Swan mussels

richard bowler · Mar 18, 2012

Am I right in believing that the Swan mussel is a protected species, the reason for asking is that a lovely local stream that I used to photograph Kingfishers along was "improved" last week and in the spoil left by the dredger were hundreds and hundreds of some of the largest Swan mussels I've ever seen. I've just spent yesterday afternoon and this morning saving as many as I could but loads have died. How this sort of carnage can be allowed to carry on is unbelievable. I've put a few pictures up on my blog if anyone is interested in looking.
All the best
Richard
- Home

chub_on_the_block · Mar 18, 2012

Swan mussels (Anodonta cygnaea) are not protected, only the freshwater pearl mussel (Margaritifera margaritifera) is.

Pearl mussels are a northern and western species, now known from only a few rivers where recruitment is often a problem - most surviving populations comprise old individuals only (sometimes over 50 years old).

Philistine dredging operations still go on, even though this practice should only produce a partial dredge (eg short sections at a time, one bank only etc) to preserve biodiversity. You should name and shame the local EA office/region that still condones it on your stream, as in many areas it is an out-dated approach.

richard bowler · Mar 18, 2012

Many thanks for that, the stream is a little side stream of the Ivel in Bedfordshire, I have never seen such large amounts of Swan mussels, the reed beds that were ripped out were also home to Water rail and Water vole needless to say devoid of life now.
All the best
Richard
- Home

barbelboi · Mar 18, 2012

Sheer madness Richard, I wonder who organised this?
Jerry

chub_on_the_block · Mar 18, 2012

So it was Anglian Region Central Area I guess, not surprised really i have found Anglian Region to be one of the most backward thinking of the lot - ditch diggers rule in those parts. Only for ESA/Special Protection Areas like the Broads do ecologists/conservationists actually get a significant role in that awful region (and that took a lot of fighting for back in the 1980s)..

richard bowler · Mar 18, 2012

It's such a shame, although the stream was too small to be a fishery it teemed with dace and chub, kingfishers had just returned after an absence of a year and the fly life was really good. They've dug so deep into the stream bed that gravel has been deposited in the fields no doubt cleaning out the stream of all the over winter dragon and damselfly nymphs. Not to mention a large rabbit warren that has had spoil dumped on it effectively burying them alive.
On the bright side I'll soon be buying another rod licence to no doubt fund some more improvements.
All the best
Richard
- Home

MarkTheSpark · Mar 18, 2012

Water voles and kingfishers are fully protected, so the dredgers have committed a very serious offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act.

If you can prove the water voles and kingfishers were present before the dredging took place - maybe a picture or more than one person to say they had seen them - you should ask the local Wildlife Trust or someone similar to mount a case against the EA.

In any case, if they did not make an environmental assessment before dredging the stream, they are also guilty of negligence. Without this environmental assessment, they have no defence against a legal challenge.

barbelboi · Mar 18, 2012

MarkTheSpark said:
Water voles and kingfishers are fully protected, so the dredgers have committed a very serious offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act.

If you can prove the water voles and kingfishers were present before the dredging took place - maybe a picture or more than one person to say they had seen them - you should ask the local Wildlife Trust or someone similar to mount a case against the EA.

In any case, if they did not make an environmental assessment before dredging the stream, they are also guilty of negligence. Without this environmental assessment, they have no defence against a legal challenge.

Very true Mark, the powers that be carry out a very comprehensive risk assessment to ascertain they're not allowed to enter 'ankle deep' water to save a person from drowning - the mind boggles.
Jerry

mark brailsford 2 · Mar 19, 2012

Swan mussels are protected!
The people that are supposed to look after our countryside are nothing more than jumped up ex graduates that jump on the ''countryside wagon'' after getting a masters in ART because they think its the profession to be in. We have a county council run ranger service in Derbyshire that are nothing more than collage boys with no common sense whatsoever! These people have nearly decimated a local nature reserve (and fishery) by thinking it was a jolly good idea to rip out the vast beds of fragmities (is that how you spell it?) which are also protected.
I Decided to complain about these guys to the head at county offices and one of these chaps took it in to his hands to report me to the police for harassment! What I am getting at is that it is no good trying to do anything about rangers, wardens, EA officials or any other uniformed ''public servant'' as they ether think they are above the law, or as I found out, protected by them.

PS: I am a nice guy really and have never been in trouble with the law before...honest!

Mark

MarkTheSpark · Mar 19, 2012

I found this letter on another forum dated 2003 (but there may be some mileage in finding the current person at the JNCC:

The swan mussel is not a protected species in the UK. It is thinly distributed in England, Wales and southern Scotland, and is considered to be local. Like other long lived species of slow moving rivers, canals, lakes and larger ponds with a muddy substrate it is vulnerable to dramatic changes of habitat.
The most significant threat to unionids in Britain is poor river management. Dredging occurs approximately every 10 years and can remove 20% of the unionid population. Sometimes an entire population can be lost. Weed cutting happens yearly and removes 2-5% of the population.
Mussels are found at greatest densities in the marginal zones of rivers. Therefore, the impacts of river management on mussels can be reduced greatly
while retaining the management function by leaving marginal zones of the river bed unmanaged.
The other threat of course is from pollution.

Sincerely

Deborah Procter

Species Advisor dealing with invertebrates, amphibians and reptiles
JNCC, Monkstone House, City Road, Peterborough, PE1 1JY, UK

Jeff Woodhouse · Mar 19, 2012

I'd be interested to learn if this was the EA, I would very much doubt it. Probably the insane work of a local land owner who has no idea of the devastation he has caused. He (whoever it is) should be taken to task over it, why not contact your local EA Fisheries Dept and find out for sure.

Some work has been done on the upper River Loddon involving placing logs in the water and pinning them, creating areas for weed beds (they grow themselves naturally) and all manner of stuff that will help both fish and other wildlife. I'd be happy to send you a copy of their newsletter with all the details and plans, but I'd need your email address, if you want to PM it to me. It's great stuff and if you get EA fisheries on your side this sounds like just the sort of thing that could be done to that stream.

chub_on_the_block · Mar 19, 2012

If its not "main" river, the local council may have done it. It could also be the local landowner as Jeff suggests. However, i have seen the likes of similar dredging elsewhere in the Great Ouse catchment that was undertaken by the EA. Curious, because all national thinking is about retaining the water for as long as possible so it can soak into the water table - not rush it off to sea as fast as possible. Perhaps they considered that this drought year poses an imminent flood risk?.

richard bowler · Mar 19, 2012

Thanks everyone for thee interesting comments. Although I do have photographic evidence of kingfishers on the stream they do not nest there, I believe it's the nest site that is protected, the water voles were to be my photographic project this spring.
I don't think that the EA is carrying out the work it's self but I would have thought they would have consented to the work and there must be some kind of checks that take place to make sure the work is carried out correctly.
As I said before the stream is not big enough to be a fishery but it was a wonderful natural environment.
All the best
Richard
- Home

---------- Post added at 12:09 ---------- Previous post was at 11:51 ----------

Hi Jeff,
My email address is richardbowler@easy.com
All the best
Richard
- Home

richard bowler · Apr 20, 2012

Sorry to bring back an old post. But I thought that those of you who replied, would like to know that after weeks of leaving apple pieces along the stream bank the water voles have returned. To start with all I was getting were foot prints, these could easily have been rat's but today while staking out a fox family I was treated to some lovely views of a vole swimming around. The light was all wrong but I got a record shot of it that can be seen on my blog.
It has to be said that the kingfishers have gone though along with the fish.
All the best
Richard
- Home

barbelboi · Apr 20, 2012

Good news about the voles. It's quite a few years since I last heard the plop of a vole diving in let alone saw one - a common sight around local waters up to about 30 years ago.
Jerry

Chevin · Apr 20, 2012

The damage the Great Ouse Authority did to the Upper Ouse in the '60s and '70s was criminal. I followed the dredger along **** Walker's stretch throwing back all of the river pebbles, miller's thumbs, stone loach, crayfish and anything else I could find. Instead of nice natural banks we finished up with vertical walls and for what reason? To make the river navigable. The only things that could get through the river were canoes who paid nothing to use it. Who paid for that work? Anglers. After that act of sheer vandalism I decided never to give the GORA another penny in licence fees and I never did.

alan whittington · Apr 20, 2012

Which continued into the 80's and 90's Chevin,i wouldnt let em loose on my driveway,for i think they all live in caravans.

The stream,come ditch is home to monsters Richard,truly mahoosive mussels,at least they are still about in places.

Phil Adams · Apr 21, 2012

Ive been watching a group of water voles and at least two pairs of kingfishers recently in the local river (trickle) lea in Luton.

The area which you photographed with the swan muscles looks very much like a backwater I used to fish...although I dont think it is.

I hate seeing places like this ruined.

tuolumne fisher · Apr 22, 2012

there aint no end in sight to these occurences, whoever is charged with making sure things are tickety boo tasty, have an assortment of excuses for their failures, in my humble opinion, grab a few buddies and take loads of pics, put signs up informing as many people as you can of wots occured, and get letters published in the local paper
in order to have an effect you need local non anglers support, and therein lies the problem, the non angling public aint for the most part got a clue about the environment, and they aint no good at talking to the backs of anglers either, hence anglers are viewed as strange

watatoad · Apr 22, 2012

Best thing is photograph and report it nicely documented, I for one would never be surprised if it is the EA in the Anglia region as they do not appear to me to have the slightest notion of what river and waterway management is.

Swan mussels

Active member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

Senior Member

Well-known member

Banned

Senior Member

Moaning Marlow Meldrew

Well-known member

Active member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

alan whittington

Guest

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member