River Tay 15 January Opening Day

[kercock]

I.m all for lifting lids etc on subjectsI know about,but John you'r not really telling the whole story here. You pretty well rubbish the Tay Ghillies Association on not supporting you but you have'nt mentioned the fact that the money raised on Newtyle by the flycasting lessons which was,I believe to go,at least partly to the TGA funds for opening up the burns etc was used to finance the survey you had done,the TGA got none of the money raised. It seems to me you could not blame them for refusing to finance further ideas you had put forward . It is all very well putting yourself forward as the saviour of the Tay John, but you have to tell the whole story. I agree wholeheartedly with some of the points you make but we are not all without blame.

[Yorkshire Esk]

williethegillie said:

Does anyone think that the 15th of January opening on the Tay is still correct ?. In the last couple of decades only a small amount of true springers are ever caught in the month of January let alone the 15th. Does anyone ever think about the disturbance/injury of late run spawning fish still on the redds in January and the damage done to these fish and thousands of kelts with the large barbed cold water hooks typically used in January on the Tay. Surely spawning fish and kelts should get more respect (having evaded predation and other hazards since birth) and come before January rods and a few Tay early timeshare fishers who search for the 'needle in a haystack' January Tay springer ?

The above is the original post.

Why now has got to a slanging match about who said what who didn't pay who. Time to give this post end.

[kercock]

This is not a slanging match in any way shape or form. The reason I said what I said was I was repeating what I was told by committee members of the Tay ghillies association,who were putting their side of the story. If that is wrong,its wrong but one side of a story is never any good. I only went to the original meeting which was the forming of the association and did'nt agree with why it was being formed and have not been to another one.
I have never baulked at standing up and admitting I am wrong,being misinformed really gets my dander up. I stated the facts as I saw them and make no apologies for that,but, as the lady said in the previous post,it might be a good idea to put this to it's bed and go back to the origins of this thread,enough is enough.

[kenziemac]

Hi Jock,
Thanks for the 3 hours of non stop reading last night, I couldn't tear myself away. One thing is for sure, there are a lot of guys and girls out there who care enough to do something, so let's keep the momentum going to an acceptable conclusion, whatever that may be. Inaction and apathy, or rather, too little too late, spelled the death knell for some of our other country pursuits.
And let's not kid ourselves here, people are viewing angling in general in a critical light, so, for me at least, every fisherman, or woman, has to be seen to be much more than just a fish killer, each one of us has to visibly demonstrate how much in-tune we are with the whole natural environment which surrounds the salmon and other fish, and how much respect we have for them and nature at large.
Otherwise I'm afraid we will be seem to be exploitive, not only for financial gain, in some cases, but exploitive for pleasure too, and as we have already seen, that can all too easily be removed.
Justkeepswimming.
Kenzie Mac

[hornet]

Likewise and welcome to a friendly site.

[kenziemac]

Springer & Hornet, thanks for the kind words. I do appreciate the welcome.

Jock, from what I can gather, there is a general concensus that the Tweed system has a very good handle on what is required. They seem focused and driven towards agreed, preset goals and have in place ways and means of measuring against these goals. We (the Tay) are in the same country, only around a hundred or so miles away (as the cormora, sorry crow flies) and yet cannot reach a concensus.
It seems to me that there is no point in re-inventing the wheel here. If a successful, working model is available, why can't the same principles and goals be adopted on the Tay? In industry, commerce, in fact all business, the goods ones, the successful ones, the long standing ones, benchmark themselves against the competition, and take the good ideas and adopt them into their working practices. Could we politely"poach" some of the Tweed people?
Or at the very least ask them to make a presentation on how they made it work.
I do realise that this may be old ground; history, pride, money, valuations, ego's, etc, etc, may be obstacles. But this type of baggage is now becoming too expensive to carry.
Finally, (or maybe not), if we (the Tay) are not seen to working together as a cohesive force, then we will not build any momentum, and we will not attract any investment / backing / support from the "right" people for any projects, no matter how good we know they would be.
"My head is full of wonderful ideas that nobody wants" - Jake Burns
Don't give up.
Kenziemac

[kenziemac]

Hi Jock, one question which may help. Whom are the TDSFB accountable to, and what are they accountable for? OK, so two questions.
Do these guys have any sort of mission statement, published documents, declarations of intent, etc that they can be measured against? Are they doing what they say they will do.
And perhaps more importantly, who decides what to do?
I honestly thought that the days of "Jobs for the Boys" and "Free Lunches" were a thing of the past.
If the Board cannot demonstate effectivity, then perhaps it's time to take it to another level?
In my (limited) experience, if enough questions are asked, it eventually becomes very apparent where loyalties lie, and what the real agenda(s) are.
So the trick is to keep asking thw 5 W's (why, when, where, who, what) and if you think you're being fobbed off, don't just say so and move on, don't accept it at all.
The old boy used to say (still does actually) "you deserved that"
If we don't deserve what we've got (are getting) we can't accept it.
That final comment is for everyone, we all have a duty to safeguard and develop what we have today, and ensure that it is there for the future,
What would we rather have our children say ?
"My dad used to fish until they became extinct" or
"My dad ensured that I can fish if I choose because he fought for the change needed in 2007"
Don't let this drop.
Kenziemac

[toucan]

It is easy to criticise the management of the Tay, much harder to appreciate how difficult it is to manage a river system on that scale. The board represents many different interests (including hundreds of riparian owners, gillies, fishermen etc), and is consequently limited in what it can achieve by the politics that are that inevitably associated with such a diverse mixture of interests. The same situation existed on the Tweed, albeit on a smaller scale, and was the reason why a separate Foundation was established to pursue the specific aim of improving fish stocks in the catchment. In the case of the Tweed, removal of the nets and habitat improvement were identified as the most cost-effective means for achieving this and the Foundation under Ronald Campbell's lead proceeded to address habitat degradation and in-stream blockages on a major scale. Of course on the Tweed, the number of major riparian owners is very much smaller than on the Tay and the Foundation was asking for money at a time when the fishing was still very good and lucrative, so getting enough of the great and good onboard was not as difficult as it may be elsewhere.

The River Wye faced a much more difficult situation than the Tweed when the Wye Foundation was established. The river had been run by the Environment Agency/Welsh Water/NRA in combination with the Wye Salmon Fishery Owners Association. Like the Tay, there were many different interests to be represented - including the EA's desire to spend as little as possible on improving salmon stocks, and many, many proprietors spread over more than a hundred and twenty miles of river.

The Wye Foundation was set up on the Tweed model as a separate non-profit organisation aiming to enhance the stocks on the river. It was a struggle to get support and even harder to get agreement on what to do to try and improve stocks.

There were those dead set on a huge North Tyne-sized hatchery as the only route to salvation (although quite where the money would come from, no-one could say!), others - informed in part by early work down by David Summers when he was at the Game Conservancy Trust - took the view that the most cost effective way to improve salmon stocks on the Wye was to embark on a major series of habitat improvement projects. There is still resentment in some parts about this choice of main focus (see the Wye Gillies Association web site for example) because it is a long-term strategy and every poor season hurts those anxious to see the Wye salmon recover.

Each blockage cleared, each spawning tributary fenced, each liming of acidified streams is seen as a triumph by the those who had seen nothing happen for year after year under the previous regimes. The fish aren't back in numbers yet but as they do return, there will no longer be a major problem of a lack of spawning habitat to allow them to re-establish themselves again. The River Wye at least has a chance now.

So how is this relevant for the Tay? Well to start with, I wanted to make it clear that there is evidence that the Tay's Fishery Manager does believe in the value of habitat enhancement where it is the most cost-effective strategy for improving stocks. Secondly, long-established bodies like the TDSFB are political organisations serving a broad range of interests. They are never going to act quickly - action is better suited to separate groups with more narrowly defined objectives that can do the work for the Board. Thirdly, not every river is the same. Just because habitat work on the Tweed is seen to have worked, it does not follow that lack of spawning habitat is limiting salmon stocks in a system as large as the Tay.

Maybe Jock's fantastic efforts on the Inchewan Burn could form the nucleus from which a Tay Foundation might grow - and if it works it will prove an extremely useful agent for the TDSFB to effect enhancement projects, leaving the Board to deal with the politics and the enthusiasts to get on with making things happen. That is certainly more likely to achieve success than calling for the Board to be sacked!

Good luck to all on the Tay this season, may you catch and return many fine springers!

Mark

[kenziemac]

Dear Toucan,
Many thanks for the information, much appreciated. Some illumination goes a long way.
However, having a difficult role certainly shouldn't make us shy away from making difficult decisions. As a professional manager and having served (still serve) on more committees than you can shake a stick at, I really do realise that trying to keep everyone happy is just impossible.
In my experience it is far, far better to make / take the decisions however difficult, and then explain in a rational and clear and concise manner the logic behind the course of action. I believe that keeping people informed does go a long way. We all know that the TDSFB has a difficult role to play (not impossible), but they are there (I hope) for a purpose. If the general concensus is that the purpose(s) is not being addressed or that the the original purpose(s) need to be re-evaluated or rescheduled then let's do so.
I am in no way an advocate of "sack the board" but would rather that the Board is accountable for it's performance or non performance in the eyes of the people they serve.
Without some accountability I'm afraid there will always be a questioning of motives.
Finally, I personally am not in favour of multiple solo projects, however well intended they are.
I do admire the sheer enthusiasm of the people in this forum, for the work they have undertaken, if that can / could be harnessed into a collective drive forward then who knows what could be achieved, If the Tay is the largest system in Scotland I see no reason why the goal should not be to have that reflected in it's catch (and release) targets.
Honestly yours
Kenzie Mac

[webbie]

I witnessed salmon cutting redds last week on the River Don. I have never seen them so late! But at least we dont open till 11th Feb, but sure to be many kelts around on opening getting abused by Rapala's!!!!!!!!!!!! Not nice to see.

[sealicer]

It will actually be 1 day later this year Webbie, as the 11th is a sunday.

[williegunn]

graham said:

They have also delayed the opening of the season on the Ness for 2 weeks, this season will be the fourth year of this. Salmon have been observed to still be spawning during January when the season opens (on the 15th). Here is an article in the Inverness Courier about it.

Technically the River Ness the upper Ness system still opened on the 15th as usual.

[toucan]

Jock,

It must be frustrating when you don't even get encouragement and recognition for the work you are doing, let alone getting financial support.

However, if a Board employee believes that habitat issues are not a priority and would rather see action and funds directed elsewhere, he is in serious danger of compromising his professional position (with a Board that is by nature hard to persuade to part with its cash) by giving open support to projects which he does not believe are the most important focus for the Board's attention. It is, after all, very difficult to work for a non-professional organisation run by committee. Take the opening day issue as an example, if the vast majority of owners want to start on January 15th, anyone employed by that group would have to be very strongly convinced that delaying the start would have a positive benefit to try and persuade that majority (who employ him) that it should be changed. If the change is going to have relatively little benefit, it is hardly politic to make a big issue of it and lose any support when it comes to bigger issues. You, and your boss, will get the situation changed, not by persuading a single scientist but by persuading (shaming ) a majority of your fellow gillies and owners.

Getting support can also be difficult when the forum for getting it is in open meetings - such meetings can be hostile with the bodies that call them staying firmly on the defensive and individuals playing politics. The end result is often confrontation (leaving the parties further apart) rather than a search for common ground. Quiet discussion away from such meetings is more likely to lead to better understanding of what real problems the Board is facing and how best to overcome them.

Although I have been lucky enough to fish the Tay on a number of occasions, and enjoyed some great days, I can't count myself as a Tay regular. However, looking as an outsider I can see many positive developments in the overall attitudes to fishing on the river. When I started fishing on the Tay, on some beats the gillies wanted to do all the fishing, whether it was harling or anchoring up and lobbing in a prawn or shrimp. Nothing was put back. Flyfishers were viewed with deep suspicion and dispatched off to the far ends of the beats. Today the picture appears to be very different, with a new generation of gillies and fishermen.

I have a better knowledge of the Dee and there were many similar frustrations on that river 15 to 20 years ago, after decades of complacency. Eventually, significant changes in attitude came in during the 90s and today the vast majority of owners, gillies and fishermen there are confirmed advocates of catch and release. The owners are highly disposed towards habitat improvements and well attuned to where the honeypots of grant funding are to be found (as it sounds you are too!). Mind you, there is still a long way for the Dee to go to get back to the stock levels it should support.

Don't despair when progress is slow, just as long as there is progress!

Good luck,

Mark

[duncanglass]

I have worked as Treasurer and Secretary for the Tay Ghillies Association( TGA) for nine years without payment of any kind except the satisfaction of seeing many improvements we have achieved to the whole Tayside district, including removal of weirs, installing fish passes, fencing streams, tree coppicing and having unproductive areas scientifically examined to try to remedy the causes. This required investment of many thousands of pounds.

The true facts are as follows:-

FIRST – Monteith stated that I spent £800 on chocolates. I have the receipts for the past three years showing 40 boxes of half-price Marks & Spencer chocolates at £2.99 per box = £119.60. This is our method of thanking the ladies who help us each year at our Ballinluig Gala which raises at least £10,000 annually!

SECOND – Monteith’s statement that I refused his DEMAND for money for Inchewan Burn. I WALKED THE AREA WITH HIM and suggested how a waterfall could be eased, and also lent him my expensive bolt cutters to remove damaged gabions. I also told him that if he would show patience we would have funds available to him. At the next TGA meeting he demanded £6,000 for tree coppicing. He stated on the internet that I had a grant of £30,000 available. The true facts are that our accounts showed a credit balance of £12,175.79 at that time. I was later successful in applying for grants to BAC Awards for All (£5,000) and £20,000 from RURAL LEADER with Scottish Enterprise Tayside (SET). Both these grants had to be match funded by the TGA (£25,000). I tried to explain this at the aforementioned meeting afterwards when Monteith and Fishlock carried on a discussion between themselves. I eventually asked if we could get on with the meeting and Monteith shouted at me that I was out of order. I responded in like manner telling him to sit down and shut up!

I since invited him to a presentation photocall and mentioned to him as I was 75 at that time I suggested he could possibly take over my duties in the future as Secretary/Treasurer and showed him every friendship.

I had the worry of trying to raise money to meet these grants, and without the financial help of Tay District Salmon Fisheries Board (TDSFB) (£10,000) and Tay Foundation (£5,000) would have found this impossible without further depleting our balance of £12,175.79 by another £6,000 at that time.

These are the true facts and anyone wishing to examine may accounts and receipts are welcome to do so. The difficulty with the SET £20,000grant was that they would only pay us when receipts for work carried out to their satisfaction were submitted to them, and this was an added strain on finances.

Many hours are spent preparing accounts for submission to the new Office of Scottish Charities Regulator and now have to be audited by an independent accountant. My membership of the TDSFB, the Tay Foundation and TGA entails many hours trying to make improvements to the system, and while some initial mistakes may occur, the success rate is by far the greater and should be recognised as such.

Regarding the 15th January opening day, the TDSFB have been carrying out an experimental fishing scheme for the past two years for the Scottish Executive with a view to having the opening and closing dates changed if necessary. The decision obviously will not be taken unless properly investigated and not on some spur of the moment as seems to be the requirement of someone!

Finally, the statement on the internet regarding the use of the TGA for a fundraising casting school at Dunkeld was approved by the TGA at the meeting at the Tayside Hotel and Monteith indicated the funds would be donated to the TGA, of which nothing was actually received. The TGA on this understanding were prepared to invest substantially more money on the Inchewan Burn for Monteith as and when our grant situation was sorted out. All the substantial funds accrued by Jim Tritton at our Gala go towards TGA funds.

I object strongly to the childish way I am described on the internet, and consider taking advice on legal action over the stupid lies about me.

[jock]

I've been watching this thread since the start and feared from early on that some of the statements were not helpful to constructive debate and would ultimately end up in a post like the last one.

I can only see this thread going downhill from here. Time to stop gentlemen before things get out of hand, and the reputation and hard work of Ghillies, Tay or elsewhere becomes tarnished.

[tayspringer]

I applause Newtyle for delaying the start of the season. Fact is that there are still many fish still to and spawning in January. I do oppose the season being prolonged. Start 1st Feb finish the 15th October.

I see from Mr Glass's your response is rather defensive. Why are you getting so upset about the comments. If they are inaccurate then most people would not bother but your highly defensive, threating response does make one wonder if the facts are true??? sorry to be so blunt but often when someone is trying to hide something then they make a noise to protect themselves!!!!!

[victorclem]

I would just like to back up Jock by saying that this discussion has went too far. Whoever is right or wrong, it is a serious mistake to refer to people by name, and it is also a huge mistake to constantly slag off TDSFB when they cannot be seen to be responding to taunts in this sort of forum. Toucan has rightly outlined the many reasons why things often move slowly in the world of fisheries management. The points about the opening day and habitat management are completely valid, and WillietheGillie has been very articulate, shrewd and persistant in his arguments. However, the secret of stirring things effectively is knowing when to stop and let the discussion flow, and also knowing when to call it a day.

This discussion should be wrapped up for now. It can always be re-started another day when things have cooled down a bit and some-one has come up with a way of actually addressing the arguments in a constructive manner. The fact that there are well over 4000 views on this thread show that it has certainly touched a nerve among the wider fishing community, and it is inconceivable that people associated with the TDSFB will not have taken note of this.

I too would like to join Duncan Glass in asking WillietheGillie to shut up now (for a while anyway).

[Willie The Gillie]

My sincerest apologies to David Summers and the TDSFB & Duncan Glass of the TGA.

It was never my intention to digress from the original post into the depths of what I personally perceived to be an exclusion for support, funding, & even recognition for my efforts on the Inchewan Burn Project & other forthcoming initiatives.

I hope that lessons can be learned here on all sides and that some kind of unity would be possible on such initiatives/projects that would benefit the future of the River Tay.

I will delete the posts that have caused such embarrassment to all.

J. Monteith

[tayspringer]

I would like to say that the ghillies on the tay should deserve recognition for their hard work and efforts. I can understand why this debate got out of hand in some ways. this is not a slant on anyone but a great way to vent feelings and get opinions over. Everyone's perception is different and everyone is entitled to their own opinion that is a human right. I would have expected that members of this forum regardless who or what they were would not have taken things personally. As far as the board is concerned they do a good job but hey matter of life they cannot please everyone. I personally believe that the board should be looking very closely at the seasons debate and taking note of the comments and especially listening to the people who know what they are talking about and that is the ghillies. My own personal feeling is that the board and the experts on the board should take a lead from Mr Gray from Tyneside. Proof is in the pudding. sorry to be so blunt you do not need a degree in science to work out what needs done on the river to improve it for us all?? It is very apparent that there is definitely some unrest when it comes to the stocking or lack of stocking of burns and tributaries. Why only certain ones are stocked must be answered. Please give Mr Monteith a chance to express his views like everyone else out there and stop threatening legal action etc. We are all grown men and women. Lets behave like adults and take it on the chin. "If you can't take it don't give it"

Jock. Well done on all the hard work you have done.

[stoater]

One thing is for sure is that all is not agreed on the way the Tay fishery is run at present, or the way it should be run in the short and long-term future.
There was even a debate about the River's management this week on Radio 4, the ripples are spreading....!
I think that the Tweed model seems to have done o.k.
And, it's not "on a much smaller scale" as has been claimed. The Tay (and I must profess to little knowledge of this river system) is not so massively larger that Tweed ideas can't help.
The catch figures show that. Just needs a little confident vision, and less sqabbling over the chocolates etc.!
Folk who work and live on the Rivers usually should be the obvious first point of reference in planning the Fishery's wider picture, and sustainability. good luck all