a world where everyone wants to be grey, to be liked by everyone and they wonder why so few people go out to vote. Or..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................Maybe I am wrong, maybe I am being unfair, maybe some politicians somewhere will come out of the woodwork, nail their colours to the fence and agree that the current situation where anglers pay more and more for their rod licience in England and Wales and get less and less for there money, whilst other groups eg. canoeists who pay nothing for accessing our rivers seem to have AM's and MP's crawling everywhere to support them. Why is that? Well I can guarantee if this thread was on a canoe forum looking at the future of canoeing there would be a d**n site more views given by their members. Anyone of the 426 members of this forum who have not expressed support for this work under taken by Highplains should be ashamed of themselves.
PS. Don't come crying to me on the river bank when there are no migratory fish returning to our rivers and what fish there are are taken by poachers!
|
|
|
Post by Hoppy on Mar 26, 2007 14:58:03 GMT -1
Al,
I think you have a really good point here. There are so many organisations / trusts about and most of them have their own agendas.
The organisations i can think of off the top of my head are (also listed on my organisations page on seatroutfishing.net)
ACA North Atlantic Salmon Fund Wild Trout Trust (includes sea trout) Regional fishermans federations, Local angling Groups Angling Clubs Rivers Trusts FERAC The EA EAW Salmon & Trout Association Welsh Salmon & Trout Association Stop Now (no renamed) Salmon Farm Action Group. Inland Fisheries Stakeholder Group
As you can see these are a few of the groups who are out there, and i have only included Game fishing ones (I've even left out the Grayling Society, Wye and Usk etc etc). There are a myriad of clubs.
It is far to say that most clubs/groups do look after their own interests, and rightly so. i.e I dont think the Teifi Rivers Trust qould be interested in issues on the Seiont!
If you add to the equation Coarse Angling groups and sea angling groups the list goes on and on and on.
I did notice at the Environment Council meeting if St. Asaph the some sections of the Coarse angling community were quite acidic towards Game anglers.
Everyone is fighting for their own corner, and i dont think that there is one umbrella group that can raise issue with all our concerns.
I fish for Bass, but im not a member of UKBASS, i fish for Grayling and im not in the Grayling Society - its too much money to join every group going - but their issues effect me and my fishing.
There is not a Sea Trout Society - perhaps this is an issue.
Surely the exploitation of the seas (sandeels / fish farming) etc etc could cross boundaries between groups, but i dont know if anyone would ever take up the mantle to fight for all angles?
Its a worrying thing, imagine if all the anglers in the country had one single group to call upon to get things done. These are a few of the issues that effect me in no particular order!
Avian Predation - Cormorrants, Goosanders, Mergansers Fish Farming Canoes Enforcement and bailiffing Habitat restoration River stocking Water quality Pollution Illegal taking of fish coarse and game Illegal netting at sea and in estuaries Disease in fish Decline in fish Global warming Spear fishing
A mammoth task for an over arching group to look at, I just dont know where the answer lies?
Hoppy
|
|
|
Post by highplains on Mar 26, 2007 19:16:21 GMT -1
So, 1 million Bass anglers and only 500 members of B.A.S.S. That would seem, to be a greater proportion of anglers joining the society than there are of the almost 900 members of this forum prepared to join the campaign to persuade the Assembly to instruct the EAW to protect the fish in our rivers!
Look over this thread and count just how many are actually making themselves known. Remember this site is monitored by the EAW. They must be laughing like drains!! If you lack the energy or motivation to write to your prospective AM's then at least take a few seconds to declare your support for this cause on the forum!
Fishing has given me many years of pleasure and I want my grandchildren to have the chance to enjoy the same pleasure. It would break my heart to have to go to some aquarium to see a sea trout or salmon - if that were possible for a migratory fish. As far as I am concerned this is my pay back time to say thank you to the fish stocks, the prodigy of the ones that got away!
It will be too late when you are crying in your beer lamenting the loss of your fishing. This season should be a good one, the drift nets are away and there should be more to catch, more for the poachers so more to attract the thieves. The stocks will go down and the EAW, charged with protecting fish stocks, will stop us fishing as they preside over the demise of our sport.
WAKE UP!!!!
Highplains
|
|
|
Post by highplains on Mar 26, 2007 20:46:34 GMT -1
I have just responded to a comment on the other forum and it made me think that perhaps I have not been as clear over the last few posts as I should have been so I hope you won't mind me copying this "reminder".
Thank you.
I am the first to admit that I am a one issue campaigner. That is that the EAW must provide more policing of the waters of Wales. I have always said waters because that includes our coastal strip and estuaries. These are the areas for which our sea fishing brethren are also pleading to be protected.
The original appeal to the Assembly was supported by the sea fishing fraternity and was made on their behalf as well as the game anglers.
The issue is protection of our stocks. Sewin are being slaughtered at sea as well as by nets-men in the estuaries. Bass are being slaughtered whilst still immature, never having had the chance to breed. Tope are being slaughtered for their fins (sharks fin soup makers buy them!) Flounders are being plundered to be used as bait in the commercial fishermen's pots.
This is not and has never been about just game fishermen, if you will forgive my use of the term. It is about angling as a whole. The plea is for more EAW enforcement staff to police our waters. All of them, coastal, inshore, estuaries and the rivers up as far as the redds.
This campaign is for the fish as well as the fishermen.
As a man once said "united we stand, divided we fall!"
All the best
Highplains
|
|
|
Post by Gwyniadun on Mar 29, 2007 6:27:05 GMT -1
Highplains! who is he?,Gwyniadun! who is he? Hoppy!who is he? and so on, we have been banging the drum for a long time now and the response we have is mere lip service. I have a file of paper here an inch thick...a small rainforest...in the cause to have the 'Bailiffing Force' increased.
Carwyn is expecting a report from the EA on these issues we have raised by March, Hmmm, wonder which March he was referring to.
I will ask the question through Brynle, yet again.
Gwyniadun
|
|
|
Post by Paul Dunstan on Mar 29, 2007 8:03:49 GMT -1
Al, These are a few of the issues that effect me in no particular order! Avian Predation - Cormorrants, Goosanders, Mergansers Fish Farming Canoes Enforcement and bailiffing Habitat restoration River stocking Water quality Pollution Illegal taking of fish coarse and game Illegal netting at sea and in estuaries Disease in fish Decline in fish Global warming Spear fishing A mammoth task for an over arching group to look at, I just dont know where the answer lies? Hoppy It is a mammoth task for an over-arching group to look at - and that over-arching group is the EA Fisheries Division. It is an unfortunate fact that the EA is constrained by budget and, in common with many of our own employers, suffer from management by accountancy. As Hoppy's list shows, 'enforcement' is but one aspect of the raft of factors that affect our rivers and migratory fish stocks. The EA for Wales have undertaken a study of Welsh Rivers to establish what the major factor for each river is and although enforcement is an emotive factor for many of us - it's not necessarily the greatest factor that affects our individual rivers. It costs , according to Daffyd Evans, £50,000 per annum to put a bailiff 'on the road' - a figure that is certainly believable. Now you have to ask the question - 'does that provide value for money?' or 'are you getting enough bang for your buck?' - in terms of what that £50,000 is doing for the long term future of fish stocks in that river. Could that £50k be better spent on habitat restoration? I don't know, but I'm becoming increasingly uneasy with the idea that by throwing more lots of £50k at men in vans we are going to solve the complex problems faced by the salmon / sea trout and when all is said and done, the EA.
|
|
|
Post by silverinvicta on Mar 29, 2007 8:06:19 GMT -1
QUOTE....["I am the first to admit that I am a one issue campaigner. That is that the EAW must provide more policing of the WATERS OF WALES. I have always said waters because that includes our coastal strip and estuaries. These are the areas for which our sea fishing brethren are also pleading to be protected".]...UNQUOTE
Highplains, and all you other campaigners for the better policing of waters, I salute you all. for your dedication and love of your rivers......It has been said on numerous occasions about the lack of support off forum members..BUT..how can you expect support from anglers who's own local waters are suffering in the same way but they live in Scotland or the north of England, eastern England etc..When you make it quite clear that its only Wales your interested in. What do you think that visitors to the forum, who might read these reports may think?? or any non Welsh members. I know you love the fishing for the fishing sake, but it does come over the way i have said, i would hope that you also believe its not just Wales that matters. so please for the fishes sake lets all try to make a difference every where and not just Wales. I love Wales and its people but i do fish in other places as well. so lets Unite every region, its too important not to be....
A hopeful Si
|
|
|
Post by Gwyniadun on Mar 29, 2007 9:01:13 GMT -1
Paul Dunstan, Silverinvicta,Sewinangler and all else who are interested, especially the EA who do view the forum.
You each have a valid point and have my full support for your views except the EA Managers.
In North Wales here, we have tackled a problem that has been allowed to develop. The local river divisions of Gwynedd and Clwyd, employed 26 Bailiffs, I can not speak for other area's of the Country. They walked the rivers and shot the Cormorants, they tackled pollution at source and prosecuted the offenders, they actually caught poachers, they spoke to the anglers and there was a system which was sustainable. The river's were well stocked of Migratory fish. Over a period of 20 years, that (twenty six) has been reduced to 7, why?, I'll give you my view on this.
It became the National Rivers Authority first and then the Environment Agency and this included all kinds of remit. Within this change in time we have experienced a disolve of Fishery Orientated Managers to those who are not fishery orientated. Serious arguments developed between anglers and EA managers the very people in charge over various issues with some managers favouring ' Canoes' rather than 'fishing'....hey hang on a minute... what have you said?, well it reads like that in the paperwork I have here, and ofcourse they changed the title of 'Water Bailiff' to 'Environmental Crime Officers' the time spent on the rivers by the seven remaining is shared with 'flytiping' and that does not mean putting a maggot on a fishing fly, like we did in the days gone by.
Managers these days are more interested in (ticking the box) to ensure that targets set by persons who know little about the fisheries game are met.
Is this not a sad state of affairs?
I am a member of the Welsh Salmon and Trout Association through Clubs a Member of the Salmon and Trout Association and the ACA. To date no one has sat up to acknowledge that there is a problem that will need investment to enhance, no one has grasped the nettle and said (from the top) lets sort this out before it's too late. We have witnessed a disolving of the investment into other fields within the EA, is this caused by managers who are short sighted? have no experience of fisheries? or is this imposed upon them from the Goverment, who knows we can not get a straight answer from anywhere.
Imposing a ban on Seatrout (Annan) until July....we had a byelaw for the Spring Salmon imposed 10 years ago, has it worked wonders?, not on the Welsh Dee it hasn't!, which by the way has no dedicated 'Fisheries Enforcement Officer'. Someone has come up with this idea, someone in a position to make decisions. That is what I'll do, I'll impose a ban, that will do it... it will give me a few years breathing space whilst I reap the benefit of my fat salary cheque! so good for the future of our rivers, our heritage, that which those before left in our care. A round peg rattling about in a square hole.
Where do we go from here?
Gwyniadun
|
|
|
Post by Paul Dunstan on Mar 29, 2007 10:38:32 GMT -1
I hear what you say Gwyniadun and share your frustration that successive restructuring has 'lost' our dedicated water bailiffs and replaced them with a neutered, target driven 'catchall' alternative.
However, I regret that we must resign ourselves to the fact that we are not going to return to the 'halcyon' days of your 26 dedicated bailiffs but, at the same time I'm not suggesting that we give up lobbying our Members of Parliament or the Environment Agency because enforcement is just one issue that requires action. If we believe that falling fish stocks are soley the result of or will be repaired by returning to previous enforcement levels then we are deluding ourselves.
Neither, I'm afraid, can we indulge ourselves with an entirely anti EA attitude. At the end of the day we will be doing ourselves and our migratory fish a huge diservice if with don't work in partnership with the EA and other agencies that impact upon our river systems.
|
|
|
Post by Gwyniadun on Mar 29, 2007 11:22:21 GMT -1
Paul, my letters refer to wanting to work with the EA which is also my sentiment. The issues are varied indeed and putting one thing right will not succeed, the remaining bailiffs (Those that actually try to do the job) are also on our side, its a shambles when the management don't or won't listen.
Gwyniadun
|
|
|
Post by clwydman on Mar 29, 2007 17:26:29 GMT -1
Paul I dont think, or would hope that no-one is anti EA. They are the body that all angling clubs must work with and rely on to improve our waters. You are absolutely right about working in a partnership however. The angling clubs in general seem only concerned if poaching happens on their water. Eg a member of an angling club passing the water they fish and seeing someone acting suspiciously may phone the EA. If he saw someone acting suspiciously by a bridge further upstream , they are less likely to act. Many angling clubs only seem to have eyes for their stretch of water. Bailiffs have made their presence felt on the River Clwyd last year, this is great and demonstrates how hard the few we have are prepared to work. Have they put in an appearance in the pubs in the villages in the headwaters where poaching is still rife? probably not and why not? because they haven't got time. We do not need the bailliff numbers we had in the 50's and 60's, modern technology ensures that, but we do need far more than we have got and we do need more anglers and angling clubs especially to take the lead and care more about where the future migratory stocks are spawned and less time and money on cutting trees and making car parks alongside their stretches of water! The total head in the sand approach of many angling clubs has resulted in the gradual deterioration of bailliff numbers and migratory fish numbers returning to our rivers. We have to face facts, it would appear (and this is I know a gross generalisation) that anglers and angling clubs are far better moaners thn doers. We need doers and we need them fast!
|
|
|
Post by highplains on Mar 29, 2007 17:57:50 GMT -1
Paul,
Broadly you are correct, however there is a fundamental lack of understanding about this issue.
Balance:
We need to look after and improve habitat Polution must be controlled Redds must be maintained Potential Redd areas need to be reopened to migratory fish The list goes on.
There is no protection of the fish in our rivers, you have the statistics. each pair of bailiffs has hundreds of miles of river to protect. That's without the estuaries and coastal; waters they are also charged with protecting.
70 Sewin from one pool in one night last year. 70!! The poachers know they have little or no chance of being apprehended and are maximising the chance of a quick buck. If stocks are reducing, all the more reason to protect them!
Balance, fish protection is part of the equation.
When it comes down to it the EAW are not as at fault as we thought. The culprit is fairly and squarely the Assembly Government. They fail to include the duty to protect our fish stocks in their remit letter to the Environment Agency. The remit letter is the letter the Assembly send each year to the EAW telling them what the Assembly's priorities are and laying out the basis of the EAW performance targets.
If you or anybody else wish to look over the remit letter please PM me your email address and I will send you a copy or go the the EAW web site and read it there.
I repeat, the EAW will stop us fishing because the stocks they are supposed to protect have diminished to such an extent they are in danger.
There may not be one topic that resolves all the problems associated with the disappearance of the fish stock, but one thing is for sure,IF THE FISH STOCKS COLLAPSE ALL THE REST WILL BE ACADEMIC!
We need support and we need to apply pressure to the Welsh Assembly Government.
All the best.
Highplains
|
|
|
Post by highplains on Mar 29, 2007 18:03:40 GMT -1
Si,
Spot on. The remit letter from the Assembly is actually sent to the Environment Agency boss in England. There is consistency in all EA procedures throughout England and Wales. Norfolk or Gwyndd are treated just the same.
The campaign must succeed in Wales and that success can then, with luck be translated to England.
Have a heart, getting support in Wales is beginning to feel like platting sawdust.
All these arguments apply equally to the protection of waters in both nations. The more we can get involved the better. Any ideas?
All the best
Highplains
|
|
|
Post by highplains on Mar 29, 2007 18:20:36 GMT -1
Gwyniadun,
You have hit the nail fairley and squarely on the head: there has been a general failure by those organisation representing anglers to acknowledge the problem or to address the issue. We have clearly been let down by those "up there" who should have taken issue earlier. But those days are passed, we are going to have an impact and we will get a response! We just have to keep at it. You have been working hard for some time now and good on you. We need more.
The level of apathy concerning this matter from the angling fraternity generally is amazing. I have no rational explanation for it. We just have to continue to work to bring this issue to the attention of other anglers and try to encourage them to stand up for their fishing and the fish.
Keep up the good work and your spirits.
Well done to you and thanks.
Highplains
|
|
|
Post by Hoppy on Mar 29, 2007 18:43:58 GMT -1
It certainly is a immotive subject. There are a few points i would like to add/clarify PaulD I agree habitat restoration has its part to play, but I also see Highplains' point that - why bother improving habitat if there are no fish returning to the redds in the first place! The upper Wye might have the nicest gravel redds in the country, 5* accomodation for Breeding fish, but if they dont get there, What is the point! There is no bad feeling on my behalf in respect of the Enforcement officers, they do a stirling job. I have concerns over management and their deployment of resources i.e fly tipping etc. I am also concerned that the EA management denied that poaching was a problem in Wales! I agree with SI's point that this is not just a Welsh problem, but a problem facing the whole of the UK and Eire. Again whilst I accept that everyone is fighting for their own cause, I dont think this is the best way forward, a fragmented approach just wont get the best results, because the numbers involved in fighting their causes is too small. Im sure The Tywi clubs aren't too concerned about poaching on the Clwyd, and the Cornish clubs aren't bothered about nets on the Teifi. Why, because each river has its own issues. However Enforcement tends to cross all areas. If this were a campaign purely for the benefit of Wales, I wouldn't be as passionate about it as I am. This is a Nationwide problem. Everyone needs to be involved - look at the Annan if you are unsure. Once one of the most productive rivers in the UK - now staring compulsory C&R in the face. My point in relation to all this is that a unilateral body/approach is required - addressing key issues. This also needs to be of such a size that it has political power/influence. Looking at the BASC it looks like they have a framework that could be mirrored They have five strategic objectives - which we could use! - A strong and unified voice for fishing - Coarse, Game & Sea - All party backing for fishing - Balanced comment in the media - Continued opportunity to go fishing - High standards This is taken from their site and it could easily be adapted to fit angling - The three main reasons why WAGBI/BSAC was set up- The founder wanted to help professional wildfowlers;
- He was becoming alarmed at the increasing drainage and subsequent development of much excellent wildfowl habitat;
- He realised that as time went by it would be necessary to defend the sport of wildfowling against the growing enthusiasm of extremists bent on total protection of wild birds.
Surely these points mirror todays fishing situation.BASC has 123,000 members and that number is growing every year. Angling has around 3million participants - therefore if you HAD to be a member of a parallel society - this would mean massive funding and massive power. How is BASC run?The organisation is run by a democratically elected council of members. The council is charged with overseeing the management of the affairs of a growing, multi million-pound turnover organisation, which has very public responsibilities. In practice, the Council, as a body, delegates day-to-day running of the Association to the chief executive. This does not, however, detract from the Council's overall responsibility. How is the organisation structured?The organisation’s patron is the Duke of Edinburgh. There is also a president, chairman, council and a chief executive. The following departments are based at head office: firearms, gamekeeping, media and communications, deer, research, conservation and land management, marketing, fundraising, wildfowling, membership and shooting standards. These are overseen by directors and heads of department. The regional offices are headed up by directors who oversee regional officers and administrative staff. What is BASC’s objective?Our mission is to promote and protect sporting and shooting and the well-being of the countryside throughout the United Kingdom and overseas. We represent our members' interests by providing a voice for sporting shooting which includes wildfowling, game, and rough shooting, deer stalking, target shooting and air gunning, pigeon shooting and pest control, gun dogs, promoting practical habitat conservation, training and the setting of standards and undertaking appropriate research. To me this seems to be the perfect option - The British Association for Fishing & Conservation. Having read the above, the fishing objectives would be simple Our mission is to promote and protect Fishing and the well-being of the countryside throughout the United Kingdom and overseas. We represent our members' interests by providing a voice for fishing which includes coarse, game and sea fishing, promoting practical habitat conservation, training and the setting of standards and undertaking appropriate research. So could all these smaller organisations consider this - one body, more power, more members, more funding, more support and more accountable. In some areas you have to be a BSAC member to shoot. If this was applied to fishing, so that you had to be a member of BSAF (fishing) then funding would not be an issue. Clubs would also have the benefit of an organisation that would protect from litigation and support them with local projects. If the Wild Trout Trust and ACA came under one umbrella, the infrastructure and expertise would already be in place for most issues, add the Salmon & Trout Association etc etc - it could be perfect. Patrons for such an organisation would be easy to find - The Royals Fish, Lord Steele fishes, Sir Edward Dashwood fishes the list goes on. Still these are only my thoughts, but i dont think a fragmented approach can be as effective as one voice. Hoppy
|
|
|
Post by Paul Dunstan on Mar 29, 2007 19:20:52 GMT -1
This is a very good debate!
A couple of points, "I agree habitat restoration has its part to play, but I also see Highplains' point that - why bother improving habitat if there are no fish returning to the redds in the first place! The upper Wye might have the nicest gravel redds in the country, 5* accomodation for Breeding fish, but if they dont get there, What is the point!"
It is probably the case that the salmon populations in some of our rivers have already 'gone over the edge' and can no longer sustain a viable breeding population that has the egg production ability to continue. Any number of bailiffs will not improve a terminating population.
I am a member of BASC but I certainly don't see them as an answer as an umbrella organisation for angling. They only became interested in angling per se during the 'let's ban hunting' fury a few years ago.
In my view, a far better organisation would be the Association of Rivers Trusts but that would demand that angling bodies, clubs, riparian owners etc were singing off the same hymn sheet - and we know how easy that is to achieve!
|
|
|
Post by stumpyguy01 on Mar 29, 2007 19:29:25 GMT -1
could the 50k be spent elsewhere,habitat restoration etc,if the 50k was spent on habitat and restocking and fish started to return in numbers to excellent spawning grounds,there would still be no one to protect the fish(poachers win again).this is just one big vicious circle,
Between 3 and 4 million anglers,just imagine what could be achieved with a body of this size,if membership of say just £5 with 2 million members that would create a fund of £10 million to start with,not a bad amount of funding to start with and it could only go from strength to strength,surely with a body of this size certain parties would have to sit up and listen,
stumpy....
|
|
|
Post by Hoppy on Mar 29, 2007 19:35:14 GMT -1
It is probably the case that the salmon populations in some of our rivers have already 'gone over the edge' and can no longer sustain a viable breeding population that has the egg production ability to continue. Any number of bailiffs will not improve a terminating population. Paul - that is the problem, if we try to reverse the trend, by selective stocking then we have to consider that at some point the returning fish would need protection, as would the parr. I will pm you a horrific video that some ar*e has posted on youtube - electrofishing for parr etc! I am a member of BASC but I certainly don't see them as an answer as an umbrella organisation for angling. They only became interested in angling per se during the 'let's ban hunting' fury a few years ago. Perhaps i haven't got myself over properly, i am not suggesting that BASC takes up the mantle of fishing. What i was trying to get across was a new organisation that could take the format of the BASC - Something like the British Association for Fishing & Conservation. It would be a bad idea for BSAC to have too much involvement in fisheries, as it waters down their power. In my view, a far better organisation would be the Association of Rivers Trusts but that would demand that angling bodies, clubs, riparian owners etc were singing off the same hymn sheet - and we know how easy that is to achieve! Paul a good idea, but if we had the support of the Sea anglers and coarse anglers, we would have a far bigger voice! An association of rivers trusts would be worthwhile, but the problem of the Sea couldn't really be addressed, and it may become somewhat localised. As i said in the previous post, the Teifi Rivers Trust aren't going to be concerned about the Dwyfor in North Wales, nor about the exploitation of Sandeels and Salmon at sea? - They may have have concerns about it - but would they have the voice to address National issues that effect us all? I may be totally wrong - but hey whats new! Hoppy
|
|