The opportunity to make comments to the Scrutiny committee is
welcome and long overdue. Starting from the beginning the first
mistake was the demise of the Regional Fishery Advisory Group and
the local Fishery Groups. This left no mechanism for consultation,
the Local Fishery Groups have now been resurrected only because
realisation has set in and the need to at least discuss what is
happening, albeit late in the day.
We as an Association have been closely involved in fisheries
improvement and protection on the Rivers Taff and Usk for nearly 50
years. It was obvious to us from the very beginning that the
fisheries service was only being given lip service in all early
dealings with Natural Resources Wales. We should point out that
this was not at the local level we were normally dealing with but
high up in the management structure.
The setting up of NRW has been a disaster for Welsh fisheries and
some other correspondents make this case. The first
indication of problems to come was the handling of the Rod licence
system as it was.
Welsh anglers pay for an Environment Agency
licence and still do at the moment. Due to a
previous negotiated agreement, between Environment Agency and the
Welsh Region as it was, Wales was classed as a Region at that time,
a right to a portion of the” top slice’’ of the
licence revenue ie what was considered surplus funds as they
were, was given to Wales at the end of each year. This was set up
and negotiated by previous Environment Agency Wales fisheries
staff who were clued up. Environment Agency England must
be laughing up their sleeves at not having to pay out the
£20K that did accrue to Wales at that time. This return of
money was to develop more angling opportunities and increase the
number of anglers – to increase Rod Licence revenue. It
would have been irrespective as to what it was used for but the
principle should have been maintained. We have never been
given a valid explanation of why this extra funding was stopped
except to say it was now incorporated into the Rod Licence money
returned to Wales. There has been a reluctance to give a straight
answer.
This also raises the point of Rod Licences and although we have
been assured that the National licence as it is will be
continued, much to our relief, we have no confidence in the
current way decisions are taken. It would be a travesty for Welsh
Anglers and a totally waste of money to attempt to bring in a Wales
only rod licence fee. However shrewd negotiation should be able to
give Wales a good deal as the current way the licence is sold
through the Post Office should, with the help of the number of
licences sold in Wales, help to negotiate a cost saving based on
licences sold in Wales.
We work with Angling Cymru, set up at the time by WAG and
Environment Agency as well as Sport Wales, and are recognised by
Sport Wales, as the overarching body of Angling in Wales. Sport
Wales Fund angling through Angling Cymru and previously funding was
also given by Environment Agency to Angling Cymru direct but
totally stopped by NRW in their second year, with the curt
explanation that the Sustainable fisheries fund that was previously
ring fenced for Fisheries is now in a large pot not ring
fenced. That the fisheries budget had been cut by over
60% and because of that Angling Cymru’s funding was nil.
This shows in our opinion the total lack of concern regarding the
Fisheries function in Wales. Some local funding has been
maintained. Many who have worked with the previous body in Wales
(Environment Agency) now look on in envy at the way the English
Regions still get support. We note in the response from some
consultees that other Governing bodies have suffered from the same
loss of Funding with possibly no formal reason given as to why it
has been stopped
The closing of the hatcheries, another extremely contentious issue
with the steady and continuous decline in the Salmon population, is
another travesty. In all the reports and documents presented
to the Board not one mention has been made of the outstanding
contribution made by our own Cynrig Hatchery. A renowned
centre of excellence and one that should at all costs be protected,
we are being told it will become a centre of excellence, but at
present again information and positive movement is slow. One would
have expected the business plan to have made sure that after the
decision to stop stocking things would have moved quickly. More
importantly the records of the enormous work carried out by this
hatchery on the salmon stocks on the Taff ranks as probably the
most comprehensive data record available for any river in Wales or
from our knowledge in the World. The Scrutiny Committee should be
made fully aware none of the data was presented to the Board in any
documents that were presented as reasons for closing the
hatcheries. They should also insist that the data is
published and preserved as its findings are of more relevance to
Wales that all the other papers that were presented. Others will
have presented more evidence for the other hatcheries that are to
be closed, in great haste we may say.
The other point on Hatchery closures was the mitigation programmes
that were in place covering historical agreements that were not
discussed with the relevant funders before closure. This was even
though the legal advice below stated.
Whilst NRW may be able to enter into discussions with relevant
parties as to the
possibility
of agreeing alternative mitigation measures in place of salmon
stocking, and notwithstanding the provisions in certain agreements
which allow for a variation in the current mitigation measures eg
Cardiff Bay Agreement, and whilst relevant parties may be
willing to enter into discussions concerning any such
variations, we need to be conscious of the fact that until such
time as those discussions are complete and any agreed variations
are formally documented, there does remain a risk that we may
not be able to agree the same.
We are high lighting this as an example of what we feel is mis
management in that a decision was taken to carry out a change of
circumstances when NRW knew that this advice had been given. Not
what we would consider good business practice.
Other comments posted indicate the total lack of
understanding from the Top.
The stopping of third party stocking has also had an effect on at
least one Welsh business that has lost at least 50% of its
turnover. It has also put in jeopardy a programme being funded by
the Wye owners association at their expence to increase the
knowledge and survival of salmon on the Wye. This was previously
supported by the Environment Agency and in doing so was
carrying out one of the new aims of NRW of working as a knowledge
based organisation. This programme is now in jeopardy. In the
interest of the decline in Salmon stocks this should be
addressed. The worrying factor in all this is that previously
all these programmes were supported by the then Environment Agency.
All the supposed evidence to curtail stocking has been available
for years. It therefore appears that the cessation of stocking has
more to do with cost and New Ideas than a genuine concern for the
welfare of one of our iconic fish species and one that has seen a
dramatic decline in the last years, The Salmon.
We note with some concern that the list attached from the
CEO of Natural Resources Wales indicating a list of stakeholders
that could be consulted by you does not mention one organisation or
group that represents the owners on the rivers of Wales. In fact
not one fishing governing body from Game Sea or Course is mentioned
as well as Angling Cymru. We note that for the first time in two
years angling has been given a profile on the home page of the
Natural Resources Wales web site. It goes at length to describe the
benefits of Angling to the economy as well as the health benefits
that accrue from the outdoors it also promotes the need to buy a
rod Licence!!. There needs to be recognised, there was until
the ring fencing was taken off the Sustainable Fisheries Fund, many
benefits to support Angling in Wales.