Fishing Debate in Parliament, my fave subject

At last a debate worthy of my talents. Ive not spoken in Parliament for ages, Who said I was the hardest working MP?

Charles Walker (Broxbourne, Conservative)

…….

At this juncture, I should like to pay tribute to my good friend, the hon. Member for Reading, West (Martin Salter), who is chairman of the all-party angling group. Since his election to Parliament 11 years ago, he has done a huge amount for the sport of angling and, as an angler, I am very grateful to him for all his hard work on behalf of all 3 million anglers in Britain.

Photo of Jim DevineJim Devine (Livingston, Labour) | Hansard source

I will take away the thought that the hon. Gentleman is a member of the Red Spinners. Given where he comes from, that will probably ruin his political career.

The point about tourism and jobs is important. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that places such as Ireland sell tourism by specifically targeting fishermen and describing the facilities that exist for them, but that the United Kingdom does not do a good enough job to publicise the sport?

Charles Walker (Broxbourne, Conservative) | Hansard source

The hon. Gentleman makes a good point. For the past 15 or 20 years, Ireland has heavily promoted fishing tourism. Many people come to this country to fish—to Scotland in particular but also to England—but a great deal more could be done. I am proud to say that we have some of the best fisheries in Europe, and long may they last, but we could do more to promote them. The hon. Gentleman is working in his constituency to bring such matters to the fore.

There are 1,000 commercial fisheries—perhaps more—and hundreds of fishing clubs. The economics of fishing are simple. There is bait and tackle, of course, and my garage is like the garage of the hon. Member for Reading, West, which is full of mountains of tackle and hundreds of fishing rods.

Photo of Martin SalterMartin Salter (Reading West, Labour) | Hansard source

May I ask the hon. Gentleman to desist from notifying every burglar in the Thames valley area of the contents of my garage, which I should like to say for the record have all been moved to a secure lock-up? I thank him for his kind comments earlier.

On a more serious point, does the hon. Gentleman acknowledge that some of the figures that he quotes were published in Labour’s charter for angling, which was a serious contribution to Britain’s most popular participant sport? Is he pledged to do what he can within his own party to ensure that there is consensual support for the sport of angling among all political parties in the House in the run-up to the election?

Charles Walker (Broxbourne, Conservative) | Hansard source

I am happy to say that that will be the case, if I have anything to do with it. Angling should be non-political—support should cross all political parties. If I get the chance at some stage in the future, I should like to be at the fore in forming my party’s position on fishing.

Let us return to the economics. There are fishery fees, and we all spend money on motoring. At a time when we are worried about our environmental footprint, perhaps I should not dwell on the money that we spend travelling around the country to far-flung fisheries. We spend fortunes on provisions from local shops. We bring tourism in the form of trade to pubs and restaurants. We often stay overnight at hotels or campsites, or in bed-and-breakfast accommodation.

To put this into perspective, I give the example of my annual pilgrimage to the sunlit uplands of Scotland to try to catch a salmon. Each beautiful silver fish that I land probably costs me in the region of £1,500 to £2,000. It is money well spent. I have wonderful holidays with my family, but it is my love of fishing that takes me to Scotland. My family also engages with the local community and brings tourist pounds to villages and towns in the area of Islay where I go fishing.

Direct employment is also important in the world of fishing. Many water keepers are employed to look after our fisheries, and professional booking and guiding services are increasingly growing in this country and sending fishermen overseas. The Minister will be aware of our thriving fish farming industry. Fishery managers look after the many thousands of fisheries that people enjoy in this country. Fishing makes an important contribution of some £3 billion to £4 billion a year, as I have said.

In my last two minutes, I shall conclude with these few points. Fishermen are the eyes and ears of our rivers and lakes. If there is a problem, we are the first to raise the alarm. We play a huge role in ensuring sustainability. The catch-and-release mentality pioneered among the coarse fishing fraternity has now moved into the game fishing and sea fishing fraternities.

There are still issues that we need to address. For example, abstraction remains a concern. I was at a presentation a few months ago at which some fishery officers were applauding the increase in barbel and chub stocks on the Wye. I love catching barbel and chub—I am a passionate barbel and chub fisherman—but the Wye is changing from a cold-water fishery that supports salmonids to a warm-water fishery that supports chub and barbel. We need to address the issues that are causing that. Global warming is certainly playing a part, but there is no doubt that abstraction is affecting the water quality of that river.

We need to educate the people who come to this country about our traditions. I always welcome fellow anglers to our shores. We have a lot to offer them, but some people are used to taking fish for the table in their own countries. In this country, we do not do that. We need to educate them, so that they can enjoy our fishing and not come into conflict with people who are concerned about fish being removed from our waters.

I do not share much common ground with the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds in respect of cormorant predation, which still causes concern to fishery owners. I am worried that the RSPB does not recognise that cormorant predation has put, and will continue to put, commercial fisheries out of business until it is properly addressed. However, I do agree with its concerns about the damming of the Severn estuary with a barrage. The hon. Member for Reading, West will say a few words about that.

We must continue to protect fish stocks. I was delighted to serve on the Joint Committee that considered the draft Marine Bill, and I know that the Minister has been at the forefront in promoting marine conservation zones, which will have a huge part to play in improving the prospects for commercial fishermen and recreational sea fishermen. We in the fishing world are good at keeping our own house in order, but issues surrounding the overstocking of certain small still waters are causing concern to the fishing fraternity.

Finally, the Minister will be aware that people are concerned about the ongoing cost of fishing licences. We are happy to pay for the maintenance of our waterways—it is essential that we pay for that—but, at the same time, we must ensure that we do not discourage new entrants from joining us on riverbanks and lakesides. With that ramble, I shall sit down and let the hon. Member for Reading, West say a few words.

1:08 pm

Photo of Martin SalterMartin Salter (Reading West, Labour) | Hansard source

I thank the hon. Member for Broxbourne (Mr. Walker) for his kind comments and congratulate him on securing this debate. I had intended to speak for only a few minutes, but the Minister may not have a 22-minute response prepared, so I crave your indulgence, Mr. Pope, to speak a little longer than I had intended.

I particularly want to discuss the value of salmon and trout fisheries in England and Wales in the context of the environmental and economic threat posed by the Severn barrage, should it ever be constructed. I am aware that the Government do not have a fixed position on it at present and that a feasibility study has been commissioned, but it is right and proper that the voices of anglers and those who speak about the wider environment are heard in the run-up to that debate. There are those who believe that the barrage is a done deal. I am not one of them, and I am looking for critics to be proved wrong.

I want to make it clear that I am not a trout and salmon angler. I have no vested interest in fishing for trout, salmon or sea trout on the Severn, the Wye or the Usk, which are the major rivers in that catchment, but as a coarse angler, I am acutely aware, as is the hon. Member for Broxbourne, that what is good for trout and salmon is good for all other species of fish, including those that we coarse anglers choose to pursue.

I want to look at some of the figures before discussing the Severn, the Wye and the Usk. Perhaps the most famous trout and salmon rivers in the country are the Test and Itchen in Hampshire, which I know and in which I have fished for other species. A survey carried out in partnership with the Salmon and Trout Association, looking at the economic value of those two famous fisheries, showed that, in 2005, anglers spent £3.25 million in total to fish both rivers, of which £3 million was re-invested in river management, thus supporting 120 full and part-time jobs. The survey also showed that fishery owners spent a further £250,000, at least, on private conservation projects, mainly to carry out habitat improvements and restoration. So just two comparatively short rivers were generating in excess of £3 million to the local economy of one county.

Let us look at salmon fishing as a whole. The Environment Agency did some work in 2006 on a research and development project to determine the total economic value of salmon in England and Wales, in respect of which the public were asked to value the prevention of a severe decline in salmon to them. The results showed that the value of salmon was some £350 million a year. Bearing in mind that 25 per cent. of the spawning habitat for salmon—that is, 25 per cent. of the spawning habitat in England and Wales—is upstream of the proposed Severn barrage, and given that its construction would effectively destroy migratory fish runs, the simple conclusion is that the construction of the Severn barrage would be cataclysmic for migratory fish in the Severn, Wye and Usk catchment.

Photo of Jim DevineJim Devine (Livingston, Labour) | Hansard source

When the hydroelectric dam projects were built in Scotland in the 1950s and 60s, special channels were sent up the sides of the dams, allowing salmon in particular to go up to their breeding grounds. Are we not talking about a similar process?

Photo of Martin SalterMartin Salter (Reading West, Labour) | Hansard source

It is possible to create fish passes, but one of the big problems is that there is a world of difference between a comparatively modestly sized dam and a massive barrage that is effectively turning the tidal estuary into a lake. The huge volume of water that is released to generate the force and pressure to power the turbines will suck salmon smolt and all migratory fish through what is effectively a mincing machine.

It is no coincidence that a powerful coalition has come together to challenge the Severn barrage, including the Anglers Conservation Association—the main pollution-fighting body—the National Trust, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, the Salmon and Trout Association, the Wildlife Trusts, the United Usk Fisherman’s Association, the Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust, WWF UK, Wye Salmon Fishery Owners Association and the Wye and Usk Foundation. Those experts in their fields produced, together with the RSPB, a collective response that highlighted the point that I am seeking to make today.

I wish to read into the record that construction of a costly 10-mile barrage across the River Severn would create similar problems, by blocking the path of thousands of fish returning to the Severn and its tributaries, the River Wye and the River Usk. A barrage to generate tidal energy would also destroy wild bird habitats formed naturally by the Severn’s huge tidal range and protected by European law. The Government would have to recreate those sites elsewhere and ensure that they were of similar value to wildlife and that they were on a similarly large scale. Helping fish to adapt to the plugging of the Severn by creating a new pathway from the sea further up river will be even harder, particularly since the Government have nominated the Severn estuary for EU protection because of its importance to fish stocks. So the Government are nominating that vital economic, environmental and wildlife corridor, yet at the same time they are considering putting a barrage across it that could have devastating consequences for the whole fishery.

Photo of Bill WigginBill Wiggin (Shadow Minister, Environment, Food & Rural Affairs; Leominster, Conservative) | Hansard source

I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Broxbourne (Mr. Walker) on securing this debate. The hon. Member for Reading, West (Martin Salter) is making an argument about the Severn barrage, and the Government have, as he rightly says, not made their decision yet, although they have paid for the feasibility study. Is the hon. Gentleman satisfied with the way that the Government have approached angling? We have seen a reversal on the bass minimum landing size and a massive increase in the price of disabled angling licences. Does he think that the Government have really done what he set down in his manifesto for angling?

Photo of Greg PopeGreg Pope (Hyndburn, Labour) | Hansard source

Order. Before I call the hon. Gentleman to reply to that intervention, could I gently steer him back to the word “economy” in the title of the debate and suggest that, rather than talking specifically about fishing and the Severn barrage, he also mentions its contribution to the economy?

Photo of Martin SalterMartin Salter (Reading West, Labour) | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr. Pope; I take your gentle chiding.

I am more than satisfied with the progress that angling has made under Labour. As the hon. Member for Leominster (Bill Wiggin) was late, he will not have realised just how misplaced his comments were, given the consensual contribution by the hon. Member for Broxbourne. The Conservative party had a pathetic record when in government and completely ignored angling.

The economic value of the Wye, Usk and Severn fishery is calculated at the moment at between £8 million and £12 million per annum. The Tweed—a Scottish salmon river—is calculated to produce some £20 million for its local economy. Thanks to the groundbreaking work of the Wye and Usk Foundation, the economic value of the salmon fishery on the Wye and the Usk has begun to rise. We have started to see a return of the fish runs that made those rivers so rightly famous and created such value for that fishery.

The peak was in the 1970s, since when we have seen a reduction of some 70 per cent. in visitor numbers, but because of the work of Stephen Marsh-Smith and others in the Wye and Usk Foundation and because of the Government’s actions, pressed for by hon. Members, we have seen the buying off of the Irish drift nets, the removal of barriers to spawning, progressive liming at the headwaters to mitigate the effects of acid rain and 150 miles of habitat restoration work being done on the Wye and Usk.

The Wye and Usk Foundation raised £5 million in funding for that groundbreaking work, a lot of it from the European Union, but also from the Environment Agency, the Countryside Council for Wales and from individual stakeholders. As a result, we have a tourist resource, an economic resource and an environmental resource that is improving. The creation of the Severn barrage is a major threat to that.

I give notice that I, along with many other hon. Members, will be highlighting the potential disaster that the Severn barrage could be to wetlands and to the economy of that important fishery. I thank hon. Members for their patience and for giving me an opportunity to rehearse an argument that will be heard many more times during the process.

1:18 pm

Photo of Jonathan R ShawJonathan R Shaw (Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Marine, Landscape and Rural Affairs) and Minister for the South East), Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs; Chatham & Aylesford, Labour) | Hansard source

I, too, congratulate the hon. Member for Broxbourne (Mr. Walker) on securing his first Westminster Hall Adjournment debate, and what an excellent subject to choose! He spoke eloquently and all hon. Members present were struck by his passion for his hobby, which is shared, as I know only too well—sometimes to my cost—by my hon. Friend the Member for Reading, West (Martin Salter). Both the hon. Gentleman and my hon. Friend have garages full—

Photo of Jonathan R ShawJonathan R Shaw (Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Marine, Landscape and Rural Affairs) and Minister for the South East), Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs; Chatham & Aylesford, Labour) | Hansard source

My hon. Friend no longer has a garage full of fishing gear, which will be a relief to Mrs. Salter, I am sure, who will take advantage of the additional space that has been created in the Salter household…..

Advertisements
Published in: on July 9, 2008 at 8:41 pm  Leave a Comment  

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://martinsnottheone.wordpress.com/2008/07/09/fishing-debate-in-parliament-my-fave-subject/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: