Salmon (Hansard, 17 October 1991)

§ Mr. Gummer

The Secretary of State for Scotland and I have completed the report required by section 39 of the Salmon Act 1986 and, in accordance with that section, a copy was laid before each House earlier today. It is a very detailed report and I commend it to the House. In undertaking this review, we were aware of concerns which have been expressed about catches in some regions of Great Britain last year. The 1990 data have been included in the background paper and have been taken into account in our assessment.

In making our review, we asked scientists from our Departments to prepare a detailed background paper that would describe the management of the fisheries, the changes in catches made by each method in the review area since 1952, and the effect of the various net fisheries on other fisheries and on spawning stocks. We have decided to publish the background paper in full; it appears as an appendix to the report and should be read as part of it.

Status of the spawning stocks

The status of spawning stocks in the review area is discussed in chapter 8 of the appendix. The management of naturally-maintained, exploitable stocks of salmon depends upon sufficient fish spawning to restock the native rivers with fry and parr and so produce good seaward runs of smolts as the basis for the abundant return of adult fish. From this point of view, the number of spawning adults —the spawning escapement—can be described as sufficient if, for each river, smolt production from all parts accessible to salmon is not restricted by a shortage of fertile eggs laid.

Counts of spawning escapement and the subsequent production of smolts are available for only two rivers in the review area, the Girnock Burn, a tributary of the River See, and the River North Esk in Scotland. Analysis of the data suggests that spawning escapement is adequate at both those sites.

Catches and catch per unit effort are often used as general indicators of stock abundance and the status of spawning stocks. It must however be remembered that many factors result in variations in catch levels and diminish their value as indicators. In addition there may be some doubt about the accuracy of data in some cases. Overall the trends in data on catches of salmon and sea trout in the area in the period covered by the review have not been unsatisfactory though there have been variations within the period, some of them pronounced. Data on catches in the review area from 1952–1990 are considered in detail in chapter 6 of the Appendix.

Surveys of the abundance of juvenile fish can provide indirect assessments of spawning escapement. The difficulty in interpreting data from such surveys is, however, complicated by the extent of the survey, by our limited understanding of the dynamics of salmon populations and by natural differences between river systems. Surveys carried out in the review area in recent years have not generally been adequate to provide unequivocal indications of the adequacy of spawning stocks. It does appear that natural production is not yet sufficient in some of those rivers which are still recovering 247W from early industrial development, although in most of these it is improving. However, some factors are probably constraining juvenile salmon production including obstructions and water quality.

Management and impact of net fisheries

Chapters 4 and 5, appendix, describe the management of salmon fisheries in the area from 1952 to 1990 and the various fishing methods used. These chapters bring out the fact that there are separate national jurisdictions for the management of salmon stocks, with differing arrange-ments for administration and regulation of their fisheries. Chapter 7 describes the effect of the net fisheries on other fisheries and on stocks.

It is well established that each river has its own stock of salmon, more or less isolated from the stocks of other rivers, and each therefore a separate population with its own population dynamics. Rod fisheries generally catch fish from single stocks, while net fisheries, to a varying extent, take fish from more than one stock. This is not necessarily a problem if one can quantify and manage the level of exploitation on each individual stock.

Broadly, the aim of salmon fisheries management is to ensure that an exploitable surplus can be harvested without risk to the stock. Management therefore embraces a wide variety of activities. These include restricting the times and places where fishing is permitted; specifying the gear which can be used; preventing illegal fishing; improving fish passage; safeguarding water quality and quantity; and controlling predators. However, local managers cannot have a direct influence on all factors which affect salmon and sea trout stocks—including, for example, fisheries outside their jurisdiction and environ-mental factors.

In both Scotland and England there are long-standing restriction on mesh-size, weekly close times, prohibitions on obstructive fishing gear, annual close seasons and prohibitions on fishing for juvenile salmon. All these measures were developed for the proper management of the fisheries.

The most significant development in net fishing in the review area in the last 50 years was the rapid growth of drift net fishing off the east coast of Scotland and England in the 1960s. The use of these nets for catching salmon was prohibited in Scotland in 1962, and the prohibition was subsequently extended to cover any netting method which could catch salmon away from the immediate coast. In Northumbria and Yorkshire, the use of drift nets is allowed only subject to licence and strict effort controls.

It has been established that some salmon returning to the Rivers Tweed, Tay and Forth, and a few of those returning to the rivers from the South Esk to the Ugie, first pass along the north-east coast of England and that some are caught in the salmon fisheries there. The drift nets appear to catch a higher proportion of these fish than the fixed T and T and J nets which are used closer inshore.

Net fisheries do affect the numbers of salmon available to other fisheries and for spawning escapement. This applies whether we are talking of the impact of Scottish nets on rod fisheries in the rivers there; the English offshore and inshore fixed net fisheries and their impact on local stocks; or the cross-border interactions. Reductions in net fishing lead to an increase in the spawning escapement although where this is already adequate the number of smolts produced may not be increased. There 248W may only be a small increase in rod catches since exploitation levels from angling are generally relatively low.

The way forward

The Appendix contains extensive data about management arrangements, catch trends and the status of stocks throughout the review area, although there are some gaps. While there are problems as discussed in some river systems, the primary cause of these is not net fisheries. Water quality, condition of the habitat and presence of river obstructions can have a major influence on the state of stocks. Improvements in such factors, together with effective stock enhancement programmes, have made a substantial contribution to the salmon fisheries in several rivers.

As regards Scotland, although some continue to argue that drift netting for salmon should be allowed to resume, particularly in Berwickshire, we see no reason to amend the Government's earlier conclusion that such fishing should be prohibited off the coast of Scotland. Section 21 of the Salmon Act 1986 will therefore be brought into force. It provides that the lawful methods for salmon netting on the coasts of Scotland shall be net and coble; bag net; fly net or other stake net. These methods take salmon catches chiefly of the stocks from nearby rivers. These methods will also be defined by order. Such definitions will assist in enforcement and management of the fisheries. We do not believe that the evidence from this review justifies the imposition of further statutory restrictions on effort in these fisheries.

The net fisheries in Northumbria and Yorkshire exploit several salmon and sea trout stocks and account for a substantial proportion of the catch from a number of different river systems. The dependence of the drift net fishery on a multiplicity of stocks makes the task of conservation and management more difficult.

Ideally, management of a mixed stock salmon fishery requires extensive monitoring of, and a means of controlling, the levels of exploitation on individual stock components. This is very difficult to achieve and may not always be practicable. Therefore, we would like to see further steps carrying forward the policy which we announced in 1985 of encouraging movement of effort out of the offshore fishery and towards inshore nets which are more directed to local stocks. This could include the introduction of some fixed nets in the Northumbrian southern area provided that appropriate management measures are adopted to avoid an increase in the overall exploitation of local stocks. Drift nets have been used more or less at the present scale since the late 1960s. This review has not produced evidence of an immediate threat to stocks and thus any justification for depriving existing licencees of their licences at a stroke. It would, however, aid and improve the management of individual east coast salmon and sea trout stocks if the drift net fishery were to come to an end. We consider therefore that it is desirable to phase out the drift net fishery, but gradually so as not to cause unnecessary hardship.

In England, under the Water Act 1989, responsibility for maintaining, improving and developing salmon and freshwater fisheries has been transferred from the regional water authorities to the National Rivers Authority. Accordingly, the NRA will be invited to consider how the regulation of the net fisheries of Northumbria and Yorkshire could be changed with a view to: 249W

(a) reducing the number of offshore drift net licences as those currently holding such licences leave the fishery;
(b) making available increased opportunities for inshore fishing by T and J nets giving priority to those surrendering their drift net licences;
(c) reviewing the Authority's net licence duties so as to reflect enforcement costs;
(d) postponing until 1 May the opening date for drift netting so as to reduce the level of exploitation on spring-running salmon; and
(e) harmonising the regulations which currently apply to the Northumbria and Yorkshire regions of the NRA so as to operate the net fishery off the north-east coast of England as a single entity under a common management regime.

We remain committed to the strict regulation of the salmon drift net fisheries while they continue. If catches in these fisheries increased and posed a threat to stocks, we shall not hesitate to act.