KEEP THE MOMENTUM - APPEAL TO THE WELSH ASSEMBLY

[Hoppy]

The intial appeal to members of the Welsh Assembly appears to have made the EAW and the Welsh Assembly sit up and listen to the concerns of anglers about the levels of EA Bailiffs and the precious stocks of Migratory fish.

It is IMPORTANT that the momentum is maintained and we continue to provide information that can assist the campaign.

The most important aspect is the response from the EAW to reports of illegal activites on our river banks.

If you do contact the EA in respect of incidents of poaching or any other illegal activity affecting the rivers, please insist that you are informed of the result. The EA should get back to you to inform you of their findings.

If you do see suspicious activity please keep details of the following.

1. The incident itself, in as much detail as you can.

2. The time/date and location of the incident.

3. The time and method you contacted the EA, if possible get the name of the person taking the call.

4. The feedback received from the EA - i.e what they did, and importantly when they did it.

If you can obtain these details, please PM them to Highplains or Hoppy on the forum (this will ensure confidentiality). The details will not be posted on the forum for obvious reasons.

Also, if you hear of any suspcious activities on our rivers, please let the EA know and again forward details to the aforementioned members.

Whilst this may be Heresay, it will allow the EA to build an intelligence profile on areas of concern, and should allow them to respond more effectively.

It should be noted that this appeal is in no way directed to the EAW bailiffs. We appreciate that they are few in numbers, cover huge geographic areas, and thousands of river miles. The work that the EAW Bailiffs conduct should be applauded and it is important that we all appreciate the hard work that they all do.

Please bear this in mind, if we keep the momentum going, something will have to be done.

Hoppy

[highplains]

Paul,

Nice one. I look forward to receiving those PM's.

I would like to endorse your comments with regard to the EA bailiff team, they really do work hard and under very difficult conditions.

Nice to see the press coverage continues.

Tight lines and all the best.

Highplains

[highplains]

Hoppy,

I hope the forum members and the EAW have noticed the name change to Environment Agency Management Improvement Campaign. Nice touch!! I hope the EAW front line staff notice and join in.

Tight lines.

Highplains

[rwgbridgend]

With regards to the recent press coverage in the 'Western Mail', i thought that forum members may be interested in my reply to chris mills' letter (Director EAW) which was published in todays Western Mail. Unfortunately i could not include everything that i wanted to say to Mr Mills!

WESTERN MAIL 14TH AUGUST 2006.

Not enough EA staff
SIR – Chris Mills, Director of Environment Agency Wales stated in his recent letter that there are currently 11 operational enforcement staff in the South West Wales region who are able to deal with illegal fishing activity.


If this is so, why have such officers failed to attend a string of serious poaching incidents on the River Ogmore, the most recent of these being last week?


Such non-attendance could be due to the fact that “11 staff” are not actually dedicated fisheries staff but work for other departments within his organisation. Dedicated fisheries enforcement teams have long been disbanded throughout Wales.


WYNNE GRIFFITHS
Head Fisheries Bailiff,
Ogmore Angling Association,

[ogmore]

There was a poaching incident on the Ogmore yesterday that i witnessed,i phoned the EA and after one hour two EA ballifs arrived, unfortunately most of the poachers did a runner but one was caught with a rod in his hand (with large treble hook wound tight up to the tip ring)hopefully he will get what he deserves in court.The two baillifs in question had to travel fair distances to the incident as there is no baillif in the area,one hour earlier and perhaps the the whole gang might have been caught.but a partial result is better than nothing.Just a note on the incident the poachers were under a well known bridge which has a undercut ledge beneath it.Two guys were pushing long poles under the ledge and the others were pushing the rods under (with trebles)to try and snag the fish that were being pushed back , lucky enough i saw some large fish dart out into the main river and escaped, This happened 4 oclock in the afternoon,Ogmore

[Gwyniadun]

Copy of aletter received by Brynle Williams from Carwyn dated 14th August 2006.

Dear Brynle

" Thank you for your letter of 25 July in relation to fisheries enforcement in Wales.

The Agency have advised me that there has been one written authorisation to undertake a covert operation in North Wales so far this year, with 7 authorisations in 2005. Authorisation for planned activity is provided at Environment Manager level, in North Wales this is usually Mr Alan Winstone.

I am advised that there is no evidence that the level of poaching is increasing. Aware of concerns expressed by stakeholders, you will wish to know that I have already instructed the Agency to undertake a full review of its current enforcement activities throughout Wales and to report back by March 2007".

Yours sincerely

Carwyn AM


The Assembly yesterday played down the scale of the problem and claimed much of the Environment Agency's anti-poaching efforts were being carried out covertly.

A spokesman said, "Protection of fish stocks from poaching is the responsibility of the Environment Agency. To make the best use of available resources, the agency takes a targeted, intelligence-led approach. These operations are often undercover and not, therefore, visible to the public.

"In recent years stocks of salmon and sea trout have been in decline and poaching efforts have therefore reduced.

"However, the necessary level of resources to protect the stocks is consistently kept under review."

Merry go round! the prisoners seem to be in charge of the prisons we have been complaining officially since November 2005 and they are now feeding us this.... hope they select someone who is strong enough to tell the truth whatever, and sincerely hope that it is not a 'Performance Indicated, highly paid, possibly never seen a river bank, jobbie for the 'boys' reviewer!

Very blydi annoyed!

Gwyniadun

[highplains]

Gentlemen,

Surely there must come a time when enough is enough! I have copied below the response I received from the EAW when I asked how may "covert" operations were carried out over the THE WHOLE OF WALES in the last 12 months. The reply was as follows.


Thank you for your enquiry regarding RIPA authorisations for Fisheries
enforcement operations in Environment Agency Wales within the last
year.

The number of RIPA authorisations for the period 1st Aug 2005 - 31st
July 2006 for Fisheries enforcement in Environment Agency Wales is 10.
The monthly breakdown of the initial authorisation date is;
Aug 05 - 4
Oct 05 - 1
Dec 05 - 1
Jan 06 - 1
May 06 - 1
Jul 06 - 2

I trust this answers your query. Please accept my apologies for the
initial response you were sent.

Adrian Saunders
Fisheries Policy and Process Advisor


10, yes 10 covert operations carried out over the last 12 months.

Somebody at the Agency needs bringing to book!

Any of the depleated front line staff at the EAW prepared to throw their hat into the ring???

We are talking about a massive revenue earner for Wales, yet we are. it would seem talking about a diminutive attempt to protect the source of that massive revenue stream the fish of our rivers and estuary's.

For goodness sake get behind the campaign.

Send Wynne all your poaching details for the South and let me have them for the North. Any written proof or records more of the poaching incidents being reported correctly yet booked as "non Environment Agency business" and I will be pleased to learn of those to.

Keep on keeping on. This is not a disgrace, this is the insufferable and we must sort it. For the fish, for ourselves and because its right!.

A very very upset and annoyed.

Highplains

( Don't get upset get even!)

[DAZ]

The Assembly yesterday played down the scale of the problem and claimed much of the Environment Agency's anti-poaching efforts were being carried out covertly.

A spokesman said, "Protection of fish stocks from poaching is the responsibility of the Environment Agency. To make the best use of available resources, the agency takes a targeted, intelligence-led approach. These operations are often undercover and not, therefore, visible to the public.

"In recent years stocks of salmon and sea trout have been in decline and poaching efforts have therefore reduced.

"However, the necessary level of resources to protect the stocks is consistently kept under review."

What a load of BULL SHITE!!!

He's wright about the decline of our Salmon/Seatrout though.

[Gwyniadun]

Perhaps Hoppy can put all the salient points under one heading alone, it takes ages to find them otherwise.

INLAND FISHERY STAKEHOLDER GROUP

ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THE TEXT: CCW = Countryside Council for Wales: EA = Environment Agency for England & Wales: EAW = Environment Agency Wales: FRAWC = Flood Risk Assessment Wales Committee (formerly Flood Defence Committee): NRA = National Rivers Authority: WAG = Welsh Assembly Government.

D FISHERIES REGULATION

D1 BAILIFFS & ENFORCEMENT.
No single issue has caused so much hostility towards the EA as the apparent lack of an adequate force of full-time fishery bailiffs engaged on active front-line enforcement work to combat illegal fishing in rivers, estuaries and coastal waters.

D.1.6 The EA should be required to substantiate its claim that illegal fishing for salmon is no longer a problem: a) in absolute national terms, b) in specific regional terms and c) (most importantly in view of the parlous state of many salmon stocks) in relative terms on those many rivers that are currently failing to achieve their scientifically based conservation limits.

Why does the the Welsh Assembly want a review on 'Enforcement Issues' when all that we ask for is that they take heed and action plan what has already been reported to them.

Is there any point in having any of these comittees set up if they take no heed?

Any idea of the date of that report?

I believe that it is now time that the EA within their present structure evaluate 'Performance Indicators' on 'Enforcement Issues' which are based solely on the numbers of manhours hours spent in actual pursuit of 'Illegal Fishing Activities' outside the scope of Fishing Licence Evasion, and a second indicator on the result of those manhours in a positive / negative framework. .

They can then map the manhours over the map of Wales and evaluate the mileage of rivers / costal area's as against the time spent, they have all the information at hand already.

Maybe, they will be able to see that the opinions voiced and letters written are infact correct, maybe, that the only thing they will believe and understand in this present age is factual evidence of this nature on their computer screens, we are trying desperately to seek the action necessary.

Gwyniadun

[Hoppy]

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!

There can be no complancency here whatsoever. All anglers need to be aware of what is going on on our rivers. It no longer matters about the relationship clubs have with their Enforcement officers, this is not the point. We are not shouting about individual bailiffs this is about a Public Body that is failing on a monumental scale to tackle poaching.

It doesnt matter that your EA Bailiff is doing a good job on your stretch of river, this is much bigger, this is about the managers and directors of the EAW. Is it not laughable that there is only 1 EAW bailiff on the whole of the Tywi - the most productive sewin river in Wales!

Forget habitat restoration, fish stocking, committees, groups - there is no point in considering these issues until the enforcement issues are sorted. If enforcement is not addressed, there will be no fish to spawn on pristine redds that they have reached on fancy ladders!

I would ask that every club in Wales now looks into the level of EAW enforcement (Nationwide) and raises it at their AGM's or clubs meetings.

WE CAN NOT LOSE HERE, WHAT THE EAW FAIL TO REALISE IS THAT WE ARE NOT FIGHTING FOR PERSONAL CRUSADES, WE ARE FIGHTING FOR WHAT IS RIGHT!

In respect of this thread, I will lock all of the threads so far. There will be a new post placed onto the forum which covers the salient points which can be viewed. This may take some time, please be patient.

[rwgbridgend]

I continue to become infuriated!

How can a body in the public domain such as EAW continue with this bravado!

If they are going to continue to provide such information in this manner, then we as a group must now bang our heads together.

Highplains and myself know the extent of this problem in that we have seen an enormous amount of EAW correspondence which is written is this very manner.

It can be discredited so easily! but we now need to get all of our clubs and associations together so that we can enlighten you as to the true extent of this problem.

[rwgbridgend]

I just thought that i would add that on thursday EAW had a 'blitz' on the river Ogmore. Despite the fact that we currently have no bailiffs in this area, three officers were patrolling the river all day.

This sounds great BUT i apologise to the clubs and associations who fish on the rivers which these bailiffs were seconded from to cover the Ogmore that day. I sincerely hope that the poachers were not out on your rivers on thursday!

Sorry gents but this puts it all into perspective.

[shocker]

gwyniadun said:

Copy of aletter received by Brynle Williams from Carwyn dated 14th August 2006.

Dear Brynle

" Thank you for your letter of 25 July in relation to fisheries enforcement in Wales.

The Agency have advised me that there has been one written authorisation to undertake a covert operation in North Wales so far this year, with 7 authorisations in 2005. Authorisation for planned activity is provided at Environment Manager level, in North Wales this is usually Mr Alan Winstone.

I am advised that there is no evidence that the level of poaching is increasing. Aware of concerns expressed by stakeholders, you will wish to know that I have already instructed the Agency to undertake a full review of its current enforcement activities throughout Wales and to report back by March 2007".

Yours sincerely

Carwyn AM


The Assembly yesterday played down the scale of the problem and claimed much of the Environment Agency's anti-poaching efforts were being carried out covertly.

A spokesman said, "Protection of fish stocks from poaching is the responsibility of the Environment Agency. To make the best use of available resources, the agency takes a targeted, intelligence-led approach. These operations are often undercover and not, therefore, visible to the public.

"In recent years stocks of salmon and sea trout have been in decline and poaching efforts have therefore reduced.

"However, the necessary level of resources to protect the stocks is consistently kept under review."

this is as fine an example of circular logic as I have ever seen,in essence saying that since the stocks have been reduced( by poaching and overfishing at sea) its not worth the time enforcing.
To say that their intelligence led efforts are not visible to the public is insulting ,dont they realise that anglers represent a cross section of the community?Like police officers,magistrates and yes,some EA officers.Surely they cant expect this juvenile specious double talk to hold up in any kind of public debate,can they?

[highplains]

Can anybody tell me where the quote from the Assembly was sourced?

Is this part of the response to the Appeal?

A date and location for the source would be a big help.

Look forward to hearing from you.

All the best

Highplains.

[Gwyniadun]

I think it was the Western Mail.

Gwyniadun

[kwilliams]

The comments of the Welsh Assembly replies to members of this forum have prompted me to a response and do so as a former member of the Environment Agency Wales North Wales Special Enforcement Team with former patrolling responsibility for the Dee estuary and the Afon Clwyd.

Much has been said since I left the Agency in October 2005 and much has not been said with regard to the operational reality that has existed for many years since the inception of the Agency.

The quote by the Environment Minister Carwyn was always expected to be couched in the terms used with the EA giving over what it wants the Assembly to hear, not what in truth is the facts on the ground in as much that the task of patrolling the rivers of N.Wales and for that matter the whole of Wales is totally under resourced in manpower as a direct decision by the Board and management of EA Wales to deliberately reduce Fisheries Enforcement manpower and as a consequence EA Wales cannot in any way be said be said to be "Operationally Competent or fit for the task" as required.

In reality in N Wales, out of the 7 full time officers there are now in my opinion just 4 officers who are truly trained to all the skills required in all matters of bailiffing ie a full and thorough geographical patrolling competence of a single river catchment in which it takes on average a minimum of 10years for an officer to become geographically acquainted with a single river beat.

It may surprise the forum to learn that the EA demands that Fisheries Enforcement Staff to use the phrase "Customers" when referring to Illegal fishermen, especially poachers, thus being the age on enlightened political correctness.

The Agency has led the Assembly to believe that the patrolling of rivers and estuaries be intelligence led and covert in its approach, well as an officer who was once an area intelligence officer who took this role on with deadly seriousness and pride, I can state categorically that since 1996 when the post was taken over by another individual, I can not recall a single apprehension or fisheries prosecution derived from intelligence led information up to 2005. The statement is worthy of full and open debate and further investigation.

The Cost of the Full Time Intelligence Role has been significant and at the same time a failure to the true customers of the Agency, being those that pay for and use a rod licence as beneficiaries of the service.

All the cases brought to book were derived from the enforcement team’s own sources of information and extended investigation before taking appropriate action , either individually or calling team members to assist and finalise prosecution proceedings thereafter on each occasion.

The greatest driver within the EA of the Intelligence aspect of the service was the need to input intelligence on ‘fly tipping’ and ‘waste matters’ and this no doubt took away the need for due diligence to fisheries crime much to the demand of leading management who in a meeting in 2005 openly told all staff that fisheries crime was no longer a matter of greater concern and that it was his concern to go after " the Big, the bad and the ugly in industrial crime" in fact, the Dee Shellfish Liaison Committee were told also that ‘Fisheries Enforcement’ was no longer a priority on the Dee, this was said to a member of the Sea Anglers Conservation Committee of GB.

Having seen repetitive downsizing of fisheries staff in North Wales from what was 24 men covering all the rivers and lakes plus the coast from the Dyfi to the tip of the Wirral Peninsula, I can only say that the phrase," there's lies and there's d**ned lied comes to mind quite frequently and Senior Officers of the Agency have become adept masters of providing misinformation especially when describing performance factors such as prosecution results.

Often in meetings of the local fisheries committees, prosecution results would be stated for the whole of N.Wales rather than define the outcomes for the Gwynedd Area compared to outcomes generated in the Dee and Clwyd Area which is non staffed on a daily basis to date since my departure.

There isn't one dedicated qualified ‘Fisheries Enforcement Officer’ resident anywhere within the Dee catchment , compared to the original staff requirement of 10 men all living between Bala to the sea and covering the Clwyd at St Asaph.

It is known that all the Agency enforcement staff live in the County of Gwynedd and it is an operational impossibility to patrol rivers from such a great distance with some officers living almost 60 miles away, enforcement staff can not maintain local contacts, be present on the Dee at strategic times from the estuary through its tidal length to Farndon and know all the advantageous stakeholders.
The lack of Day to day routine patrols throughout the catchment is a now a matter of fact !

I'm sure that questions if asked as to where well known pools exist, who owns which fishery, who are the local poachers on a section of river CAN NOT be answered as a consequence of downsizing of staff numbers and presently this will not change as my former post has not been filled, the amount of netting in the estuary this season 2006 has increased dramatically from information I’ve received personally from existing sources.

The illegal netting activity in the Upper tidal areas of Saltney through to Chester has been woefully ignored and the number of daily patrols should be audited against any RIPA issued to see how much effort has actually been made throughout 2006 as poaching has been evident since May when drift netters were active from Hilbre Pool up to Flint mainly at Night as discovered and found out by the Agency's own harbour master.

It is a known fact that commercial Salmon netters on the Dee have an inherent mistrust of EA fisheries staff and this fact needs to be examined also by enquiry. This mistrust gets in the way of “ Getting the job done” and enhancing the protection of fish stocks both for the anglers and those licensed to lawfully fish for them with nets.

With regard to the EA’s Hotline Number, known to all lately as the 0800 debate, I have seen the failure of this service to deliver mainly because managers failed time and time again to agree that all complaints should be serviced even anonymous complaints.

Many times prior to the Establishment of the EA anonymous complaints would produce spectacular results and convictions, however the view now is to take no action to such complaints as they cannot be verified by an office bound officer who has to decide if the complaint is justified.

All complaints are received by a Duty standby officer, and invariably a person with no fisheries enforcement skills whatsoever and cannot ask all those questions of a person that would provide best detail to determine the extent of the offence and its seriousness.
Offences in the Dee have often been ignored and classified at the lowest level, especially at weekends, purely as a consequence of the wrong officer being allocated the task of responding to a complaint with the result that no attendance of a qualified officer took place, and more often to the annoyance of the team of enforcement officers to find out there was a problem sometime by a midweek conversation with an Environment Protection Officer.

The task used to be handled in a much different manner years ago when fisheries officers were contacted directly and had the ability to take a task on depending on information received and local knowledge of the location.

Whilst in post, I often complained about the failure of the 0800 service and the fact that Stakeholders lost confidence in making complaints and I was ignored.

The EA now tells the Assembly that as a lack of complaints being made, surely there is less of a problem, well this is a classic case of “ fiddling while Rome burns” and has to be stopped.

During 2004, I was able to approach “Crimestoppers” at its Executive level both in Cardiff and London and asked the Chairman if he was willing to take on the task of receiving Environmental Crime complaints for the Agency and there was a resounding YES!

This information and the facts surrounding the way in which to incorporate the EA into the national publicity schemes was passed to the highest levels of the EA at Bristol and it died a resounding death without any feedback .

The benefits of this would be that complainants could remain anonymous and that any conviction achieved afterwards would attract a financial reward.

The Former NRA had a reward scheme which was never propelled into the EA as it was felt that those monies held for the purpose of reward could be spent elsewhere in house and this decision not to carry it on alone promotes the attitude of management to fisheries crime.

It is significant to say that the managers in Wales with the exception of a handful of men have never experienced front line duties and cannot comprehend the difficulties faced out on the river banks, having had a gun pointed at me, a spear gun, plus being assaulted, I can see why fisheries management at large fail to see clearly what is required in an ‘Enforcement’ capacity. I feel sorry for those ‘Enforcement Officers’ in the front line.

My comments are meant to stimulate further debate into the downsizing of the ‘Enforcement teams’ and to challenge the management of EA responsibilities with regards to rivers, estuaries and costal area’s in Wales , North Wales in particular.
I am unconcerned if the Agency view my comments with disdain as the truth should prevail. Where misinformation to customers is found within the EA, there is a process of investigation internally, and if this fails, then an independent body should be employed to quell the decimation of what once was a truly dedicated and fisheries orientated team.

Those forum members who knew my working history will confirm that I stood for no nonsense with poachers, treated all fairly and did what I was empowered to do within the scope of the Salmon and Freshwater Fisheries Act. It is shameful for those who did not support that dedication.

I do not look forward to the EA rubbishing my comments, however I would ask all to look at their denials strenuously and demand a full enquiry into all complaints from all Stakeholders by the Governing Bodies of Angling in Wales in association with external bodies such as the National Assembly and Government Auditors as a matter of urgency.

To this end I seriously ask this….? Who Guards the Guardians

KW

[rwgbridgend]

Mr Williams,

Thank you for contributing to this issue. It was very enlightening to read what you had to say. To hear from a former EA officer with so much experience and knowledege reinforces what we have been saying for such a long time. Your comments now fully vindicate our campaign to bring this issue out into the open and to get fisheries enforcement back on track.

Thank you for sharing so much information with us.

rwg_ bridgend

[DAZ]

I agree with rwg!!!

Fair play to you Kieth.That was a hell of a post mate!!

DAZ.

[Gwyniadun]

I wonder if anyone from the EA will reply. We are desperate to sort this out, initially for us, but mainly for those who follow us in this life, these rivers are not ours or the EA's, but in our keeping, they came to us in good order and we shall see to it that they are handed over in good order, come what may, good on you Keith.

Gwyniadun

[highplains]

You will recall that I posted details passed on by the EAW about the number of covert operations carried out in the WHOLE OF WALES.

Following that, I requested details of the number of prosecutions as a consequence of those 10 covert operations.

I received the following reply from the EAW today.

Of the 10 authorisations, 2 resulted in successful prosecutions of a
total of 4 persons. There is a further 1 pending prosecution of an
alleged offender.

Now Mr Mills is telling us, the public and presumably the Assembly that the reason we see no enforcement officers is that they are all working covertly. Well Mr Mills what have you to say to defend this. "Presumably that the lack of success is as a consequence of a fall in poaching activities"

Thank you to Kieth recently of the EAW for your posting. Any information in this regard will be well received.

We live in hope.

Tight lines.

Highplains