On this page:

Steering Group - Minutes 6

Minutes of the 6th Meeting of the Freshwater Fisheries Forum Steering Group held at, Strathearn House, Broxden, Perth, on Monday 17 January 2005.

In attendance:

David Dunkley - SEERAD (Chairman)

Manson Wright - SEERAD

Shauna Cranney- SEERAD (Secretariat)

Andrew Wallace - Association of Salmon Fishery Boards

Brian Davidson - Association of Salmon Fishery Boards

George Holdsworth - Association of Scottish Stillwater Fisheries

Seymour Monro - Atlantic Salmon Trust

Jane Davis - British Trout Association

Willie Miller - Consultative Committee on Protection Orders

Professor Peter Maitland - Fish Conservation Centre

Ross Gardiner- Fisheries Research Services

Dr Alastair Stephen - Institute of Fisheries Management

Roger Brook - Rivers and Fisheries Trusts of Scotland

Ronnie Picken - Scottish Anglers National Association

Derek Keith - Scottish Campaign for Public Angling

Ron Woods - Scottish Federation for Coarse Angling

David Howell - Scottish Natural Heritage

Miranda Lindsay- Scottish Rural Property and Business Association

Craig Campbell - National Farmers Union (Scotland)

Introduction

1. David Dunkley offered apologies on behalf of Gordon Brown who could not attend the meeting due to illness and informed the meeting that he would be standing in as Chairman for this meeting. He also informed the meeting that Roger Brook would be the new representative from RAFTS.

Apologies

2. Apologies were received from Callum Sinclair (SEPA), Jane Wright (RAFTS), Craig Campbell (NFU(S)), John Armstrong (FRS), Ross Gardiner deputised for John Armstrong.

Minutes of Previous Meeting

3. The Steering Group approved the minutes of the last meeting with the following changes:

  • The references to 'Rivers and Fisheries Trusts' should be changed to 'Rivers and Fisheries Trusts of Scotland'; and
  • Ronnie Picken represents only the Scottish Anglers National Association on the Steering Group

Action - Secretariat to put approved minutes on the SE website.

Matters Arising

Task Matrix

4. The Chairman said that the Task Matrix would be a helpful tool in thinking about what the Steering Group would report back to the Forum. It was noted that the under the comment section for annual/ weekly close times that the sentence 'Grayling - no opposition to the suggestion made by the GS' should be removed, as it was agreed at the last Steering Group meeting that enabling powers should be used to make all close times.

Action - Secretariat to amend the Task Matrix and put on the website.

Highlands and Islands Aquaculture Forum

5. The Chairman apologised that there was no update from HIAF due to Gordon Brown's absence.

Action - Chairman to continue to report back on the work of HIAF

Presentations

6. The Chairman said that he hoped that the presentations to the Forum would be made by members of the Steering Group. SEERAD was very keen that policy developments were an open and inclusive exercise. The Forum would be chaired by the Scottish Executive, but there would need to be a lot of Steering Group involvement.

7. The Chairman reminded the meeting that it would be views of the Steering Group and not personal views that would be reported back to the Forum. The Institute of Fisheries Management said that one of the views of the Steering Group was that the Scottish Executive should be providing funding, and asked if this could be reported back to the Forum. The Chairman agreed.

8. The following members of the Steering Group agreed to give presentations at the FFF:

  • Andrew Wallace - Management;
  • Willie Miller - Access;
  • Peter Maitland -Regulation of fish movements and the use of live fish as bait;
  • Ron Woods - Use of gaffs, tailers, knotted nets and pike gags; annual/ weekly close times and the use of multiple rods and rod rests; and
  • Alastair Stephen - Rapporteur

9. It was agreed that where there was not total consensus, then the options that were available would be presented.

3.1 Management (SFFF SG 6-1)

10. The Association of Salmon Fishery Boards apologised for not having SFFF SG 6-1 tabled for this meeting, and reported that the Management Sub-group was still working on it.

11. The conclusion of the meeting was that in light of the developments regarding the issue of funding, that there was not a likely prospect for any radical management change.

12. Unitary Structures

It was agreed that the Unitary Structure approach was likely to be a long way off and further discussion would be needed to decide what they would look like. Another issue that required discussion within the Steering Group was that of how to prepare for any further legislation.

13. Existing Legislation

The Management Sub-group had also discussed what could be done in terms of Management under the capabilities of the existing legislation. It was reported that progress had been made with the resources available at the moment, including the District Salmon Fishery Boards (DSFBs) and the Fisheries Trust network at addressing certain issues. It was reported that evolution in terms of management had occurred in the past due to internal networks. The existing structures could be developed with the direction of the Steering Group. It was acknowledged that there may be sensitivities with this approach, and thought should be given on how to clear it with the Board and Trusts networks.

14. It was reported that the evolutionary process was one which would be a worth while opportunity and it would not be affected by the new legislative slot. The presentation that would be made to the forum would include the options on Management that the Group had come up with, the issues on funding and the opportunities available.

15. It was agreed that work on what the Unitary Structure would look like should not be abandoned and should be developed along with a cost outlay and presented to the Minister. The Steering Group agreed that there was a requirement for an independent review on how much a Unitary Structure would cost.

16. The Scottish Federation for Coarse Angling added that the Stimulated Evolution approach sounded like the approach described by the Management Sub-group, and said that they were more and more convinced that this was the route in which the Steering Group should go, not only because of the funding aspect but also because of the people who would be involved. If the Stimulated Evolution approach to Management was adopted, then the legislation could include enabling powers instead of being too restrictive. Access legislation that encourages the creation of some sort of local decision making should be encouraged.

Rod Licences

18. There were some differing views from the Steering Group on the issue of rod licensing. It was commented that if the revenue raised from rod licensing went straight back into fisheries management then more people would buy them. It was also commented that it would cost too much to administer a rod licensing system. It was also suggested that before a decision was taken on whether to introduce rod licensing in Scotland, more thought needed to be given to how that system would work. It was reported that the Management Sub-group had also looked at the system of rod licences and suggested that the Scottish Executive hire consultants to investigate further. It was also suggested that rod licensing did not have to be on a national basis, it could also be issued regionally and managed locally. It was also suggested that if any system was introduced that it needed to be flexible.

19. The Association of Salmon Fishery Boards suggested that the Steering Group should indicate to the Freshwater Fisheries Forum that there are both short to medium term options and also options for the long term, and it should also be explained that the Steering Group had to re-think the Management Options just before Christmas when the funding issue came to light.

Action - ASFB to circulate the paper on options for management after today's meeting

3.2 Access (SFFF SG 6-2a, SFFF SG 6-2b, SFFF SG 6-2c and SFFF SG 6-2b)

20. The Chairman spoke about the papers tabled for this issue and asked how the Steering Group would present the ideas to the Forum. Thought needed to be given to what message the Steering Group wanted to send to the Forum. The Chairman reminded the Group of the Minister's commitment to repeal the 1976 Act. The Institute of Fisheries Management stated that unless the 1976 Act is replaced with something better and properly funded and managed, then why replace it. The Consultative Committee on Protection Orders thought that there was a possibility of making progress on replacing the 1976 Act with something that builds on the existing Protection Order idea but removes 'blanket protection'. He proposed introducing a protection order system all over Scotland and applying an option whereby people can opt out. It was suggested that there was a need for a Committee to cover the whole of Scotland, similar to the Consultative Committee on Protection Orders. SCAPA's view on access was that the 1976 Act should be repealed and replaced with an 'Anglers Trust'. He explained that the 'Anglers Trust' would lease the waters in return for protection and this would exclude stillwater commercial fisheries. The Association of Scottish Stillwater Fisheries asked how non man made Lochs obtained legal protection.

21. The SFCA detected a great deal in common with the suggestion put forward by the Consultative Committee on Protection Orders and SCAPA. The basic principle from both suggestions was that if Fisheries were well managed then they would receive protection. It was noted that there was general agreement in the fundamentals for access; there were just some differences in opinion on the fringe mechanisms.

22. The ASFB thought that the 'Blanket Protection' approach was too heavy handed and suggested that it was better to have a more organic process which grows. The ASSF asked how in a legal sense someone could opt out of a blanket protection system. If this was possible, then the 'Blanket Protection' system would be perfect. The Steering Group were in agreement that the 1976 Act should be repealed.

23. The Steering Group agreed that the three options on access that would be brought to the Freshwater Fisheries Forum are as follows:

  • Anglers Trust;
  • All Scotland Son of Protection Orders approach; and
  • Organic (improved Protection Order fit for purpose legislation).

The Forum would be informed that the above options were all still work in progress.

24. It was agreed that the above three options should be brought to the Forum, and then the feedback from the forum should be used to report back to the Minister. The Chairman stated that whatever system covers access it would need to balance the following three things:

  • Promotion of angling;
  • Protection of anglers rights; and
  • Protects the fish.

25. It was also agreed that the presentation for the forum would include a section that covered the weaknesses of the 1976 Act. Willie Miller agreed to give the presentation on Access at the Forum.

Action - SEERAD to check with solicitors on the blanket protection opting out issue

3.3 Miscellaneous

26. Presenters on each issue were agreed as follows:

  • The use of gaffs, tailers, knotted nets and pike gags - Ron Woods
  • Regulation of fish movements - Prof Peter Maitland
  • The use of live fish as bait - Prof Peter Maitland
  • Annual/weekly close times - Ron Woods
  • Use of multiple rods and rod rests - Ron Woods

27. Pike gags

The paper SFFF SG 6-8 was tabled by SFCA. It was agreed that these should be banned and it was thought that it was not something that would have a huge impact.

28. Multiple rods

It was agreed that the presentation on multiple rods would take the note on the task matrix as a starting point.

29. Fish Movements

The Chairman stated that the regulation of fish movements is linked to management and access, Gs contingency plans, and the transfer of water between catchments. This issue is not just about fish, it also has ecological and genetic implications. The aim is not to stop fish movements, just to regulate them.

30. The British Trout Association commented that the issue of transportation was missing from the paper on the regulation of fish movements. The biggest disease risk is people bringing in fish from out with the UK.

31. IFM said that all the Steering Group were doing on these issues for the Forum was highlighting what can be done. At this stage it is not known who will administer this or how it would be carried out and this should be included in presentations to the Forum.

32. Close Seasons

FRS asked how good the case was for a rigidly proposed close time for grayling as opposed to enabling powers. The Chairman stated that as agreed at the last meeting, the preferred approach would be to use an enabling power .

4. Draft Agenda for the Forum (SFFF SG 6-6)

33. A copy of the draft agenda for the forum was circulated to the Steering Group. The only change that was suggested was to change the references to 'submit voting forms' to 'feedback sessions' and subject to this change, the agenda could now be circulated to the wider forum.

Action - Secretariat to send out copies of the agenda to the attendees of the Forum

5. Voting System for the Forum (SFFF SG 6-7)

34. Secretariat had circulated a paper on electronic 'audience response systems' as a suggestion to provide feedback from the audience of the forum on the issues presented on the day. There were some reservations about using this as at this forum; there was nothing solid to vote on, and all the Steering Group wanted at this stage was feedback on the issues presented.

35. SNH suggested using the approach where all forum attendees would be asked to put their comments on 'post-it' notes and put them on the flip charts for each of the presentations. Volunteers would then be needed to help count the 'post-it' note comments so the Rapporteur could present the summary of the feedback in the conclusions and close section of the day.

36. The Chairman asked the Steering Group for a volunteer to be Rapporteur for the Forum. Alastair Stephen said that he would be Rapporteur.

Action - SNH to contact Secretariat to provide more information on how the flip chart method of feedback works

6. A.O.B

Progress Report to Ministers

37. SCAPA asked whether a progress report would be sent to the Minister following the Forum. The Chairman reported that there would be one.

Action - SEERAD to produce a progress report on the Forum for the Minister

7. Date and place of next meeting

10.00am, 1 March 2005, Strathearn House, Perth

Page updated: Friday, July 8, 2005