|
|
Post by rwgbridgend on Sept 30, 2006 15:41:43 GMT -1
Keith,
you are absolutely right. All statements and stats provided by EAW must be taken with a pinch of salt. Rest assured that forum members are well aware of this. We have statistics for the number of covert operations and poaching prosecutions and I am in the process of asking for a breakdown of rod licence offences relating specifically to rivers as we are all well aware that most rod licence offences relate to still waters.
I have been in extensive correspondence and attended several meetings with EAW and can confirm some points that I have picked up on:
1) EAW have consistently stated that they now only provide 'reactive' enforcement in Wales.
2) EAW will not be patrolling our spawning grounds this year unless they are 'given reason' to do so.
3) Eaw have stated that there are no dedicated fisheries enforcement officers in south west wales.
4) EAW consistenly state that poaching is decreasing. How do they know if enforcement officers are not patrolling our river banks to gather intelligence?
5) EAW consistently state that calls to their 0800 number regarding poaching are very low. This is insignificant since most poaching prosecutions in the past have been as a result of intelligence gathering by EAW officers and not calls to the 0800 number.
6) EAW have stated that there will be times when they are unable to respond to incidences.
This is just a taster of what has been written and said to me by EAW recently.
|
|
|
|
Post by highplains on Oct 2, 2006 20:17:03 GMT -1
Following his recent meeting with the Environment Agency Wales, Mark Isherwood AM has authorised me to post the following notes of that meeting as follows:
Following Marks's meeting with the Environment Agency please see below feedback:
The enforcement review is in their remit letter and must be completed by March 2007. They started the review with data collection, using for instance, the report by the Inland Fisheries Group to the Assembly Government last year.
They will then be going to public consultation (probably October or November) to establish the facts on both data and perceptions around fisheries enforcement.
There will be approx 6 open forums across Wales, they are currently considering the use of independent facilitation (possibly by the Jill Dando Institute ) the report would then got to the Welsh Assembly Government next year.
They asked me to encourage you to participate through their enforcement review so that the facts maybe established and a common outcome hopefully achieved.
You referred to 10 covert operations by the EAW across the whole of Wales. They stated that these 10 are where there has been a planned campaign which has been approved in accordance with regulatory and legal compliance, they stated that the pattern of poaching has changed greatly over the last two decades and that criminal activity is now focused in areas such as drugs, where more money can be generated . They stated that poaching is reported to the EAW through its 0800 number and by local fisheries groups is small in scale.
They stated that they had taken an operation decision not to have people walking along river banks, being that this is not the most affective use of water resources with ref to environmental impact. They stated that they instead targeted big terms at pools where there is a highlighted level of evasion (20%)
With reference to the two specific cases detailed by you, they stated that they need new evidence and that where their problem is the timelessness of the intelligence, they added that if people ring the 0800 number they will respond.
They told me that they now have a part time team of 7 officers in North Wales going out in the evening and at weekends and walking the river banks. They stated that this was about being visible.
They explained that the North Wales cover team (fishing and waste offences) would review all the intelligence and campaigns for targeting areas at high risk.
However, they often don't catch anyone and they confirmed the intelligence needed to improve.
They added their it is there belief that the biggest threat to fish stocks comes not form poaching, but from land use , chemicals and spills , sheep dipping etc.
Water quality is deteriorating and they have concluded that conservation targets for fish will not be affected by tackling poaching alone.
They also identified netting on the estuaries as a big threat and, alongside the properties work detailed above, that is where they are putting their resources (boat patrols etc)
End of notes.
I am sure Mark wil be interested to hear your comments, which I will pass on to him.
May I thank Mark for his time and effort in supporting our appeal.
All the best
Highplains
|
|
|
|
Post by Hoppy on Oct 2, 2006 20:37:44 GMT -1
They stated that they had taken an operation decision not to have people walking along river banks, being that this is not the most affective use of water resources with ref to environmental impact. They stated that they instead targeted big terms at pools where there is a highlighted level of evasion (20%) What nonsense, are day ticket waters poached for fish? We are talking the taking of fish illegally from rivers, not fishing without a permit! This just shows that the EAW are taking the easy option. Whilst licence evasion is an issue, it is no where near as impactive on fish stocks as the illegal capture of fish. Targetting still waters is just too easy. There is a simple answer to this that will save the EAW a whole lot of time and get them back to the river bank - anglers must produce a rod licence before a ticket is issued -simpleThey told me that they now have a part time team of 7 officers in North Wales going out in the evening and at weekends and walking the river banks. They stated that this was about being visible. They explained that the North Wales cover team (fishing and waste offences) would review all the intelligence and campaigns for targeting areas at high risk. However, they often don't catch anyone and they confirmed the intelligence needed to improve. Well doesnt that say it all - they dont often catch anyone - apart from fishing without a licence at a stillwater! They added their it is there belief that the biggest threat to fish stocks comes not form poaching, but from land use , chemicals and spills , sheep dipping etc. Water quality is deteriorating and they have concluded that conservation targets for fish will not be affected by tackling poaching alone. Whilst I accept that water quality is an issue, its about time they started looking a Welsh water, who appear to be one of the main polluters in Wales. You referred to 10 covert operations by the EAW across the whole of Wales. They stated that these 10 are where there has been a planned campaign which has been approved in accordance with regulatory and legal compliance, they stated that the pattern of poaching has changed greatly over the last two decades and that criminal activity is now focused in areas such as drugs, where more money can be generated . They stated that poaching is reported to the EAW through its 0800 number and by local fisheries groups is small in scale. Well doesnt that mean that they have more time to target poachers, as i believe drug dealing is a matter for the police! Again an admission that the 0800 number isnt working 'small in scale'. Non reporting doesnt mean its not happening. The true level of crime is never known as crimes are seldom reported, the British Crime Survey usually highlights this in repsect of non fishery crime, ie burglary, theft, robbery and rape. The fact that crime figures are dropping doesnt mean the level of policing can reduce! A very interesting read, i will certainly be attending the meetings to voice my concerns. I have no faith whatsoever in the EAW managers after reading this feedback. Hoppy  |
|
|
|
Post by Gwyniadun on Oct 2, 2006 20:51:30 GMT -1
I have no faith whatsoever in the EAW managers after reading this feedback.
Hoppy
Snap
Gwyniadun
|
|
|
|
Post by highplains on Oct 5, 2006 17:43:40 GMT -1
Just a note to say that I haver it on good authority that the bailiff for the Clwyd found a 30 yard net in the estuarial waters last week and put it out of action. I have no news on who was responsible of if any prosecutions are likely to follow. I will let you know if I hear more.
All the best
Highplains
|
|
|
|
Post by kwilliams on Oct 6, 2006 10:03:24 GMT -1
Following the input by Highplains, it requires further comment on a number of incredulous mysteries purported by the EA wales managers which are also reflected the comments by " Hoppy" who is as bemused as I at the statements made.
1. they stated that the pattern of poaching has changed greatly over the last two decades and that criminal activity is now focused in areas such as drugs, where more money can be generated .
My response to this is one of total disbelief at this having been said in relation to Poaching offences in North Wales in as much Between 1985 and October 2005, I'm aware of only two instances where fishery offenders were noted in possession of or using drugs ( Marijuana ) at the time of an incident. The last I noted such a time was at a Carp lake in the Wrexham area during 2004 where I removed the three men for fisheries offences and later handed them over personally to N Wales Police and they were dealt with appropriately
This was was an incident where EA managers felt it was not a matter for EA Enforcement Staff and should NOT to have gotten involved
Never at any time has intelligence ever been presented by either the Intelligence officer or Police in all of that time to suggest that Poaching of salmon or the Theft of Coarse fish was being used to fund the purchase of Drugs so I find it highly unlikely considering the lack of intel gathering expertise by certain EA Oficers that the Poachers have suddenly changed tack and realised this potential so quickly.
it was rumoured that in the late 80's to mid 90's that poachers on the Wye were involved in such behaviour but it was never evidenced to EA staff openly.
My view and that of Hoppy is almost identical with regard to responsibilities relating to drug misuse and should the activity of Salmon poaching be drugs related, then this would elevate the amount of poaching suspected of occurring previously to have escalated on a greater scale of the like never seen before.
Wild salmon fetch in Hotels around Deeside between £3.10 - 3.95 per pound during the licencesd netting season and to buy drugs through poaching at black market lesser rates at any time would require an enormous amount of fish to be sold!
IS THERE INTELLIGENCE TO SUBSTANTIATE THIS?? I think not !!
I would suggest that as there is such a statement by the EA, why hasn't the poaching on the Lower Dee below Chester been sorted where it is a crucial issue, and had they done so considering the constant warnings of problems which were ignored, this would then have given weight to the EA Managers allegations by being able to produce outcomes in the courts.
No such outcomes have ocurred other than to deal with Illegal Cockle fishermen in winter months lower down at Mostyn Docks These are he two cases highlighted by the EA as prosecuted and certainly nothing to do with salmon poaching during the migratory run period.
If there is a drugs related activity associated with poaching then Both Cheshire Police, N Wales Police and other agency's should be demanding that EA Wales held Intelligence that is held at Buckley which is not the actionable domain of their enforcement oficers, then the intel should be handed over to the rightful authorities and be given credit if its due otherwise the EA managers statement in reality should be treated with the greatest of sceptiscm and not least be Audited by the Government department that checks all intel records held for its authenticity
They explained that the North Wales cover team (fishing and waste offences) would review all the intelligence and campaigns for targeting areas at high risk.
Can the EA state that these officers have all been trained in the skills required for the Evaluation of Inteligence received
( including anonymous Complaints that are ignored as policy in North Wales)
The ability to assess fisheries intelligence and crime in my opinion is a task that requires a total understanding and knowledge of the fisheries world, its politics, all the angling bodies, Riparain Ownersand stakeholders, unfortunately there isn't such a person in the Agency's employ in North Wales who can gain the confidence of all those groups I have touched upon, therefore the ability to collect information and improve relations through the 0800 complaints system has failed as a consequence and will continue to do so through a lack of focussed dedication.
Writing up the locations of Bin bag dumpers and waste disposal is an offence always after the fact and where it presents itself in a pattern then cameras are situated and offenders identified from car or van registration numbers and later dealt with a singular leisure, a leisure I might add has never been available to fisheries enforcement staff.
Again only one officer is trained and based at Buckley and does not meet and greet stakeholders as he should thus making him invisible to all which is unnaceptable in the light of the EA's policy on openess and being transparent
The EA may refute this comment, however as a former intel officer, I made it my business to know all fishery owners in N.Wales, created a database of the fishery name, its location, names, fish present and this is still on the EA data base record, so why isn't this info being utilised ??
Referring to rod licence evasion - They stated that they instead targeted big terms at pools where there is a highlighted level of evasion (20%)
The subject of rod licence evasion in the Northern region of EA Wales is of of the Agency'a own making and has now come home to roost in a big way.
This is mainly as a consequence of managers constantly refusing to admit there was a problem and also for failing to ensure that a small number of staff actually participated in rod licence inspection duties. Some certain officers felt that living in N West Gwynedd excluded them from routine duties and rod licence Blitzes... I can even state that a few officers made it their business to actually take time off or arrange rest days to avoid weekend working on this matter.
Nationally evasion always stood at about the 7%-9% in each region whereas in N.Wales it was was seriously at a factor of three times which has now been admitted publicly for the first time.
There is No figure for River based Rod Licence evasion to my knowledge nor has there ever been as such patrols were ever contemplated for major rivers such as the Dee which has been seriously neglected in a team enforcement role capacity since 2000 when only one officer was officially designated to patrol it.
therefore such issues will continue to come to light regarding this problem I'm sure.
with regard to the Boat patrols ...They also identified netting on the estuaries as a big threat and, alongside the properties work detailed above, that is where they are putting their resources (boat patrols etc)
Maybe the EA Managers can state why the Conwy estuary has been plagued with netting activity at night and the bass Nursery site has been ignored, Drift netting takes place above Conwy bridge in a total no go area for netting at night and has not been dealt with.
Boat patrols on the Dee Estuary appear to have been non events as commercial fishermen don't so far recall seeing such patrols downstream of Queensferry this year in any number.
Again the Dee Bass Nursery site has been neglected and in doing so the salmon stocks are neglected as the bass netsmen will take salmon and sea trout without hesitation once darkness falls and fish landed whenever. and previous intercept patrols do not ocur though a lack of local knowledge on the ground, a fact admitted not so long ago in a local Fisheries Advisory meeting at Buckley
The comment that really is d**ning is said to recount...However, they often don't catch anyone and they confirmed the intelligence needed to improve.
The intelligence service is as most suspect a failure due to the singular approach based at Buckley as stated above and the fact that as I had alwatys told managers the angling public have no faith in the EA because of poor responses or in fact no responses at all sometimes because of a belligerent attitude by officers who couldn't be bothered and in some cases is still the prevailing attitude.
As far as protecting the Spawning grounds of the main rivers in N.Wales, the activities of patrolling for poachers on the headwaters of Brown trout fisheries like Llyn Alaw should be curtailed as this is an attempt year in year out to deal with soft targets whereas the problems in Bala, on the rivers Ceiriog Dwyfawr, Dwryd, Conwy which are a few to name are being mawled every year and not properly attended to is a scandal which cannot be left to continue.
Managers made deliberate decisions in 2002 to withdraw trained enforcement multi skilled staff to carry out pure fisheries management duties which include habitat improvement, broodstock collection etc whereas the officers who did this went gladly to avoid being involved in duties that entailed conflict management with fishery offenders.
It is about time these staff were returned to frontline duties and the soft duties carried out by staff with more scientific backgrounds as was the case prior to the big changes that occured and destroyed the manpower ability and moral that was already at a fragile state.
Managers were constantly warned of the implications and they went ahead and done what they knew to be morally and operationally wrong because of Dogma from up on High.
A poll of EA staff to determine the field background skills would really show how out of touch managers within the EA actually out of touch in dealing with fisheries crime.
Such is the damage done to staff numbers, the ability to pull back to a state of well being and low evasion as was enjoyed not so many years ago is almost near nigh or impossible to recover to.
Further threats to fish stocks from foreign assylum and economic migrants is expanding at a great rate and it is now reported that lakes in the dee catcment and including the Dee itself are losing fish for offenders to eat and the tactics used to obtain them are often highly illegal...... will the EA take this matter to task and deal with the illegal activity rather than tell complainants its is a police matter.
No disrespect to police officers but they have enough to do without wondering which pool or stretch of river to attend to or how to find it and they are not as it is openly stated have any training at their training schools to reflect fishery law so why should the EA keep making this statement when they know its own officers are trained in law and capable of dealing with such matters effectively at " Common Law"
This is a pure and simple abdication of responsibility and they know it
I am of the opinion that managers should be required to take on the field tasks for a period of a least 2 years before they are put in charge of fisheries enforcement operations thus ensuring an understanding of the task and that an empathy with anglers is in place to do the job efficiently
It is significant to note how few managers are Anglers
Keith Williams
Former Special Enforcement Officer (Dee Area)
|
|
|
|
Post by rwgbridgend on Oct 6, 2006 20:51:08 GMT -1
Keith continues to put comments and claims made by EAW into context.
Keith speaks from years of experience whilst on the ground. The people at EAW making these claims are managers who make these claims from thier offices. I know who i would rather believe!
well done keith, keep us enlightened!
|
|
|
|
Post by Gwyniadun on Oct 7, 2006 0:56:26 GMT -1
Well done Keith Williams, you know well that I support truthfulness whatever it is and wherever it eminates from... I believe that you are on the mark and as a result support your views, I doubt it if anyone from the EA will respond.
|
|
|
|
Post by rwgbridgend on Oct 8, 2006 21:15:11 GMT -1
The South Wales Evening Post , letters page.
MISLEADING INFORMATION
10:00 - 04 October 2006
I Would like to congratulate members of the Tawe and Tributaries Angling Association for patrolling the River Tawe in order to protect fish stocks. They not only give up their spare time, but compromise their safety due to the presence of poachers.In the recent article Anglers on patrol as agency ducks out (Post, September 22) a spokesperson for Environment Agency stated there are 11 operational enforcement staff in South West Wales who are able to deal with illegal activity. What they fail to state is that the 11 staff are not dedicated water bailiffs, but work for other departments within their organisation.
They continue to mislead readers by stating their staff operate legally in a covert manner. According to Environment Agency statistics, only one covert operation has been carried out in Wales this year!
Wynne Griffiths
Head Bailiff Ogmore Angling Association
|
|
