|
Post by fishingd0 on Aug 7, 2007 20:04:37 GMT
|
|
|
Post by rpsalmon on Aug 7, 2007 20:04:39 GMT
Dear fenton I am appalled at your attack on the scientific community, unless you can substantiate all of your remarks with scientific evidence then I must ask you to apologise and withdraw your remarks. For instance, it is not their fault when things such as foot in mouth virus's escape from secure scientific establishments. The first step in resolving the situation is to first find out whether we really have an issue, I can pencil in a preliminary meeting for 1st Dec, if it is decided that there is an issue then we can then apply for funds from the 2008/09 budget.
I may be getting old, but I suspect your sarcasm is well placed.
|
|
|
Post by castlikeaghille on Aug 7, 2007 21:10:50 GMT
I personally find it quite amazing that the exact prognosis of this condition has not yet been determined, given how advanced science and research is these days and the contribution of the salmon to the Scottish economy (and the potential risk of a condition that could escalate into something serious). Especially now it has been going on for well in excess of a year? If you have ever spent anytime in academia, this would come as no surprise.............. A conservative estimate would suggest that...... It takes 1 year for an academic to decide that a topic needs researching, It takes him a further year to design a project and apply for funding, It takes another two years to reapply for funding having been turned down... It then takes about three years (conservative estimate!) to collect the data, Another couple to analyse the data Another few years to write it up....... If we are any further forward with this in the next 5 years I'll be gob smacked! Having said all of that, I bet that there is a talented individual somewhere (probably not an academic!) who works out the answers soon! Lets just hope that he or she shares their insight on here! cheers F Fenton Shame on you. You forgot to add that at the end of 5 years there will need to be another 5 years study to prove that the findings of the original 5 year study were indeed correct enough to justify another 5 year study to prove that the verification excericse of the second 5 year study might justify a final 5 year study of the findings of verification of the 2nd and third stuidies to..... Meanwhile, Rome has burned down while fishery scientists will argue that it hasn't because although there is nothing left genetic integrity has been maintained - c.f. the self promoting letters from the scientists in this month's T&S. Clue - through massive cross stocking from all over the world, the Victorian's started, the Georgians accelerated and up until the 70's we destroyed geneteic integrity of the indigenous UK salmon, and, surprise, following all the best known principles of increasing the gene pool, the salmon thrived. We stopped on the advice of fishery scientists, and as if by magic the salmon runs have gone phutt. And yes, before all the people who see life (and earn a living) through a microscope post in rage, this is, of course entirely a co-incidence that can be explained away if only there was the proper affirmation of 99.99% certainty applied zzzzzzzz Regards CLaG
|
|
|
Post by williegunn on Aug 7, 2007 21:20:48 GMT
Clue - through massive cross stocking from all over the world, the Victorian's started, the Georgians accelerated and up until the 70's we destroyed geneteic integrity of the indigenous UK salmon, and, surprise, following all the best known principles of increasing the gene pool, the salmon thrived. We stopped on the advice of fishery scientists, and as if by magic the salmon runs have gone phutt. And yes, before all the people who see life (and earn a living) through a microscope post in rage, this is, of course entirely a co-incidence that can be explained away if only there was the proper affirmation of 99.99% certainty applied zzzzzzzz Regards CLaG Or perhaps the hap hazard approach weakened the salmon populations so much they became vulnerable to a small parasite; that would not have bothered them before man started messing around with the genes.
|
|
|
Post by castlikeaghille on Aug 7, 2007 21:48:47 GMT
Or perhaps the hap hazard approach weakened the salmon populations so much they became vulnerable to a small parasite; that would not have bothered them before man started messing around with the genes. [/quote] Emperor I have missed you, where have you been? Small parasite which must have been prevalent since about 1979? This is a new one to me. Perhaps it might be a new one to many people. However, on the basis of Sherlock Homes methodology, please would you be kind enough to elaborate. Regards CLaG
|
|
|
Post by rpsalmon on Aug 7, 2007 21:52:46 GMT
Very interesting video. On the basis of that I suspect a lot of anglers would want a million salmon eggs from Alta salmon crossbred with their own river's stock! I'd prefer to tackle a 70Ib fish rather than a 3 Ib Grilse, even "just" a 40 Ib fish in a strong Tay current would be quite a challenge.
Is anyone going to the Alta this year????
|
|
salmondan
Member
Fishy fishy, elusive fishy
Posts: 289
|
Post by salmondan on Aug 7, 2007 23:16:56 GMT
Is anyone going to the Alta this year? Such frivolities would be nice but unfortunately, the Dan household holiday diary is now full due to our impending day trip to Filey . The rock pools there are phenomenally interesting and whilst I am sure that my 6 year old daughter (other kids not old enough yet) is looking forward to her first ever fishing trip to the Tweed in October,I know that is she is much more excited by her forthcoming trip to the seaside. I would be much happier seeing her fight a skinny grilse than a well prodded Filey crab. I would not want her to be dragged 50 yards downstream by a 40lb silver bastard. Not until I have been anyway .
|
|
|
Post by williegunn on Aug 8, 2007 7:37:12 GMT
Emperor I have missed you, where have you been? Guiding on the Spey. Small parasite which must have been prevalent since about 1979? This is a new one to me. Perhaps it might be a new one to many people. However, on the basis of Sherlock Homes methodology, please would you be kind enough to elaborate. Regards CLaG The parasite has always been present; it is just the salmons' biological strain has become so weakened by hatchery breeding that it has just started to become noticable??? A bit like show dogs.
|
|
|
Post by easky on Aug 8, 2007 8:32:34 GMT
I can confirm most of the fish I have caught on the West and NW rivers of Ireland also have had the bleeding vent - so not just a Scottish problem. Wonder if the Welsh and English fish have it as well?
|
|
|
Post by darrenuk on Aug 8, 2007 9:18:31 GMT
Had 1 on the Taw last nite the same
|
|
|
Post by tyneandrew on Aug 8, 2007 9:39:38 GMT
Tyne fish have had it for years, particularly the summer fish.
It has always been put down to the poor estuary conditions. Dead and dying fish were particularly bad for this.
|
|
|
Post by easky on Aug 8, 2007 9:56:44 GMT
I have noticed it before but whether or not its because I am more aware of it now but it does seem to be more prevelant this year. There is also a commonly held view over here that bleeding is a sign that the fish has been running hard and the abrasion causes the bleeding. While there is probably some truth to this I do think there is more to it than that and probably some sort of infection is the root cause - the lab results (when ever they come back ;D) will be interesting
|
|
|
Post by exerod on Aug 8, 2007 12:10:46 GMT
Has anyone got a picture of these red and swollen vents. I've seen two off the Frome this year with red vents but no real swelling and to be honest think of it as being normal or at least not unusual, I see a few like it every year. I used to think it was partly down to abrasion too but the Frome fish don't have to run hard over weirs or shallows. Exe fish which do have to battle a lot of weirs and shallow water do get very red anal fins and lower tails as a result of abrasion but not the red vents.
Andy
|
|
|
Post by easky on Aug 8, 2007 12:21:46 GMT
|
|
|
Post by exerod on Aug 8, 2007 12:44:26 GMT
Cheers, I couldn't get that link to open earlier Anyway I've not seen one that bad this year but I have in the past. Andy
|
|
flee
Member
I'd like to help you out. Which way did you come in?
Posts: 64
|
Post by flee on Aug 10, 2007 9:32:06 GMT
I had a 3 1/2 lb grilse on the whiteadder yesterday with a swollen vent and a rash with a little bit of redness on the lower part of the tail.I took the fish to the Tweed foundation biologist Ronald Campbell who was really pleased because it was the first one he's seen apart from in photo's .He is going to do some tests on it and let me know the outcome. Also it has apparently been found on herring as well so that kind of rules out any running damage on the salmon but the interesting thing was the bit of redness on th lower tip of the tail making me think that the swollen vent was causing substantial irritation to make the fish rub itself on the seabed like scratching an itch maybe.
|
|
flee
Member
I'd like to help you out. Which way did you come in?
Posts: 64
|
Post by flee on Aug 15, 2007 19:56:56 GMT
|
|
|
Post by salmonking on Aug 16, 2007 17:13:22 GMT
Very interesting,,,some answers at last,,well done Dave, And hey ....no comments......
|
|
|
Post by rpsalmon on Aug 16, 2007 17:35:24 GMT
Yes, very interesting. Those worms reminded me of the worms I've seen in North Sea cod etc (a fish & chip shop owner showed them to me) and apparently have been around for years. Please keep us updated.
|
|
|
Post by stuart on Aug 16, 2007 18:30:49 GMT
A couple of years ago the mackerel were full of worms too, I haven't caught any this year yet to see if they still have them. Like rps said the inshore cod have hade them for many years.
|
|