• You need to be a registered member of Barbel Fishing World to post on these forums. Some of the forums are hidden from non-members. Please refer to the instructions on the ‘Register’ page for details of how to join the new incarnation of BFW...

The next barbel river record

Next UK barbel record river?

  • Total voters
    139
They have alloted EA monitors that operate almost independently of the wastewater treatment company they work for.
When they are due to be to sample is kept very quiet allowing no one to manufacture false readings.
 
Damian Kimmins said:
They have alloted EA monitors that operate almost independently of the wastewater treatment company they work for.
When they are due to be to sample is kept very quiet allowing no one to manufacture false readings.
Click to expand...

True enough. But most of the monitoring is undertaken at fixed sites (around 7000) and at fixed times of year at regular, fixed intervals - at least monthly.

But all the monitoring in the world isn't of much us unless they are looking for the right things. I find it amazing that the impacts of water-soluble neonicotinoids (used as a prophylatic pesticide) were ignored by all almost everyone. It took a catastrophic collapse of bee populations to make everyone in this country sit up and take notice.

I posted the following on this site two years ago:

Many of you may be aware of the furore regarding the use of Neonicotinoid seed dressings which have been linked to a range of harmful environmental impacts, notably honey-bee colony collapse disorder. Thanks to the EU most of these products were banned in 2013, although no thanks to our own Govt. who revealed itself to be in the unashamedly in the pockets of the agri-chemical industry and were extremely vociferous in their opposition to the ban.

Neonicotinoids (Neonics) are a class of neuro-active insecticides, which include acetamiprid, clothianidin, imidacloprid, nitenpyram, nithiazine, thiacloprid & thiamethoxam. Neonicotinoid are relatively new onto the scene, some first became commercially available in the late 90's, others in early 2000s. Since their introduction the products became very popular, and before the ban, neonics were applied to approximately 35% of the arable land in the UK, mainly oilseed rape and winter wheat.

Remarkably, given that neonics are water soluble and therefore readily leach into watercourses, no long-term systematic study has ever been carried out to determine their impact - and surprise surprise, scientists are now beginning to discover just how polluting neonics are.

Door, stable, horse, bolted.

What ever happened to the 'Precautionary Principle'?

Take this:

There is so much evidence, going far beyond bees," Prof Dave Goulson from the University of Sussex told BBC News.

"They accumulate in soils, they are commonly turning up in waterways at levels that exceed the lethal dose for things that live in streams.

"It is impossible to deny that these things are having major environmental impacts.". BBC News - Widespread impacts of neonicotinoids 'impossible to deny'

And this:

"Peer-reviewed research, published in the leading journal Nature this Wednesday, has revealed data from the Netherlands showing that bird populations fell most sharply in those areas where neonicotinoid pollution was highest. Starlings, tree sparrows and swallows were among the most affected.

At least 95% of neonicotinoids applied to crops ends up in the wider environment, killing the insects the birds rely on for food, particularly when raising chicks.

The researchers, led by Hans de Kroon, an ecologist at Radboud University, in the Netherlands, examined other possible reasons for the bird declines seen during the study period of 2003 to 2010, including intensification of farming. But high pollution by a neonicotinoid known as imidacloprid was by far the largest factor.

“It is very surprising and very disturbing,†de Kroon said. Water pollution levels of just 20 nanograms of neonicotinoid per litre led to a 30% fall in bird numbers over 10 years, but some water had contamination levels 50 times higher. “That is why it is so disturbing – there is an incredible amount of imidacloprid in the water,†he said. “And it is not likely these effects will be restricted to birds.â€"

Neonicotinoids linked to recent fall in farmland bird numbers | Environment | The Guardian

Since then more and more evidence is being is being gathered on the impacts - I suspect we look back at the neonics in the same way we now view the impacts of DDT.

But be aware, the NFU and ag-chem industry are still lobbying to have them reintroduced. Former Defra Minister (therefore EA boss), and Tory MP Owen Paterson, who tried his best to block the neonics ban whilst he was the Defra Minister, is one of the chief protagonists.

Coincidentally, Owen Paterson's brother in law Matt Ridley (yes the man who broke Northern Rock) works for Syngenta (THE leading neonics manufacturer) as a Govt. lobbyist...
 
Damian Kimmins said:
They have alloted EA monitors that operate almost independently of the wastewater treatment company they work for.
When they are due to be to sample is kept very quiet allowing no one to manufacture false readings.
Click to expand...

They may do that on some Damian, but tell that to the anglers on the River Colne like Martin Lydon and others who have been watching, photographing and complaining to the EA regarding a Thames Water sewage works discharging raw sewage in low flows in summer which is killing their river. The EA seem to know nothing about it and say the river is fine...in so many words. So in reality, they are not monitoring or looking for problems and only responding when an angler complains. The EA there say they don't have the discharge data and the water company are the ones that hold it...and you may have to go through the Freedom of Information act to get it..which again may be denied. That process to get it is underway. Before the independent alloted monitors that you mention, each hourly or daily discharge was timed and quality logged by the water company and transmitted to the EA computers to where you could get print outs if requested by the public or anglers. The EA/NRA could see immediately if the discharges were illegal or compliant to the standard issued to protect the fish and river. In my experience, even that system was flawed, as they didn't seem to even look to check until there was a reported fish kill or compalint.
 
It may be merely indicative of EA's (lack of) thoroughness these days but... the group of houses of which mine is part has its own (privately owned) sewage treatment plant. This discharges into a stream, that then discharges into the Teme. Our discharge used to be checked every 6 months I believe, but has not been now checked for the last 3 years. Thankfully we ensure our plant is maintained/desludged etc. regularly, but without checks who knows what gets fed into our rivers. I know of a few septic tanks that regularly overflow into watercourses after heavy rain..as I'm sure many of you do.
 
I've been extremely fortunate in enjoying some exceptionally good freshwater river fishing in my lifetime,
The EA/Thames water have been responsible for destroying almost all of it.
The Kennet, the Chess and the Thames Salmon run.
 
Joe Winstanley said:
This paper which was published back in November and reviews evidence gathered around the world is pretty damning about the impacts of neonicotinoid bioaccumulation on large groups of freshwater macro-invertebrates:

http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fenvs.2016.00071/full
Click to expand...

Joe...Now that never crossed my mind regarding polluting our rivers and killing other things. I was of the thinking that it only related to Bees, Butterflies, beetles, possibly birds and all other land based insects.
Thanks for that info Joe. Enlightening stuff.
 
Lots of criticism of the EA, but not much criticism of the Govt which is a little strange!?

If the EA wasn't fit for purpose in 2010 (and it wasn't), then it sure as hell can't have been helped by the fact that Defra has, in real terms, had budget cuts of around 60% since June 2010. In fact no Govt. department has had it's budget cut to such an extent.

The only area of Defra spending that has increased in that time (by 87%) is the basic level of subsidy paid to those poor multi-millionaire grouse moor owners whose practice of intensive heather burning and drainage is causing all sorts of problems to the aquatic environment. You couldn't make it up..

https://www.leeds.ac.uk/news/articl...rning_causes_widespread_environmental_changes
 
Ray Walton said:
Joe...Now that never crossed my mind regarding polluting our rivers and killing other things. I was of the thinking that it only related to Bees, Butterflies, beetles, possibly birds and all other land based insects.
Thanks for that info Joe. Enlightening stuff.
Click to expand...

The emphasis should be on proving that these types of substances are safe before they are licensed for use e.g. the 'precautionary principle'. Instead the opposite applies - it stinks.

The Govt 'scientist' who led flawed trials upon which the Govt. based its arguments on in opposing the EU ban, left their post shortly afterwards to take up a very highly paid job with Syngenta - the leading neonics manufacturer. How can that be allowed to happen?
 
Joe it is called free market and the limits on former civil servants are, in my view wrongly, far less restrictive than they used to be... Whatever we feel about the EU at least they have got some aspects of environmental protection right; post Brexit heaven help us as we are going to need a much more robust Anglers Trust who will have to work closely with the other major conservation groups. I fear the worst...
 
Paul Dowgill said:
Joe it is called free market and the limits on former civil servants are, in my view wrongly, far less restrictive than they used to be... Whatever we feel about the EU at least they have got some aspects of environmental protection right; post Brexit heaven help us as we are going to need a much more robust Anglers Trust who will have to work closely with the other major conservation groups. I fear the worst...
Click to expand...

Don't forget in respect to this the UK has been key in producing these environmental policies and is one of the few to actually try to follow them. Public pressure in the country for green policy is pretty strong. So I wouldn't get to worried about what you read in the Gardian or hear on the BBC. That's not to say we should let up the watch, in fact the opertunity is there to improve on things, just needs the public pressure.
 
Stephen true but within an EU framework which will not exist; unfortunately i have less faith than you re the public and their green credentials given the general economic state we are in.
 
Stephen Crowhurst said:
Don't forget in respect to this the UK has been key in producing these environmental policies and is one of the few to actually try to follow them. Public pressure in the country for green policy is pretty strong. So I wouldn't get to worried about what you read in the Gardian or hear on the BBC. That's not to say we should let up the watch, in fact the opertunity is there to improve on things, just needs the public pressure.
Click to expand...

No, sorry Stephen, I can't agree with that. The UK has long been considered the dirty man of Europe so far as the environment is concerned. A succession of UK Govt's, under the influence of powerful lobby groups, have consistently impeded progress across a range of environmental issues and reforms. Many environmentalist's across the EU will be delighted to see the back the UK.

As much as I'd like to believe the British public are concerned about the environment, I've yet to ever see any real evidence of it on a wider scale. Lots of lip service, green wash and water melons but very little of any substance.
 
Paul Dowgill said:
Joe it is called free market and the limits on former civil servants are, in my view wrongly, far less restrictive than they used to be... Whatever we feel about the EU at least they have got some aspects of environmental protection right; post Brexit heaven help us as we are going to need a much more robust Anglers Trust who will have to work closely with the other major conservation groups. I fear the worst...
Click to expand...

Totally agree.
 
Dave Taylor said:
Just to throw something else into the mix, ...

http://www.riverflies.org/sites/172.16.0.99.riverflies.local/files/Worming_your_way_in.pdf

Definitely a nasty little critter that has been around for a while on the Avon and has made it's mark on chub and barbel.
Current research being done on H. Avon , Kennet, Darent and Lodden.
Click to expand...

I would be very careful on what we wish for. If DEFRA had their way and they often do, to try and get rid of it/alien species, they may get the EA to wipe out certain stretches where it is found with Rotenone poison, like they do to the top mouth gudgeon/sunfish etc whichare said to be carrying an alien parasite where they are found in the UK. If barbel and chub have got it already and it is found that it can tranfer to salmon...then all hell will break loose. They won't care about other indigenous or native species like barbel, chub, roach etc as it basically kills all fish present and macro invertebrates... and is not selective. That will the kill off the vital riverine food chain including wildfowl and some birds, amphibians and mammals. If it has the potential to affect salmon, then you can say goodbye the river coarse fish and coarse fishing if the EA get the go ahead to eradicate a parasite on some rivers and stretches. There was talk some time ago that DEFRA wanted to remove all non-native fish species from UK rivers, and that includes barbel from rivers to where they are not indigenous, like the Severn, Hampshire Avon etc. Personally, I would be very careful in reporting stuff like that to the EA, Natural England and DEFRA as they could come and destroy your fishery, even on a hunch. DEFRA gave £6 million to the EA to go and wipe out the top mouth gudgeon with Rotenone and they deliberately killed all resident indigenous species present as well. Some lake fisheries had to close down as it killed everything in them and they did they same on a river lea tributary as well. Basically, it takes a lake at least 6months or more to start recovering and probably over a year or more before it can be re-stocked. They have also done this on some foreign rivers to protect salmon.
 
Paul Dowgill said:
Stephen true but within an EU framework which will not exist; unfortunately i have less faith than you re the public and their green credentials given the general economic state we are in.
Click to expand...

The time isn't there to rewrite the rule book just yet so EU law as it currently stands will be UK law to be amended retrospectively as we go. It's not like we're hitting reset. We will have wait and see really, that's the only certainty.
I don't think the economy is all that bad at present either. The stats are a bit skewed but a report this week has revealed that average earning are up 2% in the last 12 months, unemployment is at an all time low and food is actually still cheaper than last year. Certainly things are better in 2008. Time will tell.
 
Joe Winstanley said:
No, sorry Stephen, I can't agree with that. The UK has long been considered the dirty man of Europe so far as the environment is concerned. A succession of UK Govt's, under the influence of powerful lobby groups, have consistently impeded progress across a range of environmental issues and reforms. Many environmentalist's across the EU will be delighted to see the back the UK.

As much as I'd like to believe the British public are concerned about the environment, I've yet to ever see any real evidence of it on a wider scale. Lots of lip service, green wash and water melons but very little of any substance.
Click to expand...

It's a fair opinion you have and certainly we were as you say "the dirty man" but also one of the mostly densely populated nations in the world. As I say time will tell. It's all in the air at present.
 
As I'm "out and about' this evening I'll have to make this brief,... thankfully I hear you say!
As far as STW,s are concerned, one of the classic examples of sticking two fingers up at our river environment was the incompetent privatisation of water companies back in '89.
20 years later, up to 4000 useless temporarily discharge consents, ( which were unenforceable) were still in use.

http://www.anglingtrust.net/core/core_picker/download.asp?id=956

Re the P.leavis hookworm there's been much research both here and on Danube barbel ( concerning heavy metals for the latter)

Edit,...deleted link in case of copyright probs.

Re Salmon,... some of the Wye fluff chuckers have already pointed out,... albeit disputed,... the danger of infected barbel on Wye Salmon stocks.

http://www.flyfishing.co.uk/salmon-...reasons-plummeting-salmon-numbers-wye-25.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top