On this page:

Steering Group Papers 5-1

SFFF SG 5-1: Regulation of the movement of salmon and freshwater fish between inland waters in Scotland

It is clear that freshwater fish species have been extending their range in Scotland. Some of this expansion may have come about naturally, but there is little doubt that fish have been physically moved and introduced into new locations. This is not a new phenomenon; it has been going on probably for centuries. For example, fish such as the grayling have been introduced into a number of our rivers. Whereas this has been largely welcomed as a useful addition to the angling resource, some introductions have been rather less well received by ecologists.

There is extensive documentation of the introduction and movement of new species, notably the papers that have been produced describing the change in the fish community in Loch Lomond. One of the species cited as posing particular problems, the Ruffe, has now been spread further in Scotland.

The problem is not restricted to non-native fish being introduced, however. A number of lochs and rivers in the Highlands now support populations of e.g. minnows that were never present historically. These are likely to have been taken to these waters by anglers visiting from further south, who brought the minnows along as bait for trout fishing. Whether the fish were used as live bait or dead bait, live specimens have ended up in the new waters perhaps by escape or release at the end of the fishing trip. In other instances, bait fish, such as juvenile perch, may have been introduced into waters already containing this species, but the local populations may be genetically quite distinct from the introduced specimens. The impact of the introduction of new genetic material is less easy to determine, but may not be beneficial.

One way of looking at the situation is to undertake a risk-analysis and consider the application of the Precautionary Approach. A risk-analysis might conclude that where fish are being moved around, there will always be the probability that some fish will be either accidentally or deliberately released. The impacts on the local fish community may not be immediately obvious, but they are likely to cause change, and probably not for the better. Application of the Precautionary Approach requires that we should not do something if that action could cause an irreversible change, such as permanently changing an established ecosystem or altering the genetic make-up of isolated populations by introducing conspecific but unrelated individuals.

Under existing Scottish legislation, the only control on the introduction, keeping, release or movements of fish in Scotland are the provisions in the Import of Live Fish (Scotland) Act 1978 in relation to the introduction, keeping or release of fish not native to Scotland, and those in section 24 of the Salmon Act 1986, which apply only to salmon or salmon eggs, and then only in relation to salmon fishery districts where a district salmon fishery board has been established.

The situation is rather better in England and Wales, where section 30 of the Salmon and Freshwater Fisheries Act 1975 makes it an offence if a person introduces any fish or spawn of fish into an inland water, or has in his possession any fish or spawn of fish intending to introduce it into an inland water, unless he first obtains the written consent of the Environment Agency. An exception to this rule is where the water is or is part of a fish farm, which, if it discharges into another inland water, does so only through a conduit constructed or adapted for the purpose.

While section 30 provides significantly greater safeguards against the unregulated movement of fish than are available in Scotland, there are still problems. EA indicate that it is difficult to enforce; unless someone is caught in the act, it is extremely difficult to prove that they have introduced fish into a water body or that they intend to do so. Further, it is not an offence to possess the fish in tank on a lorry, even if it apparent that the intention is to use them for stocking.

There is no intention to introduce a blanket prohibition of the movement of fish within Scotland. There is, however, a clear case for introducing a regulatory mechanism to control the spread of fish. We must learn from the experience of the EA in this respect, and introduce an analogue of section 30 to Scottish legislation, but amended to overcome the shortcomings identified by those charged with enforcing the law in England and Wales.

Possible options - in addition to existing fish health provisions:

1. Those persons, including angling clubs or associations, who wish to introduce fish into an inland water from another water should obtain the prior written consent of the appropriate management body, who should require that a risk assessment be undertaken by the proposer.

2. Suppliers of fish should be registered and provide appropriate certification with respect to the provenance and health status of any fish sold for stocking.

3. Detailed movement records should be maintained by suppliers and the management authority, and these should be available for inspection.

4. The offence should attract appropriate penalties (fine up to Level 4 on the standard scale (up to £2500)?).

5. In the case of established put-and-take fisheries, a general licence may be issued to reduce the administrative burden on such businesses.

6. In the case of ornamental fish traders, and aquarists, a general licence may be issued to reduce the administrative burden on such businesses.

Guidelines should be established so that:

1. Stocking should be permitted only where there is no significant risk of ecological detriment to the donor waters or receiving waters and where there is a demonstrable environmental, economic or recreational damage.

2. Stocking should not normally be permitted in waters with established fish populations where it is not currently practised and has not been in recent years - except where this is needed to restore depleted populations or mitigate the effects of e.g. loss of spawning habitat.

3. Where recreational pressures argue for stocking to sustain populations or to create new fisheries, decisions on whether to allow movements and introductions should take account of the existing populations, carrying capacity and the current and proposed management regime.

4. Fish should not normally be introduced into waters outwith the natural range of the species or into new catchments within their existing range.

5. Reintroduction of fish which are no longer present in a catchment should be permitted only after an assessment of the likely environmental effect of the reintroduction.

6. Where fish are to be introduced to holding facilities, such as a fish farm or transit station, adequate safeguards to minimise the risk of any escape of fish should be in place before fish may be introduced.

Page updated: Monday, June 27, 2005