Constructive help-advice needed-EA, Fish Runs, lock gates

Below is a series of emails I sent to the EA recently. Any constructive advice would be welcome, thanks in advance.

To enquiries@environment-agency.gov.uk
Aug 3 at 9:23 AM
I have noticed there are no Mullet in the river Brede this year at Rye. A new lock gate has been put in which is high and no allowance for Mullet to slip over into the river. Usually there are lots of Mullet in the river by now and I cannot see one.
Could you let me know if any provision has been built into the lock gate to allow fish to run into the river.

REPLY EA-
Thank you for your enquiry into the new lock gates on the River Brede.
Brede locks are new and have been designed to prevent tidal flooding of the river, and the resultant damage to the freshwater system by saline intrusion. During the design phase for the new gates a fish pass was looked at being incorporated into the lock, but was ruled out due to the very limited space. The solution to fish passage is to operate the lock as before, which is to release fresh water at the fall of the tide. This allows migratory species such as sea trout and eels to pass the structure.
The reason the gates have remained shut is to hold back fresh water during this extended dry period, as such the mullet will not have been able to enter the river.

REPLY ME-
Thank you for your reply Eileen. These locks will remain closed for most of the summer therefore preventing runs of both Mullet and Sea Trout up the river. I know this because I have fished here for 20 years and the lock is very rarely opened in the summer months. There should be a sluice of some sort cut into the lock gate that could be lowered a little every now and then to allow the fish to run into the river. This would hardly affect the salinity of the river.
If this is not possible could the lock keeper just open the gate a little for a few hours at the appropriate times to allow these fish to run into the river and the same in the autumn to allow them out. This also would barely affect the salinity of the river.
These fish are a very important part of the ecology of the river.

I am really struggling with this. Not one answer, comment, piece of advice etc.. Where are all the legal experts, the fish experts, the angling trust experts etc when you need them and something serious comes up. Don't worry, I will do it myself on my own.
Perhaps it was the word constructive or just I am not popular enough. I bet if one of the popular members posted this, it would have got a lot attention. Don't worry or care about the fish or the river though -eh. !!!!

Mark,

Have you approached the Angling Trust to solicit their assistance or to have them offer any advice?

Unless the EA are acting illegally then I don't see any legal possibilities that might help you, so it might be a good diea to approach on the basis of cooperation rather then confrontation.

Given the current UK-wide "fear" of flooding their actions could be considered as being "reasonable". On the other hand they seem to say that they considered a fish pass but the space/economics were against providing one.

In your position I'd be approaching the Angling Trust in the first instance . . . . . .

I would imagine that denying sea trout entry to a river is likely to affect their need to spawn on the redds they use every year. Mullet would not be affected as they spawn at sea. I'd say your strongest argument is based on the sea trout and it's inability to spawn. I, and I'm sure many others on here simply don't know how to go about resolving the problem.
Local MP perhaps may be a start. There must be an organisation in this country that would take up your case on these grounds but I've no idea who?

peter crabtree said:

I would imagine that denying sea trout entry to a river is likely to affect their need to spawn on the redds they use every year. Mullet would not be affected as they spawn at sea. I'd say your strongest argument is based on the sea trout and it's inability to spawn. .....
....... There must be an organisation in this country that would take up your case on these grounds but I've no idea who?

Click to expand...

Totally agree with the Sea-Trout line of attack. If someone is paying for the Sea-Trout fishing on the river then they may be suffering demonstrable financial loss through their frustrated fishing rights caused by the Lock actions and would have a good case to take up - with support from ATr/Fish Legal.
Are there any clubs on the river that would support complaints?
Good Luck.

OK, sorry about my earlier post, still at least I got some attention and advice which was the purpose of the post. It looked like it was going nowhere.

I will heed the advice and see what I can do. I know this river and I know a small sluice to allow fish to slip round or over the lock gate would not cost a lot. It only needs to be a few feet wide and just deep enough so that when lowered at high water it will allow fish to slip over it. I could do it myself. A full blown fish run is not required. The EA assume the gates will be opened every now and then, but I know this does not happen in practice. They can remain shut for months. There are no mullet in the river this year and by now there would be hundreds of them. I could see them splashing about on the sea ward side of the lock with no way of passing them. The old gate was lower and the fish could slip over during spring tides. Nothing against renewing the gates for flood defenses but, no thought for the Mullet, Sea Trout, Lampreys, Eels etc. The sea trout are not seriously fished for but, I have seen them leaping and caught two by accident a few years ago. They run up the river and breed, I know this.There is a club involved, maybe two, but, they never use it. Plus I doubt they are aware of whats happened the sea end of the river.
Apart from the fishing this will seriously disrupt the species mentioned for the next few hundred years until someone wakes up and does something.. These fish have been running up into the river for a thousand years. The obvious answer is the lock keeper slips the gate open at high water for a couple of hours so the fish can slip through. This will not affect the flood defenses and the salinity has never been a problem. I have caught roach and chub 50 yards from the old gate. However, my experience is the easy, obvious solution, when given meets with more objection than the hard option.
Its a shame, this river has been enjoying all manner of runs from the sea, some are in serious decline. Sea Lampreys, eels etc. The real answer lays with the lock keeper but, my guess he has not opened the lock gates all summer.
I have not had a reply yet from the EA, lets just hope they see common sense and arrange for something to be done.

Thanks for the advice, armed with a bit more knowledge is very helpful. Sorry about the rocket, happy it hit but, I hope it did not hit the most painful bit.

Hi Mark,
You could assist the Mullet by catching a few and lifting them above the barrier where they will thrive.
When locked-in without access to the sea they seem to grow disproportionately to their sea going brethren.

I have fished thick lipped Mullet from salt water compounds where salt water was retained to provide top up water for salt pans.
These mullet were allowed to enter the compounds on the two highest tides of the year, spring and autumn, and stayed in the pounds for several years, what they fed on who knows, but they really did grow and fought superbly, especially on a fly tackle late into the evenings.

And they didn't taste too bad either

mick b said:

Hi Mark,
You could assist the Mullet by catching a few and lifting them above the barrier where they will thrive.
When locked-in without access to the sea they seem to grow disproportionately to their sea going brethren.

I have fished thick lipped Mullet from salt water compounds where salt water was retained to provide top up water for salt pans.
These mullet were allowed to enter the compounds on the two highest tides of the year, spring and autumn, and stayed in the pounds for several years, what they fed on who knows, but they really did grow and fought superbly, especially on a fly tackle late into the evenings.

And they didn't taste too bad either

Click to expand...

Trouble is Mick its a no fishing area the other side of the lock. The lock area is a no go zone and then its a boat mooring area and no fishing is allowed. And even then it does not solve the problem. I am not that concerned about my fishing, I can still fish for the usual species. I just think its a shame. The EA said they considered a fish run but, dismissed it on not enough room and it would cost too much. I think they spent 30 seconds considering it.
I know there's plenty of room, at least 10 yards of concrete stanchions either side of the lock, a small sluice built into the lock itself would suffice, or just instruct the lock keeper to open the gate a foot or two for a few hours to let the fish slip through. There is actually two lock gates, a wooden inner one and the new metal one 20 yards away to the sea. Salinity is a load of baloney as well. The gate opened a couple of foot at high water would not allow hardl;y any salt water to seep through and as I ahve said , I have caught roach and chub 50 ft away when the old inefficient gate was in place.
PS- Interesting point about the land locked Mullet, never new that. Did they breed?

I would try to contact someone in the EA fisheries or ecology teams. The answer you got sounds like it came from flood defence and taken from the design statement for the new lock. Once the EA has piece of paper or a set of boxes that they believe they have ticked, it could be like banging your head against a brick wall unless one of them recognises they missed something - which it seems they have. Best chance for that would be an ecologist/fisheries officer.

chub_on_the_block said:

I would try to contact someone in the EA fisheries or ecology teams. The answer you got sounds like it came from flood defence and taken from the design statement for the new lock. Once the EA has piece of paper or a set of boxes that they believe they have ticked, it could be like banging your head against a brick wall unless one of them recognises they missed something - which it seems they have. Best chance for that would be an ecologist/fisheries officer.

Click to expand...

Thanks chub,could be a good point. I have just received a lengthy explanation from the EA. It beats around the bush and does not address any possible solution of the mullet. A wonderful description of the benefits of the new lock gate which is not my issue, I commend it. I am considering my reply.
If Peter reads this I have sent you a PM for a bit of advice.

Thanks to everyone for your help. Some salient points have been made that I would not have thought of. I will up date on any developments.

Hi Mark,
No the locked in Mullet didnt breed at all.

The water was impounded to allow the fresh to evaporate off, usually through the gentle wind and extreme sunshine, it was then released into the salt pans as they became salt slush prior to harvesting.
Obviously it was very salty which may have been why the Mullet used to spend most of their time in the suface layers

A friend owns hectacres of these salt pans and he used to allow me to fish for the Mullet but the problem was he had sown the whole place with wooden poles hammered in to the bottom (to stop the locals from netting the Mullet) so landing one was always a bit of a lottery.
Great sport all the same.

Best of luck with your campaign.

.

Just thought I would update on this in case anyone was interested --as breif as I can:-

I have had a long email back explaining all the benefits of the new lock gates. The main point being it’s to stop freshwater loss and saline intrusion. I replied that I commended the new lock gates but, could they just open them a couple of times a month when they are not normally opened at times of drought. If this was done at spring tides, at the top of the water for a couple of hours there would be no saline intrusion or water loss. Even if they were opened just a foot it would allow many fish to enter the river as normal. (seems a easy solution to me)

I also asked for the finish date of the new lock gates and a copy of the lock keepers logs to see how many times the locks had been opened since the completed date. (I believe this was April/May and the locks have not been opened since then.)

They replied with a lot of information about the freedom of information act which it seems I am entitled to (I think) .and I had been passed on to a different department of the EA and stated they would reply to me.. No comment was made about my solution to the problem.
I am waiting for a reply. That was a week ago and I will give them to the end of this week.

Meanwhile there will be no Mullet run this summer and not much else. Wheels turn slowly!

Mark just a point for you, if, and it sounds to me they are taking you info request as an FOI request, legally they have up to 28 working days to respond to it. And most bodies I've ever dealt with take the full amount to respond. After which you have the right to take it to the Information Commissioner (IC) and request he/she gets involved to get you the docs/answer you requested.

Also if they refuse to supply the info you can ask them for an internal review of that decision. Best if you do before you go to the IC with a complaint. It shows you have been fair and reasonable in your request.

The bad one said:

Best if you do before you go to the IC with a complaint. It shows you have been fair and reasonable in your request.

Click to expand...

. . . and that is excellent advise from Phil.

Fight the good fight and let us know how it goes... Very interesting.

Bit late to this but could there be any mileage in claiming migratory fish (eels or salmonoids) routes have been severed?

I am sorry for not replying earlier, I lost track of this thread.

I have received a email from the EA inviting me to meet their representative and the lock keeper on site to discuss the matter. I will be arranging this in the near future and will let you know how it goes.I think his name was Peter Bowers. I will discuss my proposal of opening the locks a little to let fish through at times of drought and/or other possible solutions and see what happens.
Thanks Bad One and all for the advice and Geoff and Peter for your support, it means a lot, I am not alone. . I will update as I go. Eventually , I may have to go further but, in the meantime I am happy to have the opportunity of this meeting. Any advice always welcome.

Pointngo- yes I believe migratory sea trout are affected and I have raised this in my emails and I will raise it again when I have this meeting.

An excellent result Mark.

I always tried to meet 'interested' parties face to face rather than endless exchanges of correspondence, be sure to take notes at the meeting and follow up with an individual letter of thanks to all those who attend.

From little acorns......



Keep up the good work.

.

markg said:

Pointngo- yes I believe migratory sea trout are affected and I have raised this in my emails and I will raise it again when I have this meeting.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't miss the opportunity to mention eels as well Mark. They are a political hot potato at the moment and I wouldn't think many people, if challenged, would openly disregard them considering they are critically endangered.

Take a look at the second bullet point on this mate...

National eel management plans - Fisheries - European Commission

It might be a bit more ammo for you if you need it. Good luck at your meeting mate. :thumbs: