Your FisheriesTamar Catchment

‘Bottom Up Fisheries planning'

Westcountry Rivers Trust

Giles Rickard

Cornwall Fisheries Team leader

Background

• Fully involve fisheries interests

• Developing a ’bottom up’ approach

• Development of shared vision & action plan

• What happened -Lessons learned

River Tamar• One of the 10 initial catchment pilots under CaBA, the Tamar

‘Catchment Fisheries Planning’ was to become ‘Your Fisheries’.

• Project leaders met with the RT, AT, and AST to develop the concept of 4 pilot ‘CFP’s’, one of which is the Tamar.

• Angling 2000/Westcountry Angling passport

• ASAP/AARC-Genetics

• Endsleigh Hatchery

• Upstream Thinking 1 & 2 –with SWW

• Three Rivers Project –CaBa funded

Tamar catchment -around 700 farms in catchment

Bottom up fisheries planning

1st action to call together local fisheries representatives & discuss development.

Awareness that national programmes and plans come & go therefore should create own ‘bottom up’ local stakeholder forum

TFF the vehicle which has:

a) discussed actions and priorities on the catchment, b) b) agreed fisheries action plansc) c) called on guest speakers to obtain additional information on key topics.

Shared vision/evidence/Action framework:

Cyclical framework

TFF would develop a sharedvision

Collect &, interpret evidence, &then take action based onevidence.

Tamar river has fish counterand additional index-rivermonitoring.

Understanding, assessing & quantifying pre-existing viewpoints.

First action of the TFF to query thestakeholder group to discover pre-existing viewpoints.

TFF asked to give their current viewpoints to the following questions-WRTdrafted questions- !(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!( !(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!( !(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!( !(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

Lee

Stone

Rexon

Forda

Trewen

Tinhay

Headon

Gravel

Boyton

Woodley

Penrose

Oatnell

Luckett

Larrick

Langham

Dexbeer

Comebow

Badgall

Yeomaden

Sydenham

Scotland

Penheale

Lew Wood

Lew Mill

EbbsfordBullapit

Trewinnow

Treburrow Townleigh

Tamartown

Spry Farm

Lawhitton

Inny Foot

Dury Ford

Dunstable

Chillaton

Broadwood

Bowithick

Bealsmill

Wishworthy

West Carne

Trewithick

TrerithickTrekennick

Treguddick

Trecarrell

Tamarstone

Southcombe

Luffincott

High Wires

Hellescott

Greenlanes

Forda Mill

Egloskerry

Drownsmill

Bridgetown

Bridgerule

Upcott MillThrushelton

St. Clether Lifton Park

Knightsmill

Germansweek

Deer Bridge

Claw Bridge

Chilsworthy

Yeolm Bridge

St. Leonards

Heale Bridge

Tinhay Bridge

Otterham Mill

Middle Bridge

Lydford Gorge

Hurdon Bridge

Great Moreton

d/s Kit Steps

Little Comfort

Hennard Stream

Henford Bridge

Halwill Bridge

Finches Bridge

Clawton Bridge

Wrixhill Bridge

u/s Tamar Lakes

Canworthy Water

Towerhill Bridge

d/s Hayne Bridge

Lowley Confluence

u/s Lamerhooe Ford

Leighwood Waterfall

d/s Greystone Bridge

Tetcott Spawning Bed 2

River Inny

Riv

er Ly

dRiv

er C

arey

Riv

er T

avy

R iver L ew

River Torri dge

River Lynher

River Fow

ey

River Mer e

River

Nee

t

Tala Water

River Waldon

River Burn

Derril

Water

Mussel B

rook

De L

ank

Riv

er

Wagaford Water

Pul worthy B rook

Withey Brook

Bre

azle

Water

Medland Brook

Little Mere Riv er

Tamar Electrofishing 2001-2010Average Salmon Numbers Caught

´0 5 102.5 Kilometers

Mean Salmon Abundance

Names!( 0!( 1 - 41!( 41 - 123

!( 123 - 253

!( 253 - 1240

Data supplied by the Enviroment Agency 2010

Fisheries Engagement

Question Bad Poor Fair Good0 ExellentDon't0

KnowImproving Declining

About0

same

Not0

sureYes No

At0the0catchment0scale0how0would0you0score0the0overall0condition0of0

the0salmon0population?4 19 1 0 0 0

What0do0you0consider0to0be0the0current0trend0in0population0health 0 23 0 4

Monitoring0and0Reporting0O0do0you0feel0there0is0a0need0to0collect0

and/or0report0more0data/information0in0relation0to0fish0populations0in0

the0catchment

1 10

At0a0catchment0level,0do0you0consider0this0score0to0be0broadly0

representative0of0all0the0main0species0of0interest7 14

Do0you0feel0that0your0previous0score(s)0are0broadly0representative0of0

the0whole0catchment0in0a0spatial0context10 10

At0the0catchment0scale0please0score0the0current0levels0of0

spawning/recruitment1 22 5 0 0

At0the0catchment0scale,0what0is0the0current0trend0in0recruitment0levels 2 9 11 3

At0the0catchment0scale0please0score0the0current0levels0of0survival 11 15 0 0 0 0

At0the0catchment0scale0please0score0the0current0trend0in0survival0levels0

O0Grilse0 17 0 0

At0the0catchment0scale0please0score0the0current0trend0in0survival0levels0

O0MSW1 14 2 5

For0the0catchment0as0a0whole0(catchment0level),0how0would0you0score0

the0overall0opportunity0to0access0fishing0(for0all)0 0 0 15 11 0

Is0the0opportunity0to0access0angling0broadly0the0same0for0all0members0

of0society19 6

Is0the0opportunity0to0access0fishing0broadly0the0same0for0all0areas0of0

the0catchment9 15

Hands up voting

Some answers may differ to our own views

Negative assessment of salmon stocks was not generally felt to be representative of other main species of fisheries interest (trout, sea trout, grayling, and coarse fish)

Developing a shared vision

Reasonably homogenous opinion although more could be done to develop a shared understanding

Important to inform & educate where possible still- multiple impacts on fisheries –not a single issue

Un-resolved issues fed into the development of fisheries action plan.

Collective view could be developed by physically bringing together stakeholders and the issues with the river.

Bus-tour of the catchment organised, with multiple sites visited and expert interpretation- great opportunity to bring together diverse upper & lower stakeholders

Developing a shared vision

Mailing list was set up to ensure the sustained involvement of stakeholders.

Initial surge in interest (80%) open rate of mailing list has stabilised around 60%

Few recipients clicked on links, therefore information funnelled into main email.

TFF group shown steady growth, 35 subscribers at launch to 65 subscribers 2017.

Once a shared vision established, evidence collected & reviewed in a multi-stakeholder meeting including public, private and 3rd sector organisation.

Evidence combined & priorities agreed based on this evidence: Mind map created

Developing a shared vision

Creation of Action Plan

Based on the process, a proposal for the improvement of Tamar salmon and seatrout stocks was created, & TFF now seeking funding to deliver this plan

Limitations:• Water quality works are covered under other projects such as UST2, &therefore

excluded • Weir improvements are excluded at the request from the TTFA

Background information and approach

Recommendations broadly follow the Defend/Repair/Attack framework developed by Ronald Campbell of the Tweed foundation

Tip! This approach generally well received when working with Anglers

DefendThese areas have good stocks and habitat, and need safeguarding actions to ensure no decline occurs.

RepairThese areas have moderate fish stocks, and fish habitat in a moderate condition; these areas need assisted habitat recovery to move them into the Defend category.

AttackThese areas have poor fish stocks, and the habitat is significantly degraded. These areas need drastic intervention such as habitat reengineering in order to improve their status.

Such actions can involve the third and volunteer sectors as well as statutory bodies,

e.g. a fishing club may choose to adopt catch and release in a poorly performing tributary, but only maintain bag limits on those that are doing well

Classification of the Tamar according to Attack/Restore/Defend model

Attack

The Wolf. Roadford dam impact & therefore impossible to restore to natural state. Gravel reintroduction –potential

The upper Tamar (including Deer, Claw and Main Tamar), CareyHistorically produced significant salmon spawning. Loss of habitat & high levels of silt & erosion -several active projects including USTAnecdotal evidence suggests the upper Tamar is ‘cleaner than they have ever seen it’in recent years. Early results from WRT’s data analysis support this conclusion.

Therefore ‘attack’ approach to increase salmon & trout fry productivity

Limiting factor clean spawning gravel. 1) gravel cleaning or 2) introduction of artificial spawning beds –comparison of results

Classification of the Tamar according to Attack/Restore/Defend model

RestoreOttery, and Kensey

WQ issues related to both point and diffuse pollution

However retains natural salmon spawning

Model proposes restoration activity including: over-shading & gravel siltation.

fisheries habitat walkover survey to target these works. River-fly/WQ surveys targeted near potential point-sources

Ottery has opportunities involving gravel works combined with coarse and large woody material to encourage flow over gravels and therefore reduce siltation. Brash installation also suitable technique for bank stabilisation.

Classification of the Tamar according to Attack/Restore/Defend model

DefendThe Inny.Important moorland fed spawning area for salmon and sea trout.WQ measurements indicate that this may be declining - increased maize growth +industryGravel cleaning appropriate measure to defend declining WQ & siltation.Monitor fry productivity to detect WQ issues.Suitable site for defending against invasive weed growth

The Lyd (including Lew and Thrushel, but excluding the Wolf)

Highly productive sub-catchment for both (sea) trout and salmon.maximise productivity by riparian shade management & monitoring

Include river-fly and EF monitoring, walk over surveys to ensure that riparianmanagement is optimised for salmon juvenile productivity.

Conclusions Framework facilitates rational discussion with anglers-

Breakdown ideas & passion into a useable & weighted format

Challenges- raising expectations- subsequent dis-engagement if unable to deliver improvements

Fisheries/conservation conflict management

Relent of control - May not agree with all outcomes e.g. excluding weirs

Future aspiration's – currently applying for funding