Help The Recovery of the Wye Salmon

Ain't going to happen. Move along, nothing to see here.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with SNR, the survival rate to smolt proves it. There are lots wrong with the ridiculous system of brood stock, striping, and growing alevins on in plastic tanks, in other words HATCHERIES. The scientists have proved hatcheries don’t work. So let’s except their word and join them in condemning this faulty system. All of us, one way and another, have allowed the habitat to degenerate into an unbalanced shambles. The proof is obvious to see.  Habitat improvement has worked to a certain extent, by addressing harmful effects, but without realistic improvement. The ongoing reduction within indigenous stock, while invasive creatures increase, proves that.

I believe SNR has proved its worth, and should be supported by all. I also believe, the present hatchery system lowers the effectiveness of SNR, and must be changed to something much more natural. In river Egg boxes are a tiny step in the right direction. I believe another way is to build SNR ponds in series, and connected by managed, spawning stream areas. I suggest your petition should seek to promote a more natural spawning system, while openly joining the scientists, by rejecting the present, and damaging, hatchery system. Surely, the more we unite, the better the salmon’s chances.

As above.. NRW/EA whoever they are need to get off thier backside and do the job they are paid for.

I agree with stocking etc., as per the Tyne,  but do not believe that the Wye & Usk Foundation are having any impact with the work they undertake on the rivers, so I will not support the petition whilst they are involved.  They have been working on the rivers for 17 years now without showing any marked improvement for the millions of pounds that have been invested in them.  Sorry to say that this is the the way I feel.

#32: river lover -  

River lover.  To make things clear, and I understand your sentiments, WUF having nothing whatsoever to do with this petition and certainly will not support it in any way. It will never appear on their website and no one employed by them will sign it for sure.   They quickly withdrew any support they ever had for the SNR scheme, which was grudgingly given initially anyway.  As you suggest their involvement in the river is open to question though anything they do that can be shown to work is always helpful but they are not party to this petition in any way, shape or form.

#17: concerned - Do NOT support this campaign !! 

Your concerns are justified, and should be born in mind for any further stocking activity. As a starting point, all stocking efforts must use progeny taken from the Wye. However, in accordance with your arguement, genetically inferior fish produced from man-made efforts [using native progeny] are unlikely to survive or come to dominate the genetics of a river system. If they do, they presumably must have genetic traits which favour survival and therefore, are genetically suited to the river system. If they don't, their genetics will die out. 

If the genetic pool is taken from the river system, then the integrity of the genetics will be maintained. For every egg produced by man-made efforts in this way, the potential for genetic improvement is increased, as it is only through replication that modification and enhancement of genetic traits may increase.

No replication, no diversification. And that is what we currently have on the Wye; a declining gene pool in need of drastic action.

The last true confirmed 40lbs salmon taken by rod and line was the fish taken on the Red Lion water at Bredwardine in the mid 80s, go back to the 1950s for a fish of 50lbs; a 50lbs was taken at Redbrook and one of 52lbs at Bigsweir. Fish 30lbs to 35lbs are still taken though since catch and release these are usually estimates ?

“The Wizard of the Wye”, Robert Pashley was the tenant of the Hillcourt and Goodrich beats from 1906 to 1957 taking over10,000 salmon to his own rod, twenty nine of these fish weighed over forty pounds, his best year was 1936 when he killed 678 salmon averaging over sixteen pounds-the total weight. At the Dog Hole Pool Pashley took a salmon of 43lbs, taken on October 15th 1940. C. H. Moffat also took a salmon of 45lbs on a fly on 10th April 1915 from this pool, Mr. G.Trafford of Hillcourt fishing the Dog Hole in 1913 took a cock salmon of 47 3/4lbs on a fly.

The last fish 30lbs plus taken from the Lydbrook and Stowfield Fishery were a 30lb in 1985, a 32 and 37 in 1976, one weighing 39lbs, weighed on a officially calibrated butchers scales the day after capture, a 49lb taken in 1939 and a fish of 50lbs taken in 1937.

90% decline in rod caught salmon since the 1970's, over 30-years since the last 40lbs salmon, over 60-years since the last 50lbs salmon. We'll all be dead waiting that long for the river to recover, so some positive action now please.

#1: -  

Here here! - I have fished the Wye for a number of years and seen the relentless decline of a once great fishery. It's recovery will ultimately be realised by the collective effect of a number of initiatives and keeping the hatchery operative must surely play its part. Please keep them open. 

#26: -  

 Actually, this time it may happen. Allow yourself to be surprised, and please support us when the time comes.

#35: - Re: Do NOT support this campaign !! 

 All suplimentary stocking of the River Wye, HAS been with Wye indigenouse Salmon over recent decades, as far as we're aware!  Otherwise EA/NRW wouldn't have approved stocking them!! In answer to Guest 35.

#27: pencil -  

 In response to "pencil 27"  I agree whole heartedly that SNR's are a very positive way forward, the updates of Smolt Release ponds of previous years.  However I don't understand "pencil 27's" logic of how the Brood fish are going to get into the SNR's to spawn and reproduce if you don't use the much melined  hatcheries, to supply either eyed eggs, Summer Fry or Autumn Parr to stock your SNR's with?

#44: - Re:  

 In a nut shell, some salmon would be caught up as usual, or removed from unproductive river areas by other means. Held in the empty SNR ponds until ready. Stripped on site, the fertilised eggs placed in boxes­­­­­­, then implanted into a river. If a series of holding/SNR ponds were somehow linked, by managed and pristine spawning gravel streams, other salmon could move at will from the holding/SNR pools, to spawn naturally within the protected stream areas.  The resulting alivin would then grow on in the safety of their SNR ponds, (no artificial stocking) until release back into the river. There are several upriver areas, such as below the Elan dams, where these types of ponds and streams, could be created, managed, and even part publically funded. It would of course take massif effort and will, but nowhere near as much effort, as it took us to irretrievably destroy the salmon’s environment. I must say I would have thought this sort of genetically strong project, would suit the WUF to a T.    

#46: pencil - Re: Re:  

 Much of this has already been done pencil.  SNR ponds have already been used on the Wye , others were on stream, privately funded by anglers and owners. 3 years into the process  NRW pulled the plug to abide by thier new genetic viewpoint.  Personally doubt they would approve however the eggs/fry/parr were obtained, egg boxes or not.   They don't want to let us do it -it just might work when they and WUF have failed.