Response to “Fishing Breaks” by John Slader, on behalf of the Trout and Salmon Conservation UK.
“Fishing Breaks recent newsletter calls into question Salmon & Trout Conservation UK’s (S&TC) Riverfly Census report despite it being based on independent scientific evidence.
I am involved with the work of S&TC. I have also undertaken a considerable amount of guiding over the past 12 years on the chalkstreams although my angling roots go back to the 1950’s.
One thing I feel I can’t be critised for is not having a lack of passion for the aquatic environment and in particular the health below the surface as opposed to what is above it, which is so often the focus of media attention.
The Government and its Agencies continue to brain wash the public with how “clean” our rivers are and whilst it is true (and cause for celebration) that certain rivers e.g. Trent, Mersey, Thames, Tyne etc have been transformed from the ravages of industry, I am sure many will agree we now face very different, and often invisible, challenges. I believe “clean” is never a word that should be used in the context of a river; in its extreme “clean” can mean sterile and of course such an environment will not support life. Instead we need to talk about the ecological status and this leads to a much different story. By the Government’s own admission 83% of rivers in England fail the test of good ecological status. This is not S&TC scare mongering or inventing but rather telling it how it is.
S&TC does not act on a whim but bases its campaigns on scientific evidence.
It is now well over a decade since Messrs Hayes and Frake published the Millennium Chalkstream Fly Survey raising concerns about a decline in fly life populations. True memories can play […]