3 May 2015 News/Editorial
I have a vision of the future.
But before coming to that, let us examine the 2014 Scottish salmon catch figures, just published.
The rods caught 45,175 (2013: 66,387) salmon and grilse, the second worst on record. No surprises there, we knew it was bad, and at 53% of the 5 year average, pretty much in line with what individual beats here experienced.
Of those 45,175, the rods killed 8,036, or 18%, releasing 82% (2013: 80%) back into the water.
The nets caught 17,778 (2013: 24,311) salmon and grilse, and of course, because it is their business, killed them all.
As an aside, 2,204 (2013: 5,522) of the net catch was from the Tweed, so at least most of that won’t be happening again from 2015 onwards.
So what can we glean from these figures?
· The rods released the highest percentage on record, 82%, despite this being by far the lowest number caught in recent years, proving, if proof were needed, that anglers and gillies are sensitive to obviously reduced numbers, and react accordingly.
· Even allowing for some of the released rod caught salmon dying, the nets killed more than twice as many as the rods, and some of those killed by the nets would come from rivers eg the Dee where the rods kill nothing.
· The figures presented by Marine Science Scotland are pretty impenetrable, but it would seem that the net catch decline has not been nearly so marked as the rod catch over recent years.
So, my vision of the future?
From 2016 onwards the Government will go ahead as planned and impose licensing, quotas and tagging on both nets and rods alike in Scotland.
For the rods, this will produce something like this:
There will be many rod fishery owners who will refuse, on principle, to have any part of it. They will, therefore, become full catch and release, all year round.
At the very least, the reality of paying for a licence and/or for tags will reduce the number of owners and anglers willing to kill, regardless of principle, simply because it is an extra expense, to which many will object; and, as night follows day, extra cost/expense always has a demand side consequence.
This will decrease still further the numbers killed by rods, so that we can anticipate release percentages of 90% and higher throughout Scotland.
Rod fishing for salmon will become, as near as dammit, full catch and release, and you can expect those still brave enough to kill anything, under licence, to do so very quietly, shush, don’t say anything out loud, whisper it, for fear of frightening the horses.
All the while, what of the nets?
I have no idea, but one scenario goes something like this:
The nets, unlike the rods, will continue to catch and kill salmon as before, albeit under licence and with tagging and quotas, one assumes, an extra cost to them too (will the cost for a licence and for individual tags be the same for nets and for rods?), but one they have no option but to bear, as killing salmon is their business.
Their quotas will be set in advance at (say) an average of the last 5 years catches, one assumes being somewhere around 15,000 to 20,000 pa.
Once quotas are set for nets, any attempt to reduce them will be fiercely resisted by the netting operators, understandably, because jobs, livelihoods and the profitability of businesses are at stake. Judicial review could be in the air.
Indeed, for mixed stock nets, quotas and licences run the risk of recognising the legitimacy of what they are doing, when many consider, as a matter of principle, they should not exist at all, and the tags will be a marketing tool for consumers to be certain they are buying a truly wild salmon, something the nets can, and no doubt will, use to increase the price at which they sell their salmon.
There is another scenario, advocated by those who support all this, root and branch, that the quotas given to existing nets, especially those acknowledged as mixed stock, will slowly be reduced, despite resistance from the operators, and that starting up dormant netting stations will cease because they will receive no quota…..all this an alternative, so this scenario goes, to buying the nets out. This is the prize, some say, which makes the price, viz licences, tagging and quotas for everyone, worth paying for the rods.
So where does this leave us?
My pessimistic vision leaves the nets where they are now, but arguably further legitimised and commercially advantaged, and fiercely resistant to quota reduction. The vision of others is more optimistic. They had better be right.
The rods on the other hand, blameless in all this, will simply give up killing anything, for the reasons given. The effect of this on salmon angling is impossible to calculate. Certainly, some of my correspondents say they will never come here again if that happens, but will they?
And all the while, here on the Tweed, there will be not one extra smolt produced, as a result of all this licensing, quotas and tagging business, because rods killing salmon at current levels (less than 5% of the population) is having no effect anyway on juvenile production, and we have minimal netting.
Excellent.
“You should not rock the boat and go along with it, for the greater good of the other rivers in Scotland, and to help the Scottish Government out of an EU hole and potentially very substantial fine, for not protecting Scottish salmon”.... I am told.
Why?
If it happens, will the rods at least be spared numerical quotas and tagging; could we live with being limited, by some sort of whole-river licence, to killing no more than (say) 1 in 3 caught, even 1 in 4, from 1st July to 30th November, effectively where we are now…. and no numerical quotas, no tagging.?
Quite possibly.
But if Government insists on numerical quotas, set in advance, and tagging of every salmon killed , I will have none of it.
Like most anglers, those salmon I caught in 2014 were all released. The last one I killed was in 2013.
It could be the last.