EA stocking of rivers

[mikench]

According to AT hundreds of thousands of barbel have been stocked into British rivers. Due it would appear to lobbying by Mr Vimes 11,834 barbel, dace, Chub and roach have been stocked into the River Skerne, 11,000 of the same plus bream have been stocked into the River Hull. I look forward to reports of increased catches!:wh

 

[sam vimes]

According to AT hundreds of thousands of barbel have been stocked into British rivers. Due it would appear to lobbying by Mr Vimes 11,834 barbel, dace, Chub and roach have been stocked into the River Skerne, 11,000 of the same plus bream have been stocked into the River Hull. I look forward to reports of increased catches!:wh

Nothing whatsoever to do with me. I only rarely fish the Tees, and never the Skerne. I find the EAs continued efforts to throw fish at the Tees and its tributaries quite baffling compared to their seeming indifference towards the Swale. I suspect that either river being in different regions, despite being separated by only a few miles in places, is the probable reason for such seemingly disparate policies. The river Hull is of little concern to me either way, it may as well be on the moon.

 

[john step]

If the river Hull was stocked, it may be that they may travel up to where it becomes the Swale? Unless of course there are weirs in the way?

 

[sam vimes]

If the river Hull was stocked, it may be that they may travel up to where it becomes the Swale? Unless of course there are weirs in the way?

If they can navigate the seals of the lower Hull, the saline water of the Humber, and the weirs of the Ouse, the Swale might see some benefit of the Hull being stocked. Good luck to the river Hull, and the hardy few that fish it though, it certainly has its problems.

 

[john step]

If they can navigate the seals of the lower Hull, the saline water of the Humber, and the weirs of the Ouse, the Swale might see some benefit of the Hull being stocked. Good luck to the river Hull, and the hardy few that fish it though, it certainly has its problems.

Actually I seem to have got my geography wrong....DOH mg:

 

[Graham Elliott 1]

In the corner then John. With a pointed hat.mg:

 

[peterjg]

According to the EA they stocked 400000 coarse fish last year.

There are roughly 2200 navigable miles of waterway in the UK. Let's be generous and say that there is only in total 3000 miles of streams, canals and rivers in the UK

Divide 400000 fish by 3000 miles: result - the EA stocked 134 coarse fish per mile of streams, canals and rivers in the whole of the UK. Now let's also consider the thousands of lakes, pits, reservoirs, ponds and lochs.

Initially 134 fish per mile doesn't sound too bad and certainly better than nothing (just) BUT when we take into consideration the true picture as a whole the figures in REAL TERMS are pathetic.

Is this an attempt by the EA to make us think that that they are doing a viable, realistic job, or is this just properganda and political lip service?

 

[thecrow]

Imo opinion its an attempt to cover up the multitude of problems our rivers have, how many of the fish that are stocked survive? going on the amount of Barbel that have been put into the Trent not many as it seems its an ongoing practice.

 

[Pete Shears]

I get the feeling that they are only feeding cormorants.

 

[Jim Crosskey 2]

These stockings seem to me like taking a sticking plaster to a gunshot wound.

The problems the rivers have in the first place is that the environment does not self-populate with fish. Because of lots of different factors - though my personal opinion on this is that the problem is the availability of both suitable breeding grounds and a healthy population of breeding fish. Thus, over a number of years when the spawning fails, what actually happens is that the remaining population of fish starts to get bigger (because the overall biomass of available food is being consumed by a smaller and smaller number of increasingly sized fish). And during this period, you never hear anglers saying... "where are all the 2lb chub and barbell? Something's very wrong with the ecology of my river!! EA, investigate this please!!" No, instead what happens is those fisheries are celebrated, probably moving away from clubs and turned into syndicates and such like. A barbel's lifespan - according to 0.7s of searching on google - is 15 - 20 years. So the fishery could be in immense decline for a good number of those years, but everyone's catching doubles so no one bats an eyebrow.

But then those fish die out. Either from old age, or predation. Let's face it, a fat old 16 pound barbel must be an pretty easy target for anything with claws and fur. But the problem isn't the predator. The problem is that the 16 pound fish that has just had its liver and gills torn out hasn't (successfully) had his end away for a good number of years! No kids, no grand kids, no great grand kids, nothing. Just a big rotting hulk left out for the nearest fox or red kite to haul off.... (who's kids, incidentally are thriving!)

It drives me mental that the very agency within the government that should be most concerned with this are so inept at looking at the real root causes. They're the Environment agency after all, surely they should be doing more to protect and enhance the environment. Stocking fish - the only time I see that making any sense is where a pollution incident really wipes out a properly healthy river, i.e. one where the fish are breeding successfully. And for anyone who's not sure what a really healthy river looks like, spend a day on the banks of the wye in the summer when the waters clear and chuck any kind of bait into the margins and see what happens. Fry will appear from nowhere and annihilate it. Because the fish are breeding (no end of access to good clean gravel) and thriving.

(And guess what, the barbel never get much more than 13 pounds! Who wants to catch a tiddler like that!)

These issues of environment just never seem to get addressed by the EA. Dredging, yes. Pulling out bankside cover, yes. Blind eye to abstraction (reduces flow and oxygen levels over spawning gravels) - yes. I'm sure this list could go on. But rarely do I hear anything about really improving the chances of natural stock recruitment, which from their responsibility towards angling should be a number one priority. Stocking fish - if anything - is just a colossal admission of their own failings in being guardians of our environment.

(Steps off soap box, wishes the blooming weather would warm up a bit so the fishing would improve.....)