Weather seems pretty stable with no sign of any real rain in forseable future so river will continue to drop and clear in all areas.

YESTERDAY

12lb fish to Emlyn Davies at Cadora Backs
Two fro Coedithiel  15 and 20lbs to John Tarplee on F/C
Seven for Bigswier yesterday.

TODAY
3 from Ingeston. 8lb Mike Pritchard,10lb David  Slade and 12lb to Bryan Owen.
3 more from Wyesham.  Richard and Peter Godsall and Huw Evans fish from 8-13lbs on F/C (2) and fly.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In light of improved spring catches on other rivers there has been some speculation as to why this may be especially on those rivers that have not had the attention and massive spend of the Wye. The below comments I saw on another forum written by a long time Wye angler. To me it sums up exactly the current position we find ourselves in at the moment.


"It is of course true that the WUF (and others) who have carried out habitat work will have had an impact, quite frankly considering the many millions that have been spent it would be a disgrace if it hadn't. Of course, if there is a sustained improvement on the Wye over and above that experienced by other rivers without the same level of habitat input then they (and other habitat or mitigation work) can can reasonably claim some credit for the difference, of course having taken account of the very low base from which the recovery started. 

However, the WUF publicity machine tends to jump on the slightest improvement, issuing press releases claiming the credit, often ridiculously prematurely, that subsequently turn out to be unsustainable or simply incorrect. For WUF to claim the whole credit and refuse to acknowledge for example that influences outside the catchment may have been responsible in some part is disingenuous in my view. 

If the WUF were to a) be a little more restrained in their claims and b) acknowledge other inputs such as high seas survival, they would get a lot less criticism but my feeling is that, primarily to sustain funding and attract more, they have a "spin" approach to publicity comparable to political organisations, the EU Referendum is a typical case, that many find promote the same feelings of annoyance and rejection, Tom Rigby's claims were typical of this approach.

Just to be clear, it is obvious that the Wye is improving, something that we are all delighted about, but it is also clear that this is not unique to the Wye and not solely down to the efforts of the WUF."

 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We should perhaps also be aware of the other measures that have been taken over the years in an attempt to improve the rivers numbers of returning fish,  It would be odd would it not if none of these measures had any effect -otherwise it would all have been a huge waste of time, effort 

 and money.

Where WUF have basically shot themselves in the foot is by not monitoring most of the work they have done -no money for it so says a WUF member.  Apart from the first Clywedog report -never published because of WUF objections, none of the work has every been quantified or peer reviewed to the extent that the work was done and immediately claimed a success.  Nothing has been a failure!. - ever though they do acknowledge, though not publicly that the initial clear out of all the tributaries of Large Woody debris was not a good idea.  Oh an d of course their was the loss of the owners funded hatchery.

Measures taken

1984 - Closure of net fisheries (drift net and stop boat) at Chepstow

1995 - Method Controls - Wye fly only until 30th April. - South East Wales drift net and putcher seasons adjusted start delayed until 15th May.

1997 - Reducing NLO designed to phase out mixed stock fishery close to the mouth of the Usk.

1998 - Greenland netting reduced to internal consumption only - too little too late?

1999 - Mandatory Catch and Release of all rod caught salmon caught prior to 16th June.

1999 - Season adjustments for net fisheries, putcher season commences1st June and 15th August. Lave and draft nets commence 1st June end 31st August.

2000 - Reducing NLO was triggered and fishery closed (Uskmouth) temporary buyout led by WUF.

2000 - Closure of putcher ranks (mixed stock fishery located close to the mouth of the Wye) through early revocation of leases.

2000 - Temporary closure of Goldcliffe putchers (mixed stock fishery close to mouth of Usk) 5 year buyout led by WUF.

2002 - effective 2003 season 3rd March fly and spin allowed until 31st August then fly only

2003 - Byelaw formally ended drift net fishing for salmon at Uskmouth (mixed fishery)

2003 - Greenland nets again closed after 2 years of ad hoc management

2004 - Lydney putcher rank - single year closure through payment by EA.

2006 - November - Irish drift netting closed

2008 - Goldcliffe putchers ended following acquisition by EAW.

2008 - Black Rock Lave nets - New lease introduced to cap effort and total allowable catch - mixed stock fishery close to the mouth of the Wye.

2009 - Severn estuary lave nets - net limitation order

2009 - Severn estuary draft net fishery - net limitation order

2010 - Lydney park Putcher rank cessation of operation - single year slosure led by WUF and EAW.

2011 - 100% Catch and release.

Surely some, all or perhaps none of these measures has had any effect.

We don't know but they are just as likely as habitat work where fences are erected and immediately many kilometers of river are claimed to be 'restored'.  Make your own mind up but at the end of the day if the river does recover does it really matter?

However I did see this in print (below) from one of the WUF faithful, one Robert Denny,who said,

"As we speak, WUF are contacting Cardiff University to get a research student to write a paper on the Day Ticket sales and associated Salmon catches. They will then decide which respected journal to seek peer review and hopefully have it published.First funding must be found"

That old money problem again. can't do a thing unless they fund the £500,000 wage bill first which, thinking about it, has perhaps dropped considerably lately.