See below another letter to WSFOA.
Comment: RWGA
It seems to me this Association is likely to implode and become insignificant as it no longer reflects the majority of owner views on the river Wye..
Is this not the time for everyone to get together in an organisation that represents everyone on the river so that a united front can be presented to NRW or any other Government bodies on issues that impact on our river. For too long there have been divisions and decisions made which in no way reflect the actual salmon anglers position in any decision making. For too long they have been a cash cow for others who took it upon themselves to decide what was right for us and the river. Surely this cannot continue.
As to the role of WUF in all this who knows. I do not believe for one moment there will be a sincere decision to engage with a body of this sort. I have often mooted the point that on what or whose authority do they influence decisions which affect us all when they engage with no one. I suspect thier agenda is to continue to try and extend their 'influence' further into Wales together with NRW. Who knows, they never tell anyone anything.
Anyone who wishes to contribute to the present discussion please feel free. If it's printable I would be happy to do so.
Geoff.
Today's reply from John Craddock;
Yes Michael, your response and Patrick’s was
entirely predictable. We all know WUF have done a lot, we all know they have
spent a lot. What I want to know is.....have they ACHIEVED a lot?? The
rod catch results don’t suggest they have. Passport schemes, wild stream
fishing and so on, all well and good.......up to a point. The focus on salmon
has gone. And that’s what I thought it was all about?
Since you pose the question, tell me if you
would how employing a couple of guys (how much?) to go round killing Giant
Hogweed, directly reflects on an increase in salmon? (I kill the
stuff myself, and so should all the other owners)
I’m just taking a business approach here. If I
were Alan Sugar I’d be taking them apart on their results. You may be in a
privileged position to throw money their way, and actually so you should, since
a high % of fish over the past few seasons have come from Wyesham, but what
about the rest of us? Seems to me that WUF have become a business in their own
right, and as it grows will continue to suck in more and more money. Not from
me though. It’s a bloody big bucket with a very large hole in the bottom. And
when one adds all the politics, skulduggery and yah boo insults into the mix,
it becomes.....er....rather tiresome. It’s not a sustainable business.
David has done the decent thing and resigned. I
didn’t know he had until I got his mail. That resignation is significant, and a
clear indication to me that the chain has finally come off this knackered bike.
I gave you, in my rather long and verbose
missive, a view as to which way WSFOA should be heading, and why. This isn’t
about pro and anti hatchery stuff. It’s much, much bigger than that.
Anyway enough of this. My main obsession is pike
fishing actually, and I now find that my rod catch has diminished over
the past couple of years so I may just set up my own charity........
Kind regards
John
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Three messages here. Start at the bottom one.
-
Mr Jerome Vaughan the owner of Courtfield Estate is happy for this correspondence to be posted on the Wye Daily Fishing Reports.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: JEROME H VAUGHAN <jerome@courtfield.net>
Date: 14 October 2014 12:32
Subject: Fwd: NRW Hatchery News
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: JEROME H VAUGHAN <jerome@courtfield.net>
Date: Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 10:09 PM
Subject: Re: NRW Hatchery News
To: Timmis <wyetimmis@gmail.com>
Cc: Seth Johnson-Marshall <seth@wyeuskfoundation.org>
Dear Michael,
I have now had an opportunity to review the literature produced to support the recent decision by Natural Wales and, comment as follows:
1. Literature you have referred me to
These two papers have clearly been written to support a position against the efficacy and future use of hatcheries. This is to be expected if the government has decided to take such a position. I attach my comments on some aspects of these papers. (EA Guidance regarding hatcheries)
2. Additional resources
In addition to the two papers you directed me towards, I have found a further document (Bibliography-review-hatcheries-stocking.doc) published by Natural Wales on 10.03.2014 you will note this gives an extensive list of academic papers used to support their position in respect of their recent policy on hatcheries
3. An analysis of this Bibliography
I attach my analysis of this bibliography (Bibliography-review-hatcheries-content.xls) In this I have looked over the summary of each paper and categorised it according to that summary. You will note, there is overwhelming numerical support for hatchery programmes from the literature and clear support against their negative effects on the gene pool of existing river populations (where wild brood stock have been used).
4. Conclusions from the literature
- Hatchery programmes using wild [from native river] brood stock do positively assist regeneration of river populations
- It is likely better not to retain brood stock for >1-2 years so as to reduce genetic drift and wild characteristics
- It is likely better to release at an early stage in evolution either eggs [via boxes] or fry, rather than smolts to improve net returns
5. My questions
- Was the WSFOA aware of this Bibliography/literature review
- Has the WSFOA undertaken its own analysis of this literature review and reached different conclusions from mine above
- What is the WSFOA's position in relation to the evidence produced in this literature review and the position of Natural Wales vis efficacy of Hatcheries
I look forward to hearing from you.
Yours sincerely
Jerome H Vaughan
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 11:45 AM, Timmis <wyetimmis@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Jerome,
>
> The scientific studies which were used by the NRW to underpin their decision can be found here http://www.wyeuskfoundation.org/issues/hatcheries.php [4].
>
> I look forward to hearing from you.
>
> Regards,
>
> Michael
>
> On 6 Oct 2014, at 13:13, Jerome H Vaughan <jerome@courtfield.net> wrote:
>
>> Dear Michael,
>>
>> Thank you for your email. In principle, I would be pleased to meet and hear what you have to say about the WSFOA's position regarding the NRW's decision, I also appreciate you clarifying the this is an NRW and not WSFOA decision. However, before we arrange to meet, could you first direct me to the scientific studies which were used by the NRW to underpin their decision. I should like to have read these first, to get a better understanding.
>>
>> I look forward to hearing from you on this point.
>>
>> Yours sincerely
>>
>> Jerome H Vaughan
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 12:24 PM, Timmis <wyetimmis@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Dear Jerome,
>>>
>>> I was very sad to read your email regarding your withdrawal from the WSFOA. However , I am also very confused by what you say.
>>>
>>> The press release that I distributed to members of the WSFOA was not our press release but that of NRW. It was they who have made this decision. Did you mean to direct your comments at them?
>>>
>>> The WSFOA is of course made up of individuals who actually own the river and have the experience of actually running and , hopefully , understanding a fishery. If we are to succeed in restoring the Wye to its former glory , we need the support of owners like you. I very much hope that you will reconsider your action and would be delighted to meet with you and discuss the way forward after the NRW decision.
>>>
>>> Incidentally , a great friend fished the Breiddalsa last year and was very disappointed. The catches have dropped drastically over the past four years to around 300 per annum which is about the level that they were before the hatchery was started.
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>>
>>> Michael,
>>>> FROM: Jerome H Vaughan [mailto:jerome@courtfield.net]
>>>> SENT: 05 October 2014 10:19
>>>> TO: WSFOA
>>>> SUBJECT: Re: NRW Hatchery News
>>>> Dear Sir,
>>>> I note your press release with regard to the termination of hatchery work. I consider this decision ill-informed, short-sighted and characteristic of interest groups with limited imagination. The Wye is a large river which required a re-stocking effort far in excess of the village-like proportions you have engaged in. If you wish to base your decision on scientific evidence, you ought to pay attention to successful examples such as the attached.
>>>> I suspect your scientists have used evidence to support a pre-determined position. I work in an industry requiring significant scientific input and, am quite aware of the difference between "theoretical science" and "actual world experience". Does it mean nothing to you that, the people who actually own and operate the Wye, have an entirely contrary view to your scientists and government civil servants, who I suspect, have very limited practical experience in running or understanding a fishery?
>>>> In light of your decision, I will certainly be cancelling any ongoing support for your organisation. Please take this email as a termination of any further association with the WSFOA.
>>
>>>> Yours faithfully
>>>> Jerome H Vaughan.
Three messages here. Start at the bottom one.
-
Mr Jerome Vaughan the owner of Courtfield Estate is happy for this correspondence to be posted on the Wye Daily Fishing Reports.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: JEROME H VAUGHAN <jerome@courtfield.net>
Date: 14 October 2014 12:32
Subject: Fwd: NRW Hatchery News
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: JEROME H VAUGHAN <jerome@courtfield.net>
Date: Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 10:09 PM
Subject: Re: NRW Hatchery News
To: Timmis <wyetimmis@gmail.com>
Cc: Seth Johnson-Marshall <seth@wyeuskfoundation.org>
Dear Michael,
I have now had an opportunity to review the literature produced to support the recent decision by Natural Wales and, comment as follows:
1. Literature you have referred me to
These two papers have clearly been written to support a position against the efficacy and future use of hatcheries. This is to be expected if the government has decided to take such a position. I attach my comments on some aspects of these papers. (EA Guidance regarding hatcheries)
2. Additional resources
In addition to the two papers you directed me towards, I have found a further document (Bibliography-review-hatcheries-stocking.doc) published by Natural Wales on 10.03.2014 you will note this gives an extensive list of academic papers used to support their position in respect of their recent policy on hatcheries
3. An analysis of this Bibliography
I attach my analysis of this bibliography (Bibliography-review-hatcheries-content.xls) In this I have looked over the summary of each paper and categorised it according to that summary. You will note, there is overwhelming numerical support for hatchery programmes from the literature and clear support against their negative effects on the gene pool of existing river populations (where wild brood stock have been used).
4. Conclusions from the literature
- Hatchery programmes using wild [from native river] brood stock do positively assist regeneration of river populations
- It is likely better not to retain brood stock for >1-2 years so as to reduce genetic drift and wild characteristics
- It is likely better to release at an early stage in evolution either eggs [via boxes] or fry, rather than smolts to improve net returns
5. My questions
- Was the WSFOA aware of this Bibliography/literature review
- Has the WSFOA undertaken its own analysis of this literature review and reached different conclusions from mine above
- What is the WSFOA's position in relation to the evidence produced in this literature review and the position of Natural Wales vis efficacy of Hatcheries
I look forward to hearing from you.
Yours sincerely
Jerome H Vaughan
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 11:45 AM, Timmis <wyetimmis@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Jerome,
>
> The scientific studies which were used by the NRW to underpin their decision can be found here http://www.wyeuskfoundation.org/issues/hatcheries.php [4].
>
> I look forward to hearing from you.
>
> Regards,
>
> Michael
>
> On 6 Oct 2014, at 13:13, Jerome H Vaughan <jerome@courtfield.net> wrote:
>
>> Dear Michael,
>>
>> Thank you for your email. In principle, I would be pleased to meet and hear what you have to say about the WSFOA's position regarding the NRW's decision, I also appreciate you clarifying the this is an NRW and not WSFOA decision. However, before we arrange to meet, could you first direct me to the scientific studies which were used by the NRW to underpin their decision. I should like to have read these first, to get a better understanding.
>>
>> I look forward to hearing from you on this point.
>>
>> Yours sincerely
>>
>> Jerome H Vaughan
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 12:24 PM, Timmis <wyetimmis@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Dear Jerome,
>>>
>>> I was very sad to read your email regarding your withdrawal from the WSFOA. However , I am also very confused by what you say.
>>>
>>> The press release that I distributed to members of the WSFOA was not our press release but that of NRW. It was they who have made this decision. Did you mean to direct your comments at them?
>>>
>>> The WSFOA is of course made up of individuals who actually own the river and have the experience of actually running and , hopefully , understanding a fishery. If we are to succeed in restoring the Wye to its former glory , we need the support of owners like you. I very much hope that you will reconsider your action and would be delighted to meet with you and discuss the way forward after the NRW decision.
>>>
>>> Incidentally , a great friend fished the Breiddalsa last year and was very disappointed. The catches have dropped drastically over the past four years to around 300 per annum which is about the level that they were before the hatchery was started.
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>>
>>> Michael,
>>>> FROM: Jerome H Vaughan [mailto:jerome@courtfield.net]
>>>> SENT: 05 October 2014 10:19
>>>> TO: WSFOA
>>>> SUBJECT: Re: NRW Hatchery News
>>>> Dear Sir,
>>>> I note your press release with regard to the termination of hatchery work. I consider this decision ill-informed, short-sighted and characteristic of interest groups with limited imagination. The Wye is a large river which required a re-stocking effort far in excess of the village-like proportions you have engaged in. If you wish to base your decision on scientific evidence, you ought to pay attention to successful examples such as the attached.
>>>> I suspect your scientists have used evidence to support a pre-determined position. I work in an industry requiring significant scientific input and, am quite aware of the difference between "theoretical science" and "actual world experience". Does it mean nothing to you that, the people who actually own and operate the Wye, have an entirely contrary view to your scientists and government civil servants, who I suspect, have very limited practical experience in running or understanding a fishery?
>>>> In light of your decision, I will certainly be cancelling any ongoing support for your organisation. Please take this email as a termination of any further association with the WSFOA.
>>
>>>> Yours faithfully
>>>> Jerome H Vaughan.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.