Memorandum submitted by Thames Fisheries
Consultative Council
1. This organisation, Thames Fisheries Consultative
Council (TFCC), has for many years worked closely with the Environment
Agency (EA), and its predecessor the National Rivers Authority
(NRA). We represent 10 catchment based fisheries and angling consultatives
within Thames Region of the EA, (approx 80,000 individuals). We
acknowledge the wider responsibilities of the EA and what it has
achieved so far in the protection and development of fisheries
and angling. We also acknowledge the dedication and hard work
of all staff at the EA. It should be clear here that we differentiate
between Fisheries and Angling, whereas the Agency does not in
many cases. We believe a Fishery is the aquatic eco-system in
which fish are the highest form of life and angling (fishing with
rod and line) is the exploitation of a fishery. We believe that
for many reasons the quality of a Fishery is an environmental
responsibility of the whole community, and not just those who
exploit it, either practically or ethically. In real terms there
are many fisheries which are not fished, but are important breeding
grounds for fish and the whole food chain on which they depend.
This then leads on to higher forms of life, more familiar with
the public, such as kingfishers, herons, otters and many others.
They all depend on the quality of all our water resources such
as rivers, lakes, and canals. Many of these are natural in origin
or man-made, but they are all affected by our actions. It is the
responsibility of the EA to enhance, protect, police and monitor
these areas.
2. Our Regional members report back to us
on many issues relating to the EA. Many are good, but in the way
of things, some are not so. The EA has many responsibilities,
mainly relating to Flood Control, Navigation, Recreation and Fisheries.
We also think that Angling should also be a responsibility of
Recreation, and should work more closely with Fisheries. In passing,
anglers contributed nationally nearly £18 million last year
in the form of Rod Licences, which we are assured is all spent
on fisheries. We also think that there should be a more stable
form of financing fisheries than relying so heavily on rod-licence
income.
3. The first main criticism is that Fisheries
appears to have been downgraded in the list of priorities, since
the recent re-organisation (BRITE). Specialist, and in the main
very dedicated, staff have been "generalised" into a
pool of multi-skilled operators dealing with the areas mentioned
earlier. This has led to a constant change of personnel, at both
Local and Regional level, so real lasting relationships cannot
yet be established, and thus no two way ongoing communication
carried out. Anglers, possibly the main eyes and ears of the Agency,
report pollution incidences on the number requested (0800 807060).
The speed of response immediately depends on whether or not it
is "office hours" and the knowledge and skill of the
responder. The response time and quality can vary within Regions,
but there are instances of a poor, and in many cases a disastrously
late investigation. This can have an affect on effective possible
prosecutions. If I was an unscrupulous polluter, I would dump
at week-ends.
4. Another area of national concern is the
development of Fisheries Action Plans (FAPS). This was an optimistic
avenue for all interested bodies, not just anglers, and led by
the EA, to get together and produce a plan for the development
and exploitation, for the public good, of fisheries on a catchment
or river basin basis. There have been some initial successes in
Thames Region, the Kennet FAP, still to be implemented, and the
Lee FAP, but there are many more to be done and at the present
rate it could take something like 20 years to cover the whole
Country. It needs more investment in money, time and effort, but
the will must be there, and this is not evident in the higher
echelons of the EA, well not to us at the base. The EA must abide
by the Habitats Directive, but we feel that we shall still see
fish spawning beds of gravel still being dredged in the name of
Flood Control or Navigation, and Water Quality deteriorating.
5. Privatised Water Companies also come
under great discredit. Many feel that the EA, as the enforcer
of environmental regulation and controls, is not strong enough
in its monitoring and prosecution, where appropriate, in such
areas as discharges from Sewage Treatment Works, storm discharges,
water abstraction and the management of drought prevention measures.
Recently there was the disastrous pollution of the River Thames
in London, which killed many tens of thousands of fish, just after
some were saying that the river was cleaner than it has ever been.
6. Again can we stress that much of our
criticism is levelled at the political policy makers and not at
the hard working and dedicated staff of the EA, who at ground
level are doing their best to make the "system" function.
We are more than willing to send one or more representatives,
or give detailed written evidence to the Committee if required.
Thames Fisheries Consultative Council
December 2005
|
