Spey-Fishery-Board-Annual-Report-2013-Web

Recommendations

Info

There were at least two other pollution incidents that were discovered by the SFB during 2013. These related tothe leakage of by-products or waste materials from distilleries. On both occasions, the details were reported toSEPA and distillery production ceased until the causes had been rectified. Furthermore, in both cases theresponse from the distilleries was exemplary.Above: An example of the growth of Sewage Fungus following a pollution incident (Photo: Brian Shaw)3.6 Control of RanunculusRanunculus is an invasive aquatic plant species which is non-native to the River Spey. It was accidentallyintroduced to the river over 30 years ago near Grantown-on-Spey and much of the River downstream ofGrantown is now badly affected by this plant.In the past the chemical Midstream, which contained the active and toxic ingredient Diquat, was used to controlRanunculus. As a result of EC legislation, we are no longer able to use this chemical and so the plant isspreading and in some areas choking the flow of the river. It has now been accepted that the presence of theplant is detrimental to two of the SAC-designated species (Atlantic Salmon and Freshwater Pearl Mussels). Theextensive mats of Ranunculus often accumulate sand and gravel underneath, choking the underlying substratebeneath it. This affects the Freshwater Pearl Mussel and Salmon fry habitat. Alternative methods of control,such as manual cutting and removal or hand pulling, are not considered practical as they are costly, labourintensiveand pose considerable health and safety issues for individuals working in a fast flowing river.In October 2010, Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) produced a Position Paper which clearly explained howRanunculus is detrimental to two of the Spey’s SAC-designated species and outlined the history of attempts toaddress it. In 2011 the Board identified Roundup Pro Biactive as a potentially suitable chemical for plant controlthat has been accepted for use in and around watercourses.Despite a joint approach by the Spey and Dee Boards to the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) in2011, seeking acceptance of the SNH Position Paper and proposing a collaborative approach to trialingRoundup Pro Biactive and TopFilm on selected areas of each River to resolve this long-running issue, progress38
has been disappointingly slow. In 2012, SEPA accepted the Position Paper and informed us that a UK TechnicalAdvisory Group (UKTAG) had been working on a directive for the application of herbicides in watercourses.There had also been concerns about the application of herbicides in to SAC Rivers and so a proposal wassubmitted for a trial in the neighbouring River Don, which is not SAC-designated. In order to develop this, aManagement Group, consisting of SEPA, SNH and the Spey, Dee and Don Boards and Trusts, was establishedat the end of 2012. This Management Group decided in 2013 that an important first step would be a literaturereview, to establish if any research had been undertaken on the efficacy of applying Roundup Pro-Biactive andTopFilm to ranunculus, and on any impacts it may have had on our designated species. Furthermore, it wasimportant to scope an outline Ecotoxicology Research Project for approval by SEPA and SNH, so that a licencecould subsequently be sought for a trial application in the River Don.Above: Ranunculus in the River Spey. (Photo: Roger Knight)During 2013 the Management Group went out to tender and awarded the literature review and project scoping toAPEM. A draft of APEM’s Report was received in late December 2013 and we look forward to progress withthis long-running issue during 2014.3.7 Sawbill Ducks and CormorantsIn November 2012 the SFB again coordinated a combined application to Scottish Natural Heritage (which in2011 had assumed responsibility for licensing issues from the Scottish Government) for the Spey, Conon, Nessand Beauly Rivers to shoot Goosanders, Mergansers and Cormorants during 2013. This application wassuccessful and the Spey was licensed to shoot 14 Goosanders, 4 Mergansers and 2 Cormorants between Januaryand the end of May, the latter date being significant because we need to provide additional protection to Salmonstocks during the annual smolt run. Carcasses of birds shot were also collected where possible and submitted tothe Marine Scotland Science laboratory in Pitlochry for analysis of stomach contents.39
Page 1: ANNUAL REPORT2013www.speyfisheryboa
Page 7 and 8: Chairman’s ForewordThe numbers of
Page 9 and 10: that all the burden of the Manageme
Page 11 and 12: - a duty to hold at least one publi
Page 13 and 14: Figure 2. The River Spey catchment
Page 16 and 17: Figure 3: Scottish & Southern Energ
Page 18 and 19: The primary compensation flow (abov
Page 20 and 21: Spey Salmon Catch 1952 to 201315000
Page 22 and 23: 2.2 Sea Trout CatchesThe 2013 decla
Page 24 and 25: 2.3 Salmon Conservation PolicyAs pa
Page 26 and 27: Catches have not been encouraging i
Page 28 and 29: Part 3Management Report3.1 Spey Cat
Page 30 and 31: the Initiative’s work at a recept
Page 32 and 33: In recent years the focus has been
Page 34 and 35: Table 2. Spey Fishery Board Stockin
Page 36 and 37: catchment (particularly in the Trui
Page 40 and 41: In 2013 the SFB continued counting
Page 42 and 43: A total of eleven patrols along our
Page 44 and 45: Part 4Spey Foundation Report4.1 Juv
Page 46 and 47: Rather than focussing on the result
Page 48 and 49: 2012DulnainNethyDruieSpey Dam2014Fi
Page 50 and 51: capable of producing similar smolt
Page 52 and 53: Table 10: Results from the River Tr
Page 54 and 55: 4.7 Invertebrate SamplingDuring 201
Page 56 and 57: Above: Pupils from Aberlour House9t
Page 58 and 59: as well as the habitat enhancement
Page 60 and 61: Spey Fishery Board Financial Summar
Page 62 and 63: Notes62

Spey-Fishery-Board-Annual-Report-2013-Web

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?