EA NEWS

[cff]

CFF is first with the news as usual ;D

EA has announced their new Trout Stocking Policy and their proposed new salmon and sea trout byelaw proposals

(no comment)

www.environment-agency.gov.uk/subjects/fish/fishnews

[apprentice2]

Actually CFF it was on the EA web site first! But your posting above was the first news on this site.

Brian M.

[Torgoch]

Why is there an apparent element of " One Up-manship " being portrayed in postings.
I find it most unpalatable and certainly gives weight to the South -v- North divide being restated
Shame!

[cff]

It is very interesting that the EA News concerned includes two items of extreme importance to the future management of our fisheries.
Both have featured in heated forum and other debates.
My posting has been read 65 times on this thread and 52 on Gethyn's forum. Yet apart from two slick remarks here, there has been no other comment.

So after all the fuss about closing rivers and c&r, does nobody have any views on the new brown trout stocking policy or salmon and sea trout byelaw proposals?

Has anybody actually taken the trouble to read them?

What, for instance would be your advice to the Campaign for expressing its views on triploids ?

[clwydman]

CFF both documents on the EA web site make interesting reading and would probably bring less opposition that the rumoured catch and release proposals etc.
As for the stocking of non fertile brown trout, I have for many years questionned the stocking of brown trout in large densities into our rivers. It would be an interesting experiment on all rivers, to leave stretches of river unstocked and then measure the different stocking rates, if any.
To fill a river with over size trout that are unable to breed brings many questions rather than answers in my view. eg. What is the catch up rate of stocked fish? How many stocked fish go on to breed?
I would like to see the scientific reasoning behind stocking brown trout that are unable to breed thinking very quickly I can see only negative impact on the river eco system??

Interesting

[apprentice2]

CFF,

Surprised that YOU should find my posting slick and I am really quite flattered.

I HAVE actually read the documents AND the allegedly "suporting" EA annual reports and am in correspondance with the relevant EA staff scientists. I am chosing to await their reaction to my observations before posting a detailed critique.

Brian M.

[highplains]

I would urge all members to read this latest missive from the EA.

To sum up they are saying either stock with the progeny of the existing wild stock from the river into which the fish are to be introduced or stock with infertile female triploid trout.

There will be some of you, like me, who remember the introduction of triploid trout in the 80's/90's. They were hailed as the panacea for stock fisheries. They do not have to bother with wasting energy on the sex urge, nor to waste it on producing eggs. They are simply eating machines! They grow and grow and grow and eat and eat and eat.

So what you may ask is the problem?

Mother nature, being a wise old bird, selected native trout that, finding food hard to find in its native stream, migrated to the sea to feed and grow, later to return to mate in the rivers of their birth. However, when they returned to the rivers of their birth they lost the urge to eat for fear of eating itself into extinction. Wise old mother nature, she produced sea trout and salmon and all was well.

Then came the Environment Agency and said unto the anglers "you must stock your waters with triploid trout for they do not breed an thus the integrity of the local stock will be maintained." Also they eat and eat and eat so will soon do what nature succeeded in preventing for millions of years - they will eat all the local stock and soon the rivers will be bare. But the Environment Agency have spoken so we must do as we are told. Have they finally put the inmates in charge of the asylum??

Please EA tell me I am wrong and if so why?

Pleading for sanity

Highplains

[muddlerman]

hi highplains
i have just read your letter mate , i will say this i totaly agree with you , i think its a total waste of time stocking sum river in wales , as sum of them are not capable of holding large numbers, of natural trout , not to mention stocking them with farmed trout , certain rivers do not have a plentyful supply of food to feed a large head of stocked trout, why the hell would a, SALMON/SEATROUT/SEWIN ,RIVER ,,want a stock of ffarm produced trout in the system?,
in my opinion there is a place for farmed trout and it aint in our RIVERS,there is a natural stock of wild trout, in my river and that how MOTHER NATURE INTENDED ,,,,
muddlerman

[beanzy]

Surely the EA are still going to have to license stocking/rfish movements in river systems anyway, so they'll still be in charge of where gets stocked?

I thought this was just about mandating that, where stocking happens, this only uses either fish from eggs of that river or triploid rainbow trout. I don' think they are mandating the use of stocking, just imposing some controls on what can be stocked, in light of the reports they received during last year.

As to whether a river should or shouldn't be stocked, that a different kettle of fish entirely.